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
White Racialism in America, Then and Now
An Intellectual History of the Last One Hundred Years
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

Audio Segments: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8

The Stigmatization of White Nationalism

One morning a couple of years ago I received an urgent email from a moderately prominent libertarian figure strongly focused on antiwar issues. He warned me that our publication had been branded a “White Supremacist website” by the Washington Post, and urged me to immediately respond, perhaps by demanding a formal retraction or even taking legal action lest we be destroyed by that totally unfair accusation.

When I looked into the matter, my own perspective was rather different. Apparently Max Boot, one of the more agitated Jewish Neocons, had written a column fiercely denouncing some recent criticism of pro-Israel policies that Philip Giraldi had published in our webzine, and the “White Supremacist” slur was merely his crude means of demonizing the author’s views for those of his readers who might be less than wholeheartedly enthusiastic about Benjamin Netanyahu and his policies.

After pointing this out to my correspondent, I also noted that a good 10% or more of our writers were probably “White Nationalists,” and perhaps a few of them might even arguably be labeled “White Supremacists.” So although Boot’s description of our website was certainly wrong, it was probably less wrong than the vast majority of his other writing, which was typically focused on American military policy and the Middle East.

Our webzine is quite unusual in its willingness to feature a smattering of writers who provide a White Nationalist perspective. Such individuals are almost totally excluded from other online publications, except for those marginalized websites devoted to their ideas, which often tend to focus on such topics and related issues to the near exclusion of anything else. However, I believe that maintaining this sort of ideological quarantine or “ghettoization” greatly diminishes the ability to understand many important aspects of our world.


Substituting ideological slurs and demonization for rational evaluation and rebuttal has long become a commonplace in heated American policy debates, recently growing more severe in the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement and the associated “cancel-culture” driven by inflamed social media. Locating a couple of controversial sentences and then using these to dismiss an enormous body of detailed analysis may sometimes serve as an effective debating technique among timorous journalists, but its intellectual legitimacy seems rather doubtful. And this is especially true with regard to the charged subject of white racialism, which seems to provoke a near-religious antipathy among so many of the politically correct elites of our society, despite their avowedly secular protestations.

Even the choice of preferred accusatory phrases suggests a certain amount of bad faith. My impression is that a couple of years ago members of the pro-white ideological camp were usually denounced as “White Nationalists” but more recently that term has been superseded by “White Supremacists.” I suspect that part of the reason for this verbal shift was the obvious hypocrisy of their disparate treatment. As I noted a few years ago:

A strident Black Nationalist such as Malcolm X was widely condemned during his own lifetime as an extremist advocate of violence, yet he has now been honored with a U.S. postage stamp, while today a lifelong racial activist such as Al Sharpton has his own MSNBC cable television show and received 80-odd invitations to the White House over the last few years. Such treatment seems very different from what their white-activist counterparts, either past or present, might expect to receive.

Following the unexpected victory of Donald Trump and the resulting sudden media prominence of the racialist Alt-Right, a national journalist who had become a leading chronicler of that movement visited me for lunch in Palo Alto, and we spent a couple of hours discussing what I considered some of the tremendous ironies of America’s existing ideological landscape. Among other things, I pointed out that the overwhelming majority of the world’s leading academics and intellectuals from one hundred years ago—whether left, right, or center—held many views that would surely have gotten them branded as “White Nationalists” in today’s severely constricted ideological climate.

But whereas today’s WNs are an extremely vilified and marginalized group, with their ranks therefore necessarily skewed towards eccentrics and misfits, the situation was entirely different back then. Their counterparts of the past included many of the foremost academic scholars and public intellectuals of that era, who openly discussed their views in leading opinion journals rather than by pseudonymous postings in dark corners of the Internet. Partly for this reason, such individuals tended to approach the same issues with far greater sophistication.

Until the early 2000s, nearly all these names would have been almost unknown to me, either rating a sentence or two in my introductory history textbooks, or else being entirely omitted. But I spent most of that decade building a content-archiving system that provided convenient access to over a million articles from more than 200 of our leading periodicals since the mid-nineteenth century, and was stunned by the severe distortions and enormous lacunae in my knowledge which this revealed. As I wrote a couple of years ago on related matters:

I sometimes imagined myself a little like an earnest young Soviet researcher of the 1970s who began digging into the musty files of long-forgotten Kremlin archives and made some stunning discoveries. Trotsky was apparently not the notorious Nazi spy and traitor portrayed in all the textbooks, but instead had been the right-hand man of the sainted Lenin himself during the glorious days of the great Bolshevik Revolution, and for some years afterward had remained in the topmost ranks of the Party elite. And who were these other figures—Zinoviev, Kamenev, Bukharin, Rykov—who also spent those early years at the very top of the Communist hierarchy? In history courses, they had barely rated a few mentions, as minor Capitalist agents who were quickly unmasked and paid for their treachery with their lives. How could the great Lenin, father of the Revolution, have been such an idiot to have surrounded himself almost exclusively with traitors and spies?

As I gradually discovered, large portions of America’s entire intellectual past had been hidden or altered beyond recognition, and racial beliefs constituted a major portion of this transformation.

The ongoing “cancel-culture” of today’s elite-backed Black Lives Matter movement represents merely the latest iteration of this long process. The names of many of our most famous presidents and honored national leaders have recently been stripped from buildings and public monuments, and a committee organized by the Mayor of DC recently called for the possible removal of the Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument. If this current social revolution continues, we are only a step or two away from a society in which any favorable public mention for Thomas Jefferson or George Washington might be regarded as an immediate firing-offense by many major corporations, and grounds for banning by social media. Although such a development seems unlikely, it would merely represent an extreme version of the ideological purge that has already reshaped our academic and journalistic world over the last century.

The Sociology of E.A. Ross

E.A. Ross
E.A. Ross

In my conversation with that national journalist, one of the major examples I cited was that of E.A. Ross, a leading intellectual figure of the early decades of the twentieth century but now largely forgotten except when portrayed as a racist cartoon villain by ignorant present-day academics. Last year, I noted such crude treatment by Holocaust historian Joseph W. Bendersky in his book documenting and condemning the views of America’s Anglo-Saxon elites from a century ago:

Although I would not question the accuracy of Bendersky’s exhaustive archival research, he seems considerably less sure-footed regarding American intellectual history and sometimes allows his personal sentiments to lead him into severe error. For example, his first chapter devotes a couple of pages to E.A. Ross, citing some of his unflattering descriptions of Jews and Jewish behavior, and suggesting he was a fanatic anti-Semite, who dreaded “the coming catastrophe of an America overrun by racially inferior people.”

But Ross was actually one of our greatest early sociologists, and his 26 page discussion of Jewish immigrants published in 1913 was scrupulously fair-minded and even-handed, describing both positive and negative characteristics, following similar chapters on Irish, German, Scandinavian, Italian, and Slavic newcomers. And although Bendersky routinely denounces his own ideological villains as “Social Darwinists,” the source he actually cites regarding Ross correctly identified the scholar as one of America’s leading critics of Social Darwinism. Indeed, Ross’s stature in left-wing circles was so great that he was selected as a member of the Dewey Commission, organized to independently adjudicate the angry conflicting accusations of Stalinists and Trotskyites. And in 1936, a Jewish leftist fulsomely praised Ross’s long and distinguished scholarly career in the pages of The New Masses, the weekly periodical of the American Communist Party, only regretting that Ross had never been willing to embrace Marxism.

  • The Old World in the New
    The Significance of Past and Present Immigration to the American People
    E.A. Ross • 1914 • 59,000 Words

Ross was quite plain-spoken in his views, and his long career was bracketed by his leading national role in major free speech issues. As a young academic, he had been fired by Stanford University for his political beliefs, a celebrated incident that led to the creation of the American Association of University Professors, while he ended his life serving for a decade as national chairman of the ACLU.

In 1915 Ross published South of Panama, describing the backwardness and misery he had encountered in so many of the societies of Latin America during his half year of travels and investigation across that region. Although the bulk of the text was descriptive and empirical, at one point he pondered the underlying nature of those problems, wondering whether the causes were primarily cultural, due to the widespread poverty and lack of education, or instead a result of the innate inferiority of the local population, emphasizing that the answer to this crucial question would have an enormous impact upon the continent’s future developmental trajectory.

After even-handedly mentioning some of the limited evidence supporting each of these two conflicting theories, he ultimately leaned towards the environmental side, criticizing heredity as “a cheap offhand explanation” of human characteristics that actually often change over time. Today such a discussion would be utterly unimaginable within the confines of our respectable academic or media worlds, and for opposite reasons would also be extremely rare among committed racialists.

Although Ross was uncertain about the natural abilities of South America’s mostly Mestizo population, a six month research trip to China a few years earlier had left him no doubt abut the potential of the Chinese, despite their immense existing poverty. As he recounted in his book:

To forty-three men who, as educators, missionaries and diplomats, have had good opportunity to learn the “feel” of the Chinese mind, I put the question, “Do you find the intellectual capacity of the yellow race equal to that of the white race?” All but five answered “Yes,” and one sinologue of varied experience as missionary, university president and legation adviser left me gasping with the statement, “Most of us who have spent twenty-five years or more out here come to feel that the yellow race is the normal human type, while the white race is a ‘sport.’”

Given these conclusions, he felt quite confident of China’s future success as I explained a few years ago:

[China’s global rise] would have seemed far less unexpected to our leading thinkers of 100 years ago, many of whom prophesied that the Middle Kingdom would eventually regain its ranking among the foremost nations of the world. This was certainly the expectation of E.A. Ross, one of America’s greatest early sociologists, whose book The Changing Chinese looked past the destitution, misery, and corruption of the China of his day to a future modernized China perhaps on a technological par with America and the leading European nations. Ross’s views were widely echoed by public intellectuals such as Lothrop Stoddard, who foresaw China’s probable awakening from centuries of inward-looking slumber as a looming challenge to the worldwide hegemony long enjoyed by the various European-descended nations.

  • The Changing Chinese
    The Conflict of Oriental and Western Cultures in China
    E.A. Ross • 1911 • 61,000 Words

Ross published more than two dozen books and numerous articles, and I have no doubt that these could easily be mined for a multitude of sentences or paragraphs that would today ignite a firestorm of controversy on Twitter or among the talking-heads of Cable TV, with a lynch-mob branding him a “White Supremacist” fit for deplatforming. But that merely demonstrates the severe flaws in our current climate of harsh ideological censorship.

Lothrop Stoddard and The Rising Tide of Color

Lothrop Stoddard
Lothrop Stoddard

A much stronger case could be made against his close contemporary Lothrop Stoddard, also mentioned above. Indeed, I doubt that Stoddard himself would have disputed any attempt to label him as a “White Supremacist.” After all, his most famous and influential work bore the full title “The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy,” and that 1921 bestseller focused upon the emerging challenges that peoples of white European origin faced in maintaining their global control in the aftermath of the terribly destructive First World War.

But although that term would probably apply to Stoddard, the marginalizing implications it carries in today’s society would be extremely misleading since his beliefs were so widely shared by much of America’s political and intellectual elite. He himself came from a prestigious New England family, and after earning his doctorate in history at Harvard, his series of very successful books quickly established him as one of our country’s most influential writers and public intellectuals, winning him regular invitations to lecture at our nation’s military academy and with his articles regularly gracing the pages of our most prestigious national publications.

The serious concerns he raised about the economic challenge America and Europe might soon face from a rising China were grounded in solid realism. For example, he approvingly quoted the late Victorian predictions of Prof. Charles E. Pearson:

Does any one doubt that the day is at hand when China will have cheap fuel from her coal-mines, cheap transport by railways and steamers, and will have founded technical schools to develop her industries? Whenever that day comes, she may wrest the control of the world’s markets, especially throughout Asia, from England and Germany.

Many of Stoddard’s books focused upon sharp racialist issues, and these might seem extremely jarring to a modern readership. But other works fell outside that area, and they effectively demonstrated the remarkable quality and objectivity of one of America’s leading geopolitical thinkers of that era.

For example, just prior to our own 1917 entry into the First World War, he had published Present-Day Europe, providing a detailed description of the political and social situation in all of the contending European states, including their historical roots. I happened to read the book about a decade ago, and found it the best summary treatment of that subject I had ever encountered.

  • Present-Day Europe
    Its National States of Mind
    Lothrop Stoddard • 1917 • 74,000 Words

World War I and its immediate aftermath saw the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the abolition of the Islamic Caliphate by Ataturk’s secular regime, and the widespread rise of left-wing militant atheism inspired by the Bolshevik Revolution. As a natural consequence, nearly all Western thinkers dismissed the power of Islam as a spent force and a fading relic of the past, while Stoddard was almost alone in presciently suggesting its possible worldwide revival in The New World of Islam, published in 1922.

But Stoddard’s best-known work certainly remains The Rising Tide of Color, published 100 years ago, which launched his influential career. About a decade ago, I finally got around to reading it, and was greatly surprised that a book so heavily demonized in every description I had encountered actually came across as so level-headed and innocuous. Although most of the leading political figures of that time proclaimed permanent white rule of the world, Stoddard strongly argued that this situation was temporary, soon to evaporate under the pressure of rising non-white nationalism, economic development, and population growth. These rising tides of the peoples of Asia and the Middle East made their eventual independence almost inevitable, and the European powers should therefore voluntarily relinquish their vast colonial empires rather than earn future bitterness by stubbornly seeking to retain them. A “White Supremacist” might certainly advance such arguments, but only one of far greater sophistication than is today implied by that popular media slur.


I recently reread Stoddard’s volume and was even more impressed the second time through. In many respects, his sweeping panorama of the future geopolitical landscape brings to mind The Clash of Civilizations, published in 1997 by renowned Harvard political scientist Samuel P. Huntington, which then became a huge national bestseller and cultural-touchstone in the wake of the 9/11 attacks of 2001. Yet although Huntington’s text is just two decades old and Stoddard’s has reached its first century, I think it is the former that actually now seems much more dated and less applicable to the current alignment of the world and the challenges faced by white European populations.

By the mid-1930s, Stoddard’s star was fading, with his racialist framework under growing pressure both in the sciences and by the influential leftist and anti-racist elements brought into power during the New Deal Era. His last book appeared the year before our entrance into the Second World War and probably sealed his intellectual fate. As I wrote last year:

During late 1939, a leading American news syndicate sent Stoddard to spend a few months in wartime Germany and provide his perspective, with his numerous dispatches appearing in The New York Times and other top newspapers. Upon his return, he published a 1940 book summarizing all his information, seemingly just as even-handed as his earlier 1917 volume. His coverage probably constitutes one of the most objective and comprehensive American accounts of the mundane domestic nature of National Socialist Germany, and thus may seem rather shocking to modern readers steeped in eighty years of increasingly unrealistic Hollywood propaganda.

  • Into the Darkness
    An Uncensored Report from Inside the Third Reich At War
    Lothrop Stoddard • 1940 • 79,000 Words

As I’ve previously discussed, during World War II and in its immediate aftermath, America experienced its own Great Purge of our academic and journalistic elites—left, right, and center—with many of our most prominent figures permanently disappearing from public visibility, and Stoddard was among those who fell. For two decades he had been among America’s leading public intellectuals, but when he died in 1950, no obituary appeared in the pages of the New York Times.

The Anthropology of Madison Grant Dethroned by the Boasian Revolution

Madison Grant
Madison Grant

Stoddard’s own writings had focused primarily upon history and politics, but his world-view had been shaped by the ideas of his mentor Madison Grant, a hugely influential figure in racial theories, eugenics, and natural conservation efforts.

Although a lawyer by training, Grant never practiced in the field, and instead gained fame with the 1916 publication of his book The Passing of the Great Race, which argued for the division of European populations into three primary races of Nordics, Alpines, and Mediterraneans, with the first of these playing the overarching role in world history and the creation of dynamic civilizations. Late twentieth century critics such as Harvard’s Stephen Jay Gould denounced the book as America’s most influential work of “scientific racism,” and noted that Adolf Hitler had written Grant a fan-letter in which he described it as his “Bible.”

Early American anthropology was heavily dominated by Anglo-Saxon racialists, and Grant’s views were widespread within that field. Drawing upon a Darwinian world-view, these scientists heavily focused upon physical and psychological racial differences, certainly including those within the white population, and they were often aligned with political movements aimed at sharply curtailing continued large-scale immigration, especially from Southern and Eastern Europe. They also tended to be either right-wing or apolitical in their views.

Franz Boas
Franz Boas

The opposing ideological camp in the early field of anthropology was overwhelmingly the creation of a German-Jewish immigrant named Franz Boas, who held strongly left-leaning political views. Becoming a professor of anthropology at Columbia University in 1899, he began strongly challenging existing notions of race and racial differences, and focused much more on cultural rather than biological explanations for the behavior of different human societies.

In those pre-DNA days, the classification of different racial groups relied heavily upon physical measurements, with the shape of the skull being a key means of separating European populations into the purported Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean races. Boas’s greatest early claim to fame was his landmark 1911 study demonstrating that European groups who immigrated to America rapidly changed the shapes of their skulls, apparently due to shifts in diet or other environmental factors, thereby seeming to transform themselves into a different racial group, an astonishing discovery that shocked most of his scientific colleagues.

When I first read that account, I found myself extremely skeptical of such a result, since we know that skull-shape is overwhelmingly determined by genetic factors rather than by diet or sunshine. And indeed, it does appears that Boas’s conclusions were entirely false, and apparently even fraudulent, though perhaps unintentionally so, being a product of his ideological zeal in debunking existing racial dogma. Over the years, quite a number of ultra-high-profile frauds in the field of anthropology have come to light, almost all of them falling upon a particular side of the ideological aisle. Perhaps the most famous recent example was that of Boas disciple Margaret Mead and her bestseller on the sexual customs of Samoa.

From his Columbia University base, Boas began minting large numbers of anthropology Ph.D.’s, and his former students soon began founding new departments throughout the country, gradually shifting the entire field towards their much less hereditarian perspective on human behavior. By the late 1920s they had gained the upper hand over their academic rivals in this hidden institutional conflict, and a Darwinian framework for understanding human behavior had largely been expelled from the academic social sciences. Even the basic notion of biological race—once almost universally accepted—had become much less of a subject of discussion, with fewer and fewer academics focusing upon the differences between human groups, let alone among European whites.

The victory of Boasian anthropology became overwhelming around the time of the Second World War, and for decades thereafter any notion of applying Darwinism to the understanding of human activity was confined to the margins of academia. This situation only began to change in the mid-1970s with the rise of sociobiology, and the large-scale mappings of the human genome around the end of the century finally began restoring race to its proper place near the center of anthropology. Many of Boas’s intellectual heirs ferociously resisted this revival of a Darwinist and hereditarian framework, sometimes with improper means. The serious scientific fraud at the center of Stephen Jay Gould’s influential book The Mismeasure of Man is a notorious example of this.


The fascinating story of this hidden decades-long struggle over the control of anthropology and its relationship to Darwinism is very effectively told in Carl Degler’s 1991 book In Search of Human Nature, which carries the descriptive subtitle “The Decline and Revival of Darwinism in American Social Thought.”

As a Pulitzer Prize-winning former president of the American Historical Association, Degler certainly had stellar academic credentials for the task. For decades, he had been a strong champion of feminist and anti-racialist causes, firmly embracing the “culturalist” model of human history, and as he explained both in his Preface and in a subsequent interview, he had begun his investigation assuming that the Boasian victory had come about primarily on the basis of objective scientific facts. But his years of archival research had eventually led him to conclude that the motives had mostly been ideological, and that the bulk of the evidence had always actually remained to the contrary.

The Times gave his important book the lead position in its Sunday Book Review, with the very favorable discussion running nearly 3,000 words, including an appended interview in which the scholar recognized that his longtime colleagues would issue “a sigh of regret that Carl Degler, who has been working all this time writing against racism and sexism, has been converted to the other side.” Notwithstanding his shift into the sociobiological camp, when he died a quarter-century later, the Times obituary honored him with the headline “Carl N. Degler, Scholarly Champion of the Oppressed in America, Dies at 93.”

Carleton Putnam and the Battle Over School Desegration

A few years after Stoddard’s unnoticed 1950 death, racial issues moved to the forefront of American society. The 1954 Supreme Court decision Brown vs. Board of Education unanimously overturned more than a half-century of legal precedent by striking down state laws for public school segregation. Reaction to Brown was fierce throughout the South, but although President Eisenhower seems to have had misgivings about the decision, he dispatched the troops of the 101st Airborne to forcibly integrate Little Rock high school.

The massive resistance of the South to these new racial policies continued, and periodically reached the national media. According to his later account, Carleton Putnam happened to read a 1958 column in Life Magazine by a Southern journalist defending segregation, and he was soon drawn into the ongoing political battle.

Like Stoddard, Putnam had deep New England Puritan ancestry, but after graduating from Princeton and earning his law degree at Columbia, he had chosen to pursue a business career. In the mid-1930s he had become a pioneer in commercial aviation and started his own small airline, which following various expansions and mergers eventually became Delta, the nation’s largest carrier, with Putnam serving as chairman for 15 years. While still in his early 50s, he had retired from active business involvement and begun work on an intended four volume biography of Theodore Roosevelt, a distant relative, with the first volume appearing in 1958 to widespread critical praise. But that project was soon abandoned as he gradually began devoting all his efforts to the campaign to maintain racial segregation, first by writing a series of public letters and newspaper columns, and later by launching a public speaking tour, writing books and organizing legal efforts to overturn Brown.

Putnam had paid little attention to political or scientific developments during the two decades he had been absorbed in the business world, but was stunned when he discovered the ideological changes that had swept through the academy during that period, which eventually laid the intellectual basis for the legal and political decisions that overturned legal segregation. From his perspective, the major biological differences between blacks and whites had long been recognized, with the substantial African inferiority in mind and temperament fully acknowledged by most scientists. But in less than a single generation, the theories of Franz Boas and his coterie of academic disciples had captured anthropology and related sciences, proclaiming the doctrine of racial equality and marginalizing those who maintained the old beliefs. Eventually, this new scientific consensus was given the strength of law by the Supreme Court.

In Putnam’s opinion, the great danger of desegregation was that it might eventually lead to racial miscegenation, and the admixture of African ancestry into America’s white population would severely degrade the citizenry, leading to a large and permanent decline in mental ability and social behavior. To a considerable extent, he believed that biology was destiny, and the mixture of black with white would destroy our nation’s future.


During the 1950s, the battles over racial integration were almost entirely confined to the South, which contained the overwhelming majority of our black population, and as a New England Yankee and prominent business executive Putnam’s energetic involvement in the cause drew considerable attention. In 1961 he collected together his writings on the subject, much of which were based upon his extensive correspondence with various critics, and published Race and Reason, a short book setting forth his views which became a major bestseller, having 150,000 copies in print. Several of the world’s leading scientific experts who supported his position contributed a Foreword to his book, which also received the strong endorsement of several high-ranking Southern senators, who distributed copies to their followers and local newspaper editors.

As a prominent voice in the national campaign to maintain segregation, Putnam argued that the leading figures in his political movement were pursuing an ineffectual strategy, staking their claim on the constitutional doctrine of “states’ rights” while they avoided raising the scientific reality of the large biological differences between blacks and whites, which he believed should have been their main issue. He claimed that these individuals all privately acknowledged those racial facts, but as members of the Southern elite they had been closely associated for generations with the families of their black household domestics and other retainers, and considered it impossible to publicly discuss the biological differences that they so readily acknowledged in private. Thus, for cultural reasons they were foregoing their strongest political weapon, and Putnam believed his own work was necessary to remedy that lack. He also claimed that numerous prominent scientists privately endorsed his scientific views about race but were too fearful of academic or financial retaliation to acknowledge those facts in public.

According to Putnam, the unchallenged sociological and psychological evidence that had helped sway the Supreme Court to overturn segregation was largely fraudulent, and his project culminated in an important 1963 challenge to Brown, in which he and his legal team successfully introduced the contrary testimony of several scientific experts. But although they won at trial, that verdict was subsequently overturned at the appellate level, and the high court refused to hear an appeal.


In 1967 he published his sequel Race and Reality, which received a glowing endorsement from physics Nobel Laureate William Shockley who had recently become notorious for voicing similar views. Around the same time or a few years later, leading psychometric scholars such as Arthur Jensen of Berkeley, Hans Eysenck of University College London, and Richard J. Herrnstein of Harvard had focused upon the large and seemingly innate racial gaps in IQ, with intellectually-elite publications such as the Harvard Educational Review and The Atlantic presenting their long articles on the subject. But the political tide in American society was never reversed, and Putnam eventually abandoned his efforts.

Despite his controversial and strongly racialist public writings, when Putnam died in 1998 at the age of 96, he received a rather long and favorable obituary in the Times, certainly emphasizing his segregationist efforts and even mentioning that his books had inspired a young David Duke to become a leader of the Ku Klux Klan, but written in a surprisingly detached and even friendly tone, suggesting that Putnam had managed to retain lifelong credibility among our East Coast elites.

Wickliffe Draper, the Pioneer Fund, and Mankind Quarterly


Much of the hidden backstory of Putnam’s pro-segregation effort was later revealed in a 2002 book by William H. Tucker of Rutgers. The Funding of Scientific Racism recounted the origins and activities of the Pioneer Fund, for many decades the leading financial backer of numerous American racialist projects. Prof. Tucker had his origins in the academic New Left of the late 1960s and was intensely hostile to the ideological positions of his subjects, but his three years of archival research and numerous personal interviews provide a wealth of information that otherwise would have remained hidden.

Although the Pioneer Fund only became an occasional subject of media scrutiny during the 1990s, its origins actually stretched back to the early decades of the 20th century and a millionaire named Wickliffe Draper, who funded and established the organization. Like Stoddard, Grant, and Putnam, Draper himself was of New England Puritan stock, the group that had provided a hugely disproportionate share of America’s intellectual elites from the founding of our nation up through the beginning of the twentieth century. He had graduated Harvard in 1913, been wounded in combat during the First World War, and eventually gained the rank of colonel in the post-war reserves. Inheriting a substantial textile industry fortune, he never pursued a career, but instead devoted most of his life to such gentleman pursuits as big game hunting and travel.

Although obviously distasteful to Tucker, Draper’s strong racialist views seemed quite reflective of the leading American figures of his youth such as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, and in his early adulthood, the books of Grant and Stoddard were on everyone’s lips. Indeed, Roosevelt had praised Grant’s theories, and Draper was one of Grant’s social acquaintances, regarding him as a personal role-model according to Tucker.

By modern standards, America’s ruling elites of that era embraced extremely racist notions, and Draper’s views fit very comfortably within that milieu. One of his earliest projects had been to promote the repatriation of America’s blacks back to Africa, but such ideas were hardly uncommon at the time, and indeed during the 1920s one of America’s most prominent black public figures was the nationalistic leader Marcus Garvey, who proposed to do exactly that.

Draper was hardly any sort of intellectual, but his importance lay in his willingness to heavily finance those racialists who were, and his choice of like-minded successors who continued to support such causes for decades after his death in 1972, which allowed his influence to span nearly a century, from the era of Warren Harding to that of Barack Obama. The non-profit Pioneer Fund, which he established in 1937, was the primary vehicle for his donations, but Tucker’s research indicates that substantial additional sums were also disbursed directly from Draper’s personal assets. In particular, it appears that much or even most of the funding for Putnam’s press campaigns, book distributions, and legal efforts may have been quietly provided by Draper, who viewed Putnam as a trusted ally and advisor.

Among American foundations, the Pioneer Fund scarcely ranked as a minnow, being dwarfed a hundred times over by Ford, Carnegie, Rockefeller, and other philanthropic endowments which were enthusiastically supportive of the rising anti-racist tide in American society and thought. But although massively outspent by its ideological opponents, Pioneer’s dollars played a crucial role in subsidizing and keeping alive the racialist doctrines that had once entirely dominated American society but which had begun receding from the late 1920s onward, before becoming completely marginalized among our national elites by the 1950s and 1960s.

For example, the science of eugenics had been launched in the late 19th century by polymath Francis Galton, a first cousin of Charles Darwin, and for decades was almost universally accepted by educated individuals of all ideological backgrounds, with the strongest support usually coming from progressives and only the fervently religious being the main holdouts. But under continuous pressure mostly by Jews and Marxists, the doctrine began a long and permanent retreat during the late 1920s and 1930s. Around the same time, Franz Boas and his energetic group of academic disciples, most of them Jewish, had gained control of American anthropology, largely displacing the Anglo-Saxon academics who had originally created the discipline, and overturning the racialist theories once promoted by Grant and Stoddard.

As regular academic periodicals grew unwelcoming to articles that continued to adhere to what eventually became known as “scientific racism,” the Pioneer Fund in 1960 financed the creation of Mankind Quarterly, a new peer-reviewed journal intended to fill that gap. When I digitized the archives of that publication around 2003, its name meant nothing to me, nor did those of its editorial board members and leading contributors. But I eventually discovered that many of these latter individuals were actually leading international scholars with distinguished academic records, whose refusal to join ideological trends had locked them out of mainstream periodicals and eventually purged their names from our media and intellectual history despite their prestigious academic credentials.

For example, Henry Garrett had been the longtime chairman of Columbia University’s Psychology Department, president of the American Psychological Association, a member of the AAAS and the National Research Council, and editor of leading academic texts. R. Ruggles Gates was a prominent British geneticist and a Fellow of the Royal Society. Robert Gayre, A. James Gregor, Robert Kuttner, R. Travis Osborne, and numerous other regular contributors also had strong scientific or scholarly credentials. Although Tucker is quite hostile to these individuals and their ideology, his book is helpful in providing this important background. The 1960-2004 archives of the publication are now conveniently available for reading on this website:

Nathaniel Weyl as a Proto-Neoconservative

Nearly all of the prominent American racialists so far discussed came from an Old Stock Anglo-Saxon backgrounds, reflecting the elites that had totally dominated our society up until the 1930s, and their lifelong political tendencies were generally either mainstream or right-wing. But the most frequent outside contributor to Mankind Quarterly during the 1960s and 1970s was Nathaniel Weyl, who had different roots.

His father Walter was from a German-Jewish immigrant family and had been a leading progressive intellectual, co-founding The New Republic in 1914. After getting his degree from Columbia University in 1931 and doing graduate work at the London School of Economics, the younger Weyl soon veered far to the left, spending the 1930s as a committed Communist Party member while working in government and operating on the fringes of a Soviet spy network. He and his wife both broke with the Party in 1939, disgusted by the Hitler-Stalin Pact, and by the late 1940s he had become a strong conservative and a zealous anti-Communist, regularly denouncing Red espionage in various publications, eventually including National Review. So in some respects his ideological path anticipated that of the later neoconservatives who followed the same trajectory a generation or more later.


Racial and ethnic topics soon became one of Weyl’s main areas of interest, and in 1960 he published The Negro in American Civilization, an exhaustive and unflinching account of the role of blacks in our nation’s history. Running well over 150,000 words, the coverage stretched from their African roots down to his present day, focused primarily upon history and politics but also including extensive discussion of biological, anthropological, and sociological issues. Willmoore Kendall, a prominent Yale political scientist, was William F. Buckley Jr.’s mentor, and he gave the volume a glowing treatment in National Review, saying it filled the longstanding need for “a compendious and objective survey of the facts about the American Negro” but warned that “the evidence Weyl has assembled is vastly more discouraging…than most of us have permitted ourselves to fear in our most pessimistic moments.” While praising Weyl’s bravery and candor, Kendall predicted that “He will pay dearly for it.”

Indeed, Kendall’s warning seems to have been borne out and almost all of Weyl’s subsequent writings were confined to conservative or racialist publications, as were the reviews of his many later books. And Kendell’s ringing endorsement may even have had serious personal consequences, since the following year he was forced out of his tenured Yale professorship after 14 years of teaching at that academic institution. In 1971, Weyl and a co-author published American Statesmen on Slavery and the Negro, which seems largely a supplement and sequel to the previous book. Both of Weyl’s hefty volumes were parallel to Putnam’s short books, though providing far greater breadth and depth.


Although Weyl lacked a doctorate, he was a highly innovative thinker, so his apparent blacklisting by mainstream academics and publications had unfortunate intellectual consequences. For example, in 1966 he published The Creative Elite in America, introducing a powerful sampling technique for determining the relative performance of different ethnic groups based upon their subset of especially distinctive last names, a tool which I had christened “Weyl Analysis” and heavily used in my long article “The Myth of American Meritocracy” analyzing elite college admissions.

Among his various quantitative findings, Weyl demonstrated the long intellectual dominance of Americans of Puritan stock, and their noticeable decline by about 1900. A half-century after Weyl’s sociological breakthrough, economist Gregory Clark relied upon exactly the same methodology in widely-praised best-seller The Son Also Rises, but confined any mention of Weyl to a single brief footnote, which denounced him as a “racist” and expressed surprise that such a powerful sociological technique had been so little used.

Weyl’s passing at age 94 was noted in a brief 2005 Times obituary, which focused entirely on his anti-Communism and peripheral involvement in the Hiss case and was reasonably favorable. Since all of Weyl’s decades of research in “scientific racialism” had been blacklisted by the media, later generations of journalists may have remained totally unaware of it.

Academic Anthropologists and the Reality of Race

Although neither Putnam nor Weyl had held academic positions, these racialist writers and others drew quite heavily upon the works of those who did, most of whom were fully mainstream scholars. Very few of these individuals fell into the ideological camp of white racialism, and indeed the majority seem to have been either typical liberals or else entirely apolitical, merely being researchers who followed the scientific data wherever it happened to lead.

Objective scientific reality does exist, but unless we have the time and expertise to investigate the research studies ourselves, our perception of that reality relies upon the filter of the media, and that portrayal may be severely distorted. There is the notorious historical example of Stalin’s elevation of Trofim K. Lysenko and his anti-hereditarian theories to official dogma while condemning to the gulag those scientists who continued to believe in genetics, a policy that crippled Soviet biology for decades.

Back in 2017 I was interviewed for an hour or two over the phone by a New York Times journalist focused on the racially-related political topics that had suddenly begun dominating the national headlines. She seemed very skeptical that race was a scientifically valid concept, and quite surprised when I told her that saying “race does not exist” was roughly equivalent to asserting that “gravity does not exist.” I pointed out that her longtime colleague Nicholas Wade, an award-winning science journalist, had published an entire book a couple of years earlier on the science of race, and that just a few weeks before our conversation her own newspaper had devoted the entire front section of its prestigious Week in Review section to a lengthy exposition of the undeniable scientific reality of race by Professor of Genetics David Reich of Harvard University and the Broad Institute. But despite these points, she still seemed quite unconvinced, presumably reflecting the uniformly contrary opinions of her own journalistic peer-group. A few months ago, James Bennet, the highly-regarded Opinion Editor of the Times, was suddenly purged for insufficient “wokeness,” so I suspect that henceforth her beliefs will no longer be disturbed by any such discordant scientific information from her own newspaper.

Although our country has not yet reached the Soviet condition of imprisoning researchers whose scientific findings are misaligned with the reigning ideology, for decades harsh informal sanctions have been visited upon those academics who come to unwelcome conclusions, especially if they are perceived as lending aid and comfort to racialist forces and their political projects. In some cases, controversial findings have unleashed a torrent of media vilification, with the scholars being attacked as “fascists” or “neo-Nazis,” despite all evidence to the contrary, and even subjected to personal threats and demands that they be censored. Occasionally, such harsh and unfair denunciations have actually moved the victims into the racialist camp, thereby becoming self-fulfilling prophecies, but more typically the scholars have quietly continued their research activities until the media spotlight eventually shifted elsewhere. Meanwhile, rival academics presenting contrary positions have often been heavily promoted by the media as fully authoritative sources, despite sometimes possessing far weaker scholarly credentials.


An early post-war example of this process came in the case of Prof. Carleton Coon, one of the world’s foremost physical anthropologists, who spent two decades at Harvard and later served as president of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists. Coon’s specialty was race, and he authored several of the standard academic texts in that subject. His research also attracted some controversy when he proposed the hypothesis that the different races of mankind actually predated the emergence of homo sapiens, having previously appeared in the geographically-separated populations of our homo erectus predecessors, which then independently crossed the line into full sapiency at different points in time.

Both Coon’s fully mainstream work and his more speculative theories were heavily cited by Putnam and others in their political writings on segregation, and according to Tucker’s research, Coon was quietly sympathetic to their efforts. During his presidential term, a rump session of his professional association voted to condemn Putnam’s book, and when Coon discovered that virtually none of those hostile members had actually read it, he threatened to resign in protest.

Throughout this era, Coon’s leading scientific opponent was a British social anthropologist and follower of Franz Boas, who had originally been born Israel Ehrenberg but then chose to conceal his Jewish origins by taking the remarkably pompous and aristocratic name of “Montague Francis Ashley-Montagu.” After relocating to America, he eventually shortened his new name to “Ashley Montagu” while also affecting an extremely upper-class British accent despite his very working-class roots.


Although Montagu seems to have had few scholarly achievements, had made fraudulent claims about his educational credentials, and was dismissed after a few years from his only serious academic position, he spent decades as an extremely successful scientific popularizer, gaining enormous public influence through the media and political support he received.

He was best known for his strong opposition to the concept of race, which he characterized as “Man’s most dangerous myth” in a massively best-selling book of that title after having authored UNESCO’s famous 1951 declaration on that subject, which he quite possibly plagiarized. Although the actual fine print of his biological claims was generally more nuanced, his headline writings successfully promoted the widespread notion that race was a dangerous pseudo-scientific illusion.


A very interesting history of the anthropological conflicts of that era may be found in Pat Shipman’s 1994 book The Evolution of Racism. Prior to her turn to anthropology, Shipman had begun her academic career in Religion, and she seems a very zealous anti-racist, but as a diligent and candid researcher, her accounts of Coon, Montagu, and several of the other important figures may have revealed a different image than what she had originally anticipated.

For example, Montagu’s early attempts to expunge the scientific notion of race came under withering criticism by leading scholars in the field, and he defended himself by denouncing his anthropological adversaries as “racists” who opposed him because of his Jewish heritage. In an on-the-record interview decades later, he explained those past conflicts by declaring that “all non-Jews are anti-Semitic,” a statement so remarkable that Shipman used it as the title of one of her chapters.

One of Montagu’s later books, The Natural Superiority of Women, also became hugely influential within the burgeoning feminist movement. Montagu remained a very prominent and mediagenic celebrity-scientist for decades, finally dying in 1999 at the age of 94.

While Montagu’s misleading claims received vast media promotion and he became a major television celebrity-intellectual, far more substantial scholarly works on the same subject received scarcely any public attention, or were even actively boycotted. For example, in 1974 John R. Baker, an eminent Oxford don, published Race, a magisterial 300,000 word volume presenting the entire intellectual history and scientific information on that subject, ranging from physical anthropology to psychometrics. In the opinion of Sir Peter Medawar, one of the Britain’s leading men of science, no other book “tries to encompass everything relevant to the idea of race with such thoroughness, seriousness, and honesty.” But according to later accounts, intense political pressure forced Oxford University Press to suppress the book by minimizing its distribution and visibility outside the narrow confines of academia. As a consequence, the public impact of this major work of scholarship was restricted to the white racialist community, where it was strongly endorsed by Mankind Quarterly.

I have only casually leafed through the very lengthy works of Coon and Baker, but these massively-documented tomes seem to contain exactly the sort of careful and dispassionate material that represents the epitome of serious science, so different from the ideologically-motivated verbiage of popular, media-promoted charlatans such as Montagu.


More recently, the current state of our scientific knowledge was helpfully summarized in Race: The Reality of Human Differences published in 2004 by eminent Berkeley anthropologist Vincent Sarich and journalist Frank Miele, which won glowing praise from Colombia anthropologist Ralph Holloway and several other mainstream academics. The book describes the intellectual history of the scientific issues, providing coverage of the various political controversies and Coon’s important work, and since it only runs a couple of hundred pages and is written in an easy style, would serve as an excellent introduction to this controversial topic.

IQ Researchers and Racial Differences

Putnam’s second book had appeared in 1967, recounting the failure of his attempts to overturn the Brown decision, and thereby reestablish the legal basis for school segregation. By then, popular resistance in the South had largely crumbled, resulting in massive white flight from the local public schools. Meanwhile, Northern cities such as Boston were being roiled by similar controversies over integration, and the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act had considerably broadened the political battlefield for racial issues. Although elite liberal opinion had predicted that such reform legislation would greatly reduce American racial conflict, the country had instead witnessed the worst wave of urban unrest since at least the Civil War, with deadly black riots in Detroit, Watts, and numerous other cities.

An important basis for the Brown decision had been the argument that desegregation would substantially reduce the wide educational achievement gap between black and white students, which was also a central goal of many of Lyndon Johnson’s new Great Society programs, such as Head Start. But in February 1969, the prestigious Harvard Educational Review gave over its entire issue to a massive 123 page article by Prof. Arthur Jensen of Berkeley, a leading psychometrician, bearing the provocative title “How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?” Jensen argued that there was overwhelming scientific evidence that IQ scores and other measures of scholastic ability were determined by nature rather than nurture and that the wide black-white performance gap was mostly biological in origin. Jensen’s scientific claims provoked a national firestorm of controversy, subjecting Jensen to massive vilification, including physical assaults and very serious threats against the lives of himself and his family.


Despite these ferocious attacks, Jensen never wavered in his scientific positions during the decades that followed, and in 1998 he published his magnum opus The g Factor: The Science of Mental Ability, reiterating his findings. By 2005, he was widely regarded as the Grand Old Man of psychometrics, and he published an article summarizing the previous thirty years of research on racial differences in intelligence, with his co-author being Prof. J. Philippe Rushton, an evolutionary theorist who held explicitly White Nationalist beliefs.

Jensen seems to have been largely apolitical, and although his original article had ignited the controversy, he hardly desired the resulting media spotlight, which soon shifted away, allowing him to spend the next four decades in his scholarly research prior to his death in 2012 at age 89. Instead, a much more eager lightning-rod appeared in the person of physicist William Shockley, who years earlier had won a Nobel Prize for inventing the transistor. Shockley seemed to relish public attention, which he soon attracted by wholeheartedly endorsing Jensen’s views and then spending years promoting them in the media and various public forums, along with other racially-charged policy proposals such as government-paid sterilization for low-IQ individuals and similar eugenic measures. The physicist soon became a household name, attracting massive public vilification up until his death in 1989 and even long afterward.

Shockley was a Palo Alto native, and in 1956 after inventing the transistor he had founded Shockley Semiconductor in neighboring Mountain View to commercialize his invention, choosing to relocate back from the East Coast in order to be closer to his aged and ailing mother. His difficult personality and poor management skills eventually produced an exodus of his early employees, who went on to spawn many of the most important technology companies in the region, arguably making Shockley the father of the modern Silicon Valley, which otherwise might never have come into existence. But although he is probably the most important Palo Altan in history, his controversial racialist views have prevented any appropriate recognition. For years I have driven past his simple clapboard home on Waverley Ave., which is unmarked by any plaque or historic designation, and his name has never graced any building, monument, or award.

Lacking any such public honors and with his name now largely forgotten, Shockley presented no target for the recent Black Lives Matter protest movement to attack, and he was simply ignored. By contrast, a similar campaign a few years ago forced our local school district to rename Terman Middle School, which had honored famed Stanford Electrical Engineering Prof. Frederick Terman. In the 1930s, Terman had encouraged his students William Hewlett and David Packard to found their eponymous company, which also played a huge role in creating America’s powerful technology industry. Terman’s name was scraped from the school because he shared it with that of his father, Stanford Psychology Prof. Lewis Terman, who had pioneered American IQ testing a century ago, now considered a toxic figure despite almost no focus on race.

Jensen had done his own doctoral work at University College London under Hans Eysenck, a renowned professor of psychology and expert in psychometrics. A couple of years after the appearance of Jensen’s controversial article on the heredity basis of IQ, Eysenck published Race, Intelligence, and Education, a short book taking much the same position. Once again, a massive wave of controversy and media vilification erupted, with Eysenck being physically attacked and having his life threatened. Although he never retracted his views, henceforth he focused almost entirely on other topics, and by the time of his death in 1997 was a figure of enormous eminence in the field of psychology, ranking first in the world in the number of his peer-reviewed academic citations. Despite such scholarly achievements, he had never been made a member of the British Psychological Society, apparently because of the controversial nature of his writings on race and IQ three decades earlier.

The same year that Eysenck had released his controversial book, the parallel views of a much younger Harvard psychology professor named Richard Herrnstein attracted similar attention in our own country. Founded in 1857, The Atlantic had for more than a century been one of America’s most prestigious national magazines, and Herrnstein’s 20,000 word article on IQ was one of the longest ever to run in that publication, providing a comprehensive account of the origins and accuracy of IQ tests as a measure of human intelligence, along with the enormous implications for the future of our society. Herrnstein strongly endorsed the arguments of Jensen and others that IQ was overwhelmingly determined by innate factors, but tread rather carefully on the related evidence of a large difference in intelligence between racial groups.

Given its venue, Herrnstein’s massive article reached a large national audience, including many of America’s intellectual elites, and soon provoked the usual wave of attacks and hostile criticism, though his caution on racial issues probably insulated him from the level of vitriol that Jensen and Eysenck had encountered. Rather than being expelled from respectable media circles, Herrnstein went on to publish additional major articles on related IQ issues over the next couple of decades in The Public Interest, National Review, Commentary, and even socialistic Dissent.


In 1982, The Atlantic carried another one of his long articles describing the overwhelming consensus of academic researchers on IQ issues and the severe distortions of the scientific facts regularly promoted by leading mainstream media organs such as The New York Times and CBS News. So although the positions of Herrnstein and his allies were largely excluded from outlets with the largest national audiences, they continually reached smaller but more intellectually elite circles. In 1985 he co-authored Crime and Human Nature with eminent political scientist James Q. Wilson, an influential and well-received text arguing for a strong innate component to criminal behavior, including discussion of the very wide differences in crime rates between racial and ethnic groups.

The Bell Curve Wars and Other IQ Controversies


Herrnstein died of lung cancer at the age of 64 in September 1994, having devoted the final years of his life to a project that directly addressed the large racial differences in intelligence which most of his previous writings had usually sidestepped. Teaming up with prominent social scientist Charles Murray, he produced The Bell Curve, a massive volume that weighed in at 845 pages and over 400,000 words.

The book was released just weeks after his death and immediately became a national sensation, probably attracting more controversy and media coverage than anything published in decades. Almost three generations had passed since a major American press had published a book heavily arguing for the mostly innate nature of human intelligence and the wide racial differences in such traits, and although the latter issue constituted only small portion of the text, those incendiary claims attracted nearly all the attention.

At that time, The New Republic was America’s most influential liberal opinion magazine, and both owner Martin Peretz and editor Andrew Sullivan together gave their strong support to the launch of The Bell Curve, allocating much of an issue to a 10,000 word cover-story entitled “Race, Genes, and IQ: An Apologia,” which largely consisted of extended extracts from the book. But that decision sparked a huge revolt by most of the magazine’s outraged staff and regular contributors, who demanded space for rebuttal, so that the same issue also carried some 19 separate attacks on the book and its theories, many of them extremely harsh, with epithets such as “neo-Nazi” tossed around. According to Sullivan, the incident marked a turning point in his relationships with his TNR colleagues, which never recovered, and he eventually left the magazine.

From the distance of a quarter century, I had mostly forgotten the overwhelming media coverage at the time, but spending a couple of days reading fifty or sixty of the contemporaneous reviews, many of them quite lengthy, refreshed my memory, and also underscored the tremendously disparate reactions by usual ideological soulmates.

For example, just within the pages of the New York Times, the Sunday Book Review allocated The Bell Curve and two other books on similar racial issues an almost unprecedented three pages of discussion, with Malcolm Browne, the paper’s Pulitzer Prize-winning science journalist taking 4,200 words to portray the works in a substantially favorable light, emphasizing the need to confront long-suppressed taboos. But a week later the same newspaper ran a very long editorial denouncing “The Bell Curve Agenda” in the harshest possible terms, and an 8,300 word cover-story in the Sunday Magazine had vilified Murray as “The Most Dangerous Conservative in America.”

National Review, the leading conservative magazine, had already run a long and favorable review, but soon devoted most of an entire issue to a remarkable symposium by 14 separate contributors, many of them prominent journalists or academics, who provided a very wide range of both positive and negative perspectives. Although TNR was then my favorite magazine and I didn’t hold NR in high regard, the flood of attacks in the former seemed absolutely hysterical, while I thought that the latter had provided the best and most balanced discussion.

The coincidental timing of larger political events probably helped explain this enormous media coverage. Just a couple of weeks after the book’s release, Newt Gingrich and the Republicans had unexpectedly swept to power in Congressional elections, ending nearly a half-century of unbroken Democratic control by seizing majorities in both the House and the Senate, an event just as traumatic to the liberals of that day as Donald Trump’s upset victory was to prove in 2016. Racial controversies had been a significant contributing factor to the Republican landslide, and appalled liberals now saw their familiar political and ideological world crumbling about them, with the frightening possibility that the “white racism” of the buried past would suddenly regain control of American society.

The result was an exceptionally bitter wave of liberal media attacks on the book, which was demonized to an unprecedented extent. As mentioned, much of the early media discussion of The Bell Curve and its ideas had been favorable or at least respectful, but an enormous public campaign of vilification was now unleashed, with many timorous Republicans and conservatives soon wilting under the attacks and abandoning any support. A couple of years earlier, I had been invited to a private meeting in DC at which Murray had confidentially circulated portions of his work-in-progress and the neoconservative organizers strategized with him about the best approach for successfully launching the book; but now I heard word that Bill Kristol was seeking conservatives to sign a public statement condemning the “racist” tract.

The book continued to sell very well, but the tide of elite public opinion soon turned sharply against it, and Herrnstein’s death just a month before publication was surely a contributing factor. Until just a few years earlier, Murray had been totally unaware of these scientific issues involving race and IQ, and indeed had regularly dismissed the possible role of racial differences as a factor in black social problems in his previous writings denouncing the welfare state. By contrast, Herrnstein had spent more than two decades researching the topic as a leading Harvard professor, and was also partially immunized against attacks because of his strong liberal credentials. Thus, the disappearance of the senior liberal co-author removed a crucial defender of the contents, leaving the conservative Murray much more vulnerable and exposed, and forcing him to publicly defend psychometric issues that were outside his primary area of expertise. I remember thinking at the time that when faced with sharp technical questioning by hostile journalists some of his media responses were not as effective as they might have been.


America’s leading psychometricians, whose professional expertise on race and IQ had long been ignored or mischaracterized in the public arena, quickly mobilized in support, using the media firestorm as an opportunity to get their longstanding opinions into print. In December, the Wall Street Journal gave over most of a full editorial page to a public declaration that The Bell Curve represented the scholarly consensus of the “mainstream science on intelligence,” a statement organized by Prof. Linda Gottfredson and signed by 52 academic experts, including such eminent scholars as Eysenck and Jensen.

Despite these counter-attacks, the intellectual tide continued to turn against the work, and within less than a year, the ideological status quo had reasserted itself, with the remaining defenders finding themselves severely beleaguered in the mainstream media. When the firestorm had originally erupted, famed paleolibertarian Murray Rothbard had been gleeful that the long-suppressed truths about racial matters had finally broken through, suggesting that powerful political elements had apparently decided to reverse their decades of scientific suppression. But at the ten year anniversary, longtime writers on race and IQ such as Steve Sailer and Chris Brand delivered lengthy and despairing verdicts, concluding that the ideas in the book had been successfully suppressed, and any favorable mention of it in respectable circles would render someone an immediate outcast. Sailer even suggested that the “Bell Curve Wars” represented a crucial turning point for both the neoconservative and neoliberal intellectual movements, which soon abandoned any lingering candor on racially-charged issues. Indeed, other frequent writers on racial matters such as John Derbyshire and Peter Brimelow have sometimes described the period 1995-2005 as a brief “interglacial” during which controversial racial topics could sometimes be discussed in the mainstream media, but that the subsequent clamp-down had been even more severe than anything before.

Many journalists and academics became extremely fearful of broaching the subject of race and IQ, with even the most eminent figures sometimes suffering severe consequences when they did so. For half a century, James Watson had reigned as one of the world’s greatest scientific figures, having shared a Nobel Prize for discovering DNA in 1953 and then spending decades leading Cold Spring Harbor laboratory, which he built up into a major center of scientific research. But in 2007 while on a book-tour at the age of 79, he raised questions about the average intelligence of black Africans and was immediately subjected to a firestorm of public criticism and media vituperation, soon being stripped of many of his honors, and later endured a second wave of vilification when similar remarks came to light in a 2018 documentary. This was a shocking fate for a scientist in his 90s who had spent his entire career at the peak of world renown and achievement.

At the time of the initial Watson firestorm, Slate was our leading online publication, generally neoliberal and well-respected, and William Saletan, one of its senior editors, began publishing a lengthy five-part series entitled “Liberal Creationism,” in which he explained the solid scientific basis of Watson’s casual remarks. But Saletan immediately encountered such a ferocious wave of denunciations that he soon apologized for having used “disreputable sources” amid widespread doubts that he would be able to keep his job.

Richard Lynn and IQ and the Wealth of Nations

Although Saletan managed to survive, other media figures naturally became very discreet on the subject of race and IQ, either mouthing platitudes or avoiding the topic entirely lest they be mobbed and their careers destroyed. Scientists themselves also recognized that if a figure of Watson’s towering stature could be so easily destroyed, they needed to watch their words very carefully if they wished to retain their positions. Meanwhile, IQ researchers and racialist elements followed the topic more eagerly than ever, but remained on the ideological margins, with few of their books or articles gaining any wider exposure. And this severe bifurcation between the two camps—one enormously large but silent and fearful and the other small and fiercely committed to IQ doctrine—had serious negative consequences.


In 2002, Richard Lynn and a co-author had published IQ and the Wealth of Nations, which was entirely ignored by mainstream media but became a sensation in IQ and racialist circles. Some of its striking findings began to circulate widely on the Internet, together with those presented in several follow-up volumes, such as The Global Bell Curve.

For decades, Lynn had been a leading figure in international IQ research, with many of his important results cited in the Herrnstein/Murray book, and his new work proposed a sweeping global hypothesis. Based upon his collection of hundreds of international IQ samples, he demonstrated a strong correlation between national IQs and per capita incomes, claiming this proved that a nation’s IQ was a central factor in determining its economic success, with obvious implications for government policies on foreign aid and immigration. In addition, the extremely low IQs in so many African countries, often running 30 points or more below the white American average, obviously explained Africa’s dismal economic failures.

Despite his lack of any mainstream coverage, Lynn soon became a near cult-figure within the racialist community and the statistics in his book an object of veneration. Moreover, such explosive information may have been widely discussed in private conversations, gradually leaking into establishment circles, and perhaps even ultimately playing a role in prompting Watson’s controversial public statements. I suspect that numerous mainstream academics or journalists even regarded the international IQ data as a sort of intellectual pornography, becoming the “forbidden knowledge” that often attracts keen interest.

At the time, I was totally immersed in my own software work, but about a decade later I finally looked into Lynn’s material, and came to radically different conclusions. Focusing primarily upon the dozens of white European IQ samples he had presented, I noticed an extremely striking variance in those results over fairly short periods of time and between genetically-indistinguishable groups, raising strong doubts about Lynn’s strict hereditarian explanation.

Just as Lynn claimed, national wealth was closely linked to IQ, but his own evidence actually suggested that the causal arrow pointed in the direction opposite to his hypothesis, with IQs seeming to rise very rapidly as national wealth increased. For example, Lynn showed that East Germans had IQs as much as 17 points lower than their West German neighbors, while in the early 1970s Ireland Irish were some 13 points below their Irish-American cousins, but both these huge gaps quickly closed as the poorer societies became less poor. A large number of such extreme anomalies seemed to refute the “Strong IQ Hypothesis” long embraced by Lynn, most of his fellow IQ researchers, and their numerous racialist admirers.

I presented this analysis in my major 2012 article “Race, IQ, and Wealth” which provoked widespread discussion, and in a series of follow-up columns I expanded on these ideas and replied to Lynn’s attempted rebuttal. I think my conclusions were eventually accepted by most of the less-dogmatic elements within both the IQ and racialist communities:

  • Race, IQ, and Wealth
    What the facts tell us about a taboo subject
    Ron Unz • The American Conservative • July 18, 2012 • 7,500 Words

Since my own findings were rather humdrum and so obviously implied by Lynn’s own data, I suggested the larger surprise was that they had not been previously noticed during the years of bitter battles over IQ:

We are now faced with a mystery arguably greater than that of IQ itself. Given the powerful ammunition that Lynn and Vanhanen have provided to those opposing their own “Strong IQ Hypothesis,” we must wonder why this has never attracted the attention of either of the warring camps in the endless, bitter IQ dispute, despite their alleged familiarity with the work of these two prominent scholars. In effect, I would suggest that the heralded 300-page work by Lynn and Vanhanen constituted a game-ending own-goal against their IQ-determinist side, but that neither of the competing ideological teams ever noticed.

This seemed a perfect example of why efforts to suppress public discussion of a contentious topic may ultimately be self-defeating, preventing the warring camps from objectively analyzing the underlying evidence and coming to realistic conclusions.

Philippe Rushton, r/K Theory, and Accelerated Evolution

I had always been interested in racial issues, and the enormous 1994 media frenzy surrounding The Bell Curve naturally led me to purchase a copy, but I found it rather uninteresting and ran out of steam less than a hundred pages into the massive 845 page volume. After all, Herrnstein had been writing pretty much the same thing for more than two decades, starting with his very famous 1971 Atlantic article, and although he’d now compiled a great deal of additional supporting evidence, his arguments had already convinced me many years earlier.

By contrast, another book that coincidentally came out almost at the same time fell into a very different category. Although it received merely a sliver of the media coverage given to the Herrnstein/Murray book, I found Race, Evolution, and Behavior by Canadian academic J. Philippe Rushton absolutely fascinating and considered it a seminal advance in human evolutionary theory.

After summarizing the known scientific facts about the main races of mankind and their different characteristics, Rushton then analyzed this data within the context of r/K theory, a framework of biological adaptation originally developed by sociobiology pioneer E.O. Wilson, which analyzed organisms as being optimized for particular environmental conditions. Under circumstances of resource-abundance, r-selected species emphasize rapid reproduction, while if resources are scarce and competition the crucial factor, K-selected species focus on high parental-investment.

All humans are situated at the far K-end of the spectrum, but some races more so than others. Restricting his attention to the three classical continental-scale mega-races of Africans, Europeans, and East Asians, Rushton analyzed their characteristics under this theoretical framework. Across some sixty different physical and behavioral traits, Africans were invariably at one end of the continuum and Asians at the other, with Europeans in the middle but much closer to Asians. And in each case, these biological characteristics followed the same r/K pattern. A vast wealth of empirical data supported the conclusion that each race had evolved a distinct package of environmentally-influenced features.

I remember casually discussing the two contrasting books with a politically-moderate academic friend of mine at the time, and we both agreed that while the ideas in the much-hyped Bell Curve were neither particularly new nor provocative, Rushton’s research was absolutely fascinating and probably worth a Nobel Prize. I also joked that it might take at least thirty years for such controversial material to become sufficiently accepted for him to claim that honor. Since those prizes are not awarded posthumously, when Rushton died of cancer in 2012 at the relatively young age of 68, I mentioned to one of Harvard’s most prominent scholars that my prediction could no longer be tested.

Despite the shocking aspects of Rushton’s racial analysis, whose controversial conclusions vastly exceeded the rather bland and well-established claims advanced by Herrnstein and Murray, his book initially received fair and even rather favorable treatment, with the two works frequently paired together in reviews. The extremely long discussion in the New York Times Sunday Book Review covered both of them, and while it noted Rushton’s “incendiary thesis,” his ideas were still treated in a fully-respectful fashion.

Nonetheless, for most modern readers, Rushton’s rather straightforward discussion of racial differences in brain size, genital organs, and rates of physical maturation might trigger an almost allergic reaction, seeming to represent the most horrifying aspects of the endlessly-vilified “scientific racism” from in the early decades of the 20th century. I was hardly surprised to notice that Rushton’s Wikipedia entry tenuously attempted to link him to the Nazi Party in its second paragraph, and many journalists had pursued a very similar line of attack in 1994. Indeed, since his own book had made significant use of Rushton’s research, Murray felt compelled to add an Afterword that defended Rushton as a “serious scholar,” but many of the harshest attacks on The Bell Curve still greatly exploited that Rushton association.

Rushton’s landmark book is no longer in print and only available on Amazon at excessive prices, but fortunately PDF copies may be found on the Internet, as well as those of abridged edition, which condenses his 350 page volume into what amounts to a long article.

For years, Rushton’s research and writings had attracted furious hostility, with organized leftists unsuccessfully attempting to have his Canadian university fire him from his tenured professorship, and prominent politicians even suggesting that he should be investigated and prosecuted for violations of Canada’s expansive hate-crimes laws. Endlessly persecuted or ignored by the political mainstream while hailed for his brilliance by the racialist community, Rushton’s own ideological views may have gradually shifted as a consequence. Near the very beginning of his 1995 book, he had argued that use of his scientific research by ethnic nationalists was “problematic,” but by 2002 he had assumed the presidency of the Pioneer Fund and a few years later had become a featured speaker at right-wing racialist conferences, at which point I had come to consider him as an outright White Nationalist.

This last characterization actually had important consequences for my own activities. I had done quite a lot of writing on racial and ethnic issues during the 1990s, then became absorbed in my software work and published almost nothing during the first decade of the 2000s. However, I actively participated in a lively email discussion group organized by Steve Sailer which focused on racial issues. A very common topic of discussion was immigrants and immigration, with my own generally favorable views usually rendering me a tiny minority of one. A frequent sub-topic was crime, and my claims that Hispanics had approximately the same crime rates as whites of the same age attracted endless attacks and ridicule from the overwhelming majority of the other list-members. The dispute went on for so many years that I eventually no longer bothered to argue the case, but every now and then just made some satirical jibe on the matter.

As it happens, Rushton was a very occasional participant in the group, and in late 2009 one of my jokes caught his eye. Being a bit on the humorless side, he failed to comprehend that my remarks were actually tongue-in-cheek, and after three or four explanatory exchanges, I was finally forced to state my position as explicitly as possible: “Hispanics have approximately the same crime rates as whites of the same age.” He found my claim totally astonishing, saying that it contradicted absolutely everything he had ever learned about the subject and even threatened to overturn his entire ideological world-view, which he had so painstakingly built up over his previous thirty years of scientific investigation into human racial differences. Therefore, he said, I couldn’t possibly be correct.

I then regarded Rushton as probably being the world’s leading White Nationalist academic scholar, and he was basically saying that he would eat his own hat if my contradictory racial analysis proved correct. Such an intellectual challenge was just too tempting to resist, so I took a brief hiatus from my ongoing software project to work out the crime numbers, which naturally turned out to be exactly as I had expected, then published my work as “The Myth of Hispanic Crime” in January 2010, an article which provoked quite a lot of discussion on various websites. I believe my findings had a substantial impact in reshaping the public debate, and my article spent most of the next decade generally ranked #2 by Google among some 160 million search results for “Hispanic Crime” and “Latino Crime” until all the pages of our website were entirely deranked by the Internet giant a few months ago, though it still holds that impressive position both on DuckDuckGo and Bing.

  • The Myth of Hispanic Crime
    Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness
    Ron Unz • The American Conservative • January 26, 2010 • 5,500 Words

My satisfaction with that article prompted me to return to research and writing, and over the next couple of years, I published more than I ever done had in the past.


Whether or not Rushton’s ill-treatment had pushed him into the white racialist camp, he gave little indication of deeply regretting that alignment, which only came after some twenty years of increasingly harsh vilification and harassment, both at his university and by the media. A much more unfortunate public demonization, though on a far lesser scale, occurred in the case of Henry Harpending, an eminent anthropologist with whom I’d become a little friendly during the early 2000s.

As his Wikipedia article indicates, he had spent nearly his entire career as an absolutely mainstream academic figure. After earning his Ph.D. at Harvard in 1972, he did important original work both in population genetics and anthropological fieldwork in Africa, and published over 120 articles in respected scientific journals. He eventually won election to the prestigious National Academy of Sciences, and spent his last twenty years as a full professor at the University of Utah.


Around 2007 he began a series of collaborations with physicist Gregory Cochran and together they published a number of important, high-profile papers. These included a theory that the introgression of Neanderthal genes may have spurred the development of early Homo Sapiens, the presentation of genetic evidence for the evolution of increased Ashkenazi Jewish intelligence, and most importantly the hypothesis that human evolution had been rapidly accelerating during the last 10,000 years, being driven by the increased appearance of favorable mutations due to far larger populations. All these papers appeared in well-regarded academic journals, with a couple of them being sufficiently important that they received favorable coverage in the science pages of the New York Times. In 2007 he and Cochran co-authored The 10,000 Year Explosion, published by Basic Books, which presented these various evolutionary ideas, as well as the suggestion that the evolution of lactose-tolerance might have been an important factor behind the early Indo-European expansion. The numerous reviews in academic journals were generally quite favorable.

However, the suggestion that human evolution had rapidly accelerated during the last few thousand years carried possible racial implications that did not pass unnoticed among white racialists, and the work became quite popular in such circles. Moreover, the two authors launched West Hunter, a joint blogsite focused on racial and evolutionary issues, and although Harpending seemed only minimally involved, many of the numerous commenters expressed sharply racialist sentiments on a wide variety of matters. Despite seeming rather apolitical, he accepted speaking engagements in 2009 and 2011 at small right-wing gatherings on the East Coast, perhaps thereby coming to the attention of SPLC investigators.


In 2014 Nicholas Wade, a longtime science reporter and editor at the New York Times, published an important book on race and evolution that quickly drew an organized campaign of vilification, including a public letter signed by 134 prominent geneticists, whose absurd charges conclusively proved that not a single one had read the book they were attacking. One of Wade’s chapters covered the theory of the evolution of increased Ashkenazi intelligence that Harpending had co-authored, probably placing a large target on the latter’s back.

So the following year, the SPLC’s HateWatch newsletter outrageously denounced the mild-mannered academic as a “White Nationalist.” This accusation was based upon a ridiculous grab-basket of charges, several of which merely amounted to describing his scientific research findings or mere guilt by association. Other than that, they noted he had occasionally made public statements roughly along the lines of the theories promoted by Herrnstein and Murray and had once called for the mass-deportation of illegal immigrants. For his writings on controversial Jewish issues, Kevin MacDonald has long become an arch-fiend to SPLC researchers, and they demonstrated their total incompetence by claiming Harpending’s theories were based upon those of MacDonald although they have no connection whatsoever and the latter’s name never even appeared in the index nor the bibliography of his book.

Quiet academics who become the object of vicious accusations by influential national organizations have little recourse, and suddenly being labeled a “White Nationalist” and “racist” must have been a very painful experience, possibly contributing to his death from a couple of strokes early the following year at age 72. Despite his twenty years as an esteemed Utah professor, no obituary appeared in his local newspaper, while his university website currently contains a page disassociating itself from one of its former academic stars.

The motive behind such SPLC calumny may have been partly to provide a severe warning to other scientific researchers, much like the destruction of James Watson’s towering reputation. But I think a larger factor was the desire to sufficiently anathemize the scholar that in the future no one would dare to cite his research in the public media, and that result seems to have been achieved. In 2019 a rather chauvinistic Jewish columnist at the New York Times casually referred to some of the findings that had been favorably discussed in his own newspaper a dozen years earlier, then desperately back-pedaled and removed the reference after someone discovered he had been relying upon a “racist” researcher.

Jewish Issues and Revilo P. Oliver

This extreme sensitivity towards any scientific research touching upon Jews or Jewish characteristics may actually represent a major hidden subtext behind the heavy suppression of racial research over the last century, perhaps even being a more important factor than the obvious focus on black/white issues.

As discussed above, Prof. Tucker’s exhaustive investigation of the Pioneer Fund revealed that throughout most of the twentieth century the organization had been at the center of a network of racialist researchers, providing at least some funding support for many of the scholars discussed above, including Jensen, Eysenck, Rushton, and Lynn, whose focus on topics of race and IQ was heavily disfavored by the vastly larger flow of funding from governmental or mainstream philanthropic sources. But Tucker discovered widespread indications that many of the key Pioneer figures had also held strong views on Jewish issues, though they were careful not to publicly disclose them.


In his first chapter, he explained that Pioneer had its ideological roots in the 1920s, when now-controversial notions of white racialism and eugenics were ubiquitous in elite American circles, especially prevalent in our officer corps and Military Intelligence, who were members of Col. Draper’s own social milieu. Heavily drawing upon the ground-breaking research of Holocaust historian Joseph W. Bendersky, Tucker noted that these same groups were also deeply—if quietly—hostile to growing Jewish influence in American society, which they viewed as a direct threat to continued Anglo-Saxon dominance. For four decades one of the top figures at Pioneer was Secretary John B. Trevor, Jr., the son of the former high-ranking Military Intelligence officer who had played a central role in the passage of the 1924 Immigration Act, whose underlying motive had actually been to eliminate any future influx of Eastern European Jews.

I summarized some of Bendersky’s important findings in a previous article:

In these military circles, there was an overwhelming belief that powerful Jewish elements had financed and led Russia’s Bolshevik Revolution, and were organizing similar Communist movements elsewhere aimed at destroying all existing Gentile elites and imposing Jewish supremacy throughout America and the rest of the Western world…Although intelligence officers gradually came to doubt that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion was an authentic document, most believed that the notorious work provided a reasonably accurate description of the strategic plans of the Jewish leadership for subverting America and the rest of the world and establishing Jewish rule.

Although Bendersky’s claims are certainly extraordinary ones, he provides an enormous wealth of compelling evidence to support them, quoting or summarizing thousands of declassified Intelligence files, and further supporting his case by drawing from the personal correspondence of many of the officers involved. He conclusively demonstrates that during the very same years that Henry Ford was publishing his controversial series The International Jew, similar ideas, but with a much sharper edge, were ubiquitous within our own Intelligence community. Indeed, whereas Ford mostly focused upon Jewish dishonesty, malfeasance, and corruption, our Military Intelligence professionals viewed organized Jewry as a deadly threat to American society and Western civilization in general. Hence the title of Bendersky’s book.

By the late 1930s and especially after World War II, such sentiments were only rarely voiced in public, but archival research confirms that they still remained a powerful factor in private thoughts and correspondence, including within Pioneer’s inner circle.


Although unconnected with Pioneer, one influential post-war racialist who placed Jewish issues at the center of his concerns was University of Illinois Classics Prof. Revilo P. Oliver. Having held an important wartime role in military code-breaking, during the 1950s Oliver became a leading figure at both National Review and the John Birch Society, two of the leading right-wing organizations of that era, and according to his 1981 memoirs, both had originally been established with the primary goal of combating Jewish influence. As I wrote last year:

One of his friends, a right-wing Yale professor named Willmoore Kendall, argued that a crucial factor in the Jewish domination of American public life was their control over influential opinion journals such as The Nation and The New Republic, and that launching a competing publication might be the most effective remedy. For this purpose, he had recruited a prize student of his named William F. Buckley, Jr., who could draw upon the financial resources of his wealthy father, long known in certain circles for his discreet sponsorship of various anti-Jewish publications and “his drastic private opinion about the aliens’ perversion of our national life.”

By 1958 Oliver had established himself as one of National Review‘s leading contributors, and he was contacted by a wealthy Massachusetts businessman named Robert Welch, who had been an early investor in the magazine but was greatly disappointed by its political ineffectiveness, so the two men corresponded and gradually became quite friendly. Welch said he was concerned that the publication focused largely on frivolity and pseudo-literary endeavors, while it increasingly minimized or ignored the conspiratorial role of the Jewish aliens who had gained such a degree of control over the country…

Late that same year, Welch described his plans for regaining control of the country by the creation of a semi-secret national organization of patriotic individuals, primarily drawn from the upper middle classes and prosperous businessmen, which eventually became known as the John Birch Society. With its structure and strategy inspired by the Communist Party, it was to be tightly organized into individual local cells, whose members would then establish a network of front organizations for particular political projects, all seemingly unconnected but actually under their dominant influence. Secret directives would be passed along to each local chapter by the word of mouth via coordinators dispatched from Welch’s central headquarters, a system also modeled after the strict hierarchical discipline of Communist movements.

…Minimal emphasis was to be placed upon Jewish matters, partly to avoid drawing media fire and partly in hopes that a growing schism between Zionist and non-Zionist Jews might weaken their powerful adversary, or if the former gained the upper hand, perhaps help ensure the removal of all Jews to the Middle East.

Although Oliver had entered both anti-Jewish projects with high hopes, these soon dissipated, and within a few years he came to believe that each had been rendered ineffective, apparently subverted by the need for Jewish funding. He ultimately concluded that his huge investments of time and effort had been entirely wasted, and eventually broke with both organizations, mostly abandoning political activity although he continued to occasionally write for Far Right publications, and retained a great deal of prestige in those circles up until his 1994 death at the age of 86.

Wilmot Robertson, The Dispossessed Majority, and Instauration

Oliver’s stridently anti-Jewish views rendered him unacceptable in regular conservative circles, let alone within the political mainstream, but Tucker’s archival research suggests that these same sentiments were far less uncommon among prominent racialists of the 1950s and 1960s than their public utterances might indicate.

As a longtime senior figure in the corporate world with an Ivy League education, Putnam was a member of America’s elite Establishment, and his national crusade to maintain racial segregation in the public schools and prevent intermarriage was wholeheartedly endorsed by many leading Southerners of the era, including governors and influential U.S. senators. But private correspondence reveals that Putnam’s true political views actually extended far beyond that particular issue, which was widely endorsed by so many leading conservatives of his day.


Around 1970, he brought to Draper’s attention a lengthy manuscript by a pseudonymous author calling himself “Wilmot Robertson,” strongly endorsing the work and urging financial support. Other leading figures in the Pioneer Fund circle were equally enthusiastic, and with their backing The Dispossessed Majority was published in 1972, not long after Draper’s death, while Putnam’s correspondence revealed that he then distributed copies to “very influential figures…near…to the controls of our society.”

Running some 200,000 words, Robertson’s opus soon became the ur-text of modern American White Nationalism, reestablishing the ideological basis for a movement once anchored in the writings of men such as Lothrop Stoddard but which had largely disappeared in the aftermath of World War II.

From its earliest days, America had been run by its Anglo-Saxon core along with the assimilated descendents of closely-related Northern European immigrant groups, who together constituted both the bulk of the population and a large majority of its ruling elites. But Robertson argued that during the previous generation or two, a quiet revolution had steadily shifted political and social control into the hands of America’s tiny Jewish minority, thereby transforming the country’s huge white Gentile population into “the dispossessed majority” of his title, even as the heavily Jewish media ensured that very few members of that group had recognized this ongoing transformation.

Putnam’s own books and other writings had been quite cagey on such touchy subjects, occasionally alluding to the elite “minority groups” that were his primary political opponents but almost never even mentioning the word “Jew.” However, his enthusiastic support for Robertson’s work suggests that he was actually in full agreement on those underlying issues, which came as a very pleasant surprise to his longtime allies in the Pioneer circle.

After encountering scattered references to the Robertson book here and there on the Internet, I finally purchased and read it about a decade ago, finding the work considerably better than I had expected. But having now learned of Putnam’s personal involvement in its origins, I decided to take another look, and also noticed the cover-blurbs from prominent scholars. Prof. Coon described it as “A work of vast scope and scholarship” while Prof. Oliver praised it as “Politically the most important book published in this country since 1939—perhaps since 1917.” Prompted by strong endorsements, I decided to reread it, and see how it held up the second time round.

Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the central fault line in American society had almost invariably been that separating black from white, with few scholars exploring any residual conflicts between different white ethnic groups. Large scale European immigration had been halted in 1924, and it was widely believed that decades of action by America’s powerful melting-pot had mostly eliminated the sharp differences between the various flavors of whites, a perception strongly encouraged by the media of that era. In fact, I suspect that one reason Beyond the Melting Pot by Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan had attracted so much attention and became such a sociological classic in 1963 was that it focused on a subject otherwise so little-discussed and one that went against the prevailing ideas of the period.

By contrast, The Dispossessed Majority marked an ideological return to the early decades of the twentieth century, when intra-white conflict along ethnic lines had been the central issue. Indeed, Robertson reverted to the old-fashioned separation of Europeans into the Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean sub-races, a usage long since fallen into disrepute and popular disuse. Although blacks, Asians, and other non-white groups were given some attention, his primary focus was on differences between American whites.

In particular, the author sharply distinguished between “assimiliable” and “non-assimiliable” white minorities. By his reckoning, America’s so-called “Majority” population—the Old Stock Anglo-Saxons and other fully assimilated Northern European ethnic groups—constituted just under 60% of our total population. An additional 12% fell into the category of “assimilable white minorities,” including the Irish, Poles, and French Canadians. But another 8% of the population consisted of white ethnicities he considered sufficiently alien as to be classified as “non-assimilable,” including Jews, Southern Italians, and Greeks, which was quite an intellectually scandalous position to take in the early 1970s.

And although Jews only represented a small fraction of those latter groups, Robertson put them at the absolute center of his analysis. Throughout his long work, he used the term “minority” on a multitude of occasions, almost once per page, and I would guess that 90% of those references were to Jews, so much so that the word almost served as a euphemism. Considering another metric, he devoted a long section of his book to describing and discussing the country’s major ethnic groups, ranging from the Irish and the Slavs to the blacks and other non-whites. But the chapter on Jews occupied nearly half the entire space: two pages on Mexicans and other Hispanics, two pages on Asians, but fifty pages on Jews. Although it might seem strange to current readers, his heavily racialist text generally paid very little attention to America’s Hispanics or Asians since both those groups were then such a small fraction of the national population.

Just as Putnam and others claimed, the book contained an enormous quantity of careful research material which Robertson had spent ten years compiling, all presented in a polished, lucid style, with professional editing. But as might be expected, a work focused on such extremely controversial material encountered severe difficulties with sales and distribution. The author later explained that nearly all conservative publications had rejected his ads and bookstores refused to stock any copies, while almost all writers who were sent review copies ignored its existence. Yet even so, within two years some 16,000 copies had been sold or otherwise distributed, a very solid achievement given the obstacles, and total sales eventually exceeded 150,000 copies, quite remarkable under the circumstances.

A book first published in 1972 is now nearly a half-century old, and must be evaluated in that light, so its numerous references to the threat of Communism and the Soviet Union are obviously quite dated. But taken as a whole, I think the text holds up very well, probably remaining more relevant to the domestic problems of our own present-day American society than all but a sliver of the works published around the same time. Indeed, although I had found it quite interesting a decade ago, the events of the last few years—and especially the last few months—seem to have enormously increased its contemporary relevance. Robertson—whose real name was Humphrey Ireland—died in 2005 at the age of 90, but I think he would have found our current domestic problems an almost straight-line extrapolation of those that he had first laid out several decades ago.

Most remarkably, I think an updated version of his central ethnographic framework might be a useful means of analyzing the fault-lines in today’s American society. Although Robertson might not necessarily have agreed, I believe that the last two generations have succeeded in fully merging virtually all of America’s white Gentile ethnic groups—whether “assimilable” or “non-assimilable”—into what he had defined as the Majority population, with few if any sharp distinctions remaining. So by that standard, today’s Majority is almost exactly the same fraction of our national population as the somewhat different Majority that he had defined fifty years ago.

And I would argue that an even more profound change has been that the bulk of America’s non-whites—most Hispanic and Asian groups—have now clearly shifted into Robertson’s category of “assimilable minorities,” or perhaps in many cases have already even become fully-assimilated members of our Majority population. Such major revisions obviously do violence to the ideological beliefs of an author who was born more than a century ago, but I think they much better reflect the realities of today’s American society than do his sharp distinctions between Europeans of Nordic and Alpine racial ancestry.

Perhaps to some extent my sociological analysis is a selfish one. Throughout world history differences of language have been among the sharpest barriers separating ethnic groups, so I believe that my own success two decades ago in dismantling the widespread system of Spanish-almost-only “bilingual education” in California and elsewhere throughout the country has probably played a large role in achieving this reclassification of America’s large and rapidly growing Hispanic population, now already 17% of the national total.

And oddly enough, under this revised ethnic framework a case can be made that the vast demographic changes of the last fifty years have ultimately resulted in an America whose Majority and assimilable minorities together now constitute a much larger fraction of our national population than they did when Robertson’s book first appeared. Whether or not others accept my modification of his ideas or regard them as grotesque mutilations, his masterwork is easily available online as a PDF, and also part of this website’s HTML Books section:


A few years after publishing his book, Robertson launched Instauration, a monthly racialist magazine that appeared without fail for the next quarter century from 1975-2000. Although widely read in racialist circles, perhaps the only time it ever gained a bit of public attention was when National Review Senior Editor Joseph Sobran favorably mentioned it in one of his 1986 columns, thereby provoking a firestorm of criticism, and laying the groundwork for his later purge from that publication and the destruction of his career.

I managed to obtain a complete set of Instauration around the same time I bought Robertson’s book, and then casually read through most of the issues. While the material was probably unique at the time it appeared, the growth of the Internet has spawned a multitude of websites now offering similar ideological fare, so I found the articles of only slight historical interest. With all the back issues now online as PDFs, people can judge for themselves.

One major element that did draw my attention was a long continuing series entitled “The Game and the Candle” that ran across more than two dozen issues, and which I found quite fascinating. It was described as “a dramatized rendering of the secret history of the United States (1912-1960)” and many of the historical allusions only became intelligible to me when I finally reread it again near the end of last year. Although most of the surprising conspiratorial claims presented are far from solidly established, I suspect that much of the “alternate reality” that they describe is at least as close to the truth as the very conventional historical narrative of the twentieth century found in all our standard history textbooks. For ease of reading, I have extracted all the 29 installments, which amount to perhaps 100,000 words, and merged them together into a single long PDF.

  • The Game and the Candle
    A dramatized rendering of the secret history of the United States (1912-1960)
    Wilmot Robertson • 1972-1974 • 100,000 Words

Jared Taylor, Peter Brimelow, and Kevin MacDonald

Around 1990, racial controversies began returning to the center-stage of American public life. Our nation’s leading economic, political, and media elements overwhelmingly reside in New York City, Washington DC, and Los Angeles, and in all these urban centers very serious levels of black crime became a daily source of concern, with fears only growing worse after the LA Riots of 1992, the worst outbreak of racial violence in a generation. Meanwhile, a continuing flood of foreign immigration, the highest in three generations, was also rapidly altering the demographics and darkening the complexion of California and other large states, with whites gradually being reduced to a minority of the population and often a small minority of public school students.

Robertson’s tiny racialist publication seems to have mostly been a one-man operation, and as someone born in 1915, he was already in his mid-70s by the beginning of this period of heightened racial tension, probably in no position to take full advantage of the opportunity. The potential audience and reach of his writings had always been severely restricted by the media boycotts he endured, but the appearance of the Internet would soon begin reducing such distributional barriers, providing a tremendous opening for those willing and able to take full advantage of the new technology. Over the next quarter-century, there was a huge growth of racialist publications, websites, and forums, which followed a wide variety of different styles and areas of main interest.

The unexpected 2016 election victory of Donald Trump was later to place these ideas under an unprecedented national spotlight. Although the term “Alt-Right” had originally been coined a few years earlier by political activist Richard Spencer and his paleoconservative mentor Prof. Paul Gottfried, the fundamental ideas of that movement had been developed over the previous decades by these various racialist outlets, whose existence had been almost entirely ignored by the mainstream media.

Three of the most prominent figures in this Internet-based ideological movement were each roughly a generation younger than Robertson, and by taking full advantage of the Internet, they eventually created ongoing publications that have become among the most important outlets for racialist content. Although Jared Taylor, Peter Brimelow, and Kevin MacDonald share overlapping interests and have regularly collaborated together or spoken at the same events, each seems to primarily focus on a particular portion of the political landscape that Robertson’s publication had originally encompassed.



Jared Taylor launched his American Renaissance newsletter in late 1990, initially under a slightly different form of his name and in 1992 he published Paved with Good Intentions, a powerful compendium of the apparent failures of America’s efforts at racial integration, with a heavy focus upon black crime and other social dysfunction. At that time, his more controversial ideological views were not yet generally known, so the book was released by a fully mainstream press, then widely and favorably reviewed in regular conservative media outlets, even receiving respectful treatment by a leading liberal academic in the pages of the prestigious New York Review of Books. An anniversary edition of Taylor’s book is available in convenient HTML form on this website, allowing those so interested to read it and decide for themselves:

According to his Wikipedia entry, Taylor had been born in Japan to missionary parents in 1951 and spent his first 16 years living in that country, afterward graduating from Yale and earning a postgraduate degree in Paris, with some years spent traveling in West Africa. He later worked in the financial services and publishing industries, and wrote a well-received book on Japan in 1983, obviously possessing the sort of mainstream and elite credentials which many might find surprising in a controversial political movement long pushed into the fringes. His memories of spending his early years in a racially-homogenous, peaceful, and orderly East Asian society surely stood in sharp contrast with the increasingly fragmented and crime-ridden America he saw about him during the late 1980s and early 1990s, and this must have been an important factor in his political evolution.

Taylor’s three decades of public activity have probably established him as America’s most prominent White Nationalist, while the print version of his American Renaissance publication shifted to an entirely online presence about a decade ago. Although many of its items have dealt with transient day-to-day events, his archives provide a cornucopia of serious racialist content, including lengthy book reviews that would be found almost nowhere else, as has already been demonstrated in this article. The quality of the content is often quite high, and under a different ideological regime one could easily imagine many of these pieces appearing in America’s leading general interest magazines rather than being confined to the margins of the Internet. Although his publication covers racialist matters in general, over the years the primary focus has probably remained the subject of his original book, namely the problematic aspects of blacks in American society.


When Taylor’s 1990 book was very favorably discussed in the pages of National Review, the writer was journalist Peter Brimelow, a senior editor at Forbes. Brimelow was then regarded as a very mainstream if conservative-leaning financial journalist, who had spent part of the late 1970s serving as a Republican Senate staffer, and had long and close ties with prominent conservative intellectuals and authors, especially those grouped around the Manhattan Institute, with its intermingled neoconservative and libertarian elements. Born and educated in Britain, he had come to Stanford in the early 1970s for his MBA, then spent a number of years working as a journalist in Canada, before permanently settling in the New York City area.

Six months before writing that review, Brimelow had himself created quite a stir by publishing a National Review cover-story entitled “Time to Rethink Immigration?,” one of the longest and most influential articles ever to appear in that magazine. The right-wing nativism of the 1920s had dissipated soon after the heavy flow of foreigners from Europe had been legally reduced to a trickle, and in recent decades conservatives had generally been quite friendly towards immigrants and immigration, with the ringing phrases of Ronald Reagan providing a perfect example of that tendency.

The 1965 Immigration Act had reopened the possibility of large-scale immigration from Europe and Asia, while the very rapid population growth in Latin America had produced a similar effect from that region, and these gradually began having a large national impact. By the late 1980s major demographic changes were taking place across American society, but most conservative leaders still continued to ignore the issue. Indeed, when Pat Buchanan published Right from the Beginning in 1990, his resoundingly conservative call-to-arms actually included favorable mention of America’s large population of hard-working illegal immigrants. But much of the Republican Party’s white conservative base had meanwhile begun to seethe on the issue, producing the dry tinder for a potential political explosion, and Brimelow’s powerful 13,000 word article helped provide the spark.


Two years later, incumbent Gov. Pete Wilson of California turned an uphill reelection drive into a landslide victory by riding the coattails of Prop. 187, his state’s anti-illegal immigration ballot measure, which passed by an even wider margin. On that same Election Day, the Republicans led by Newt Gingrich won an unexpected national victory, gaining control of both the House and the Senate for the first time in sixty years. An unforeseen consequence of these Congressional victories was that longstanding critics of immigration suddenly held the chairmanships of both relevant committees, and they pledged to pass legislation sharply reducing the flow of incoming foreigners.

Brimelow had expanded his very long NR article into Alien Nation, a book published by Random House, and with exceptionally fortuitous timing, it was released in early 1995, selling very well as a consequence. While he kept his day job at Forbes, he had also been named a senior editor at NR, and over the next few years became an influential figure at America’s conservative media flagship organ. Although long out of print, his 1995 book is conveniently available in HTML format on this website:

  • Alien Nation
    Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster
    Peter Brimelow • 1995 • 95,000 Words

Throughout the rest of the 1990s, racial issues remained at the forefront of the American political debate. California in particular became the epicenter of such controversies, with battles over the state’s Propositions 187, 209, and 227—dealing with illegal immigration, affirmative action, and bilingual education respectively—inspiring national debates over those same topics. I myself was very heavily involved in all these conflicts, and later recounted the history and broader analysis in a long 1999 Commentary cover-article and an even longer American Conservative sequel a dozen years later. I think both these articles have held up very well, and I would strongly recommend them to those interested in the topics:

Although Brimelow and his anti-immigration allies had gained the upper hand in the early battles within the conservative movement and the Republican Party, by the late 1990s their pro-immigration opponents backed by the powerful business lobby had won a complete victory and purged most of their erstwhile foes. Denied any significant media outlet for views still so widely held among ordinary grassroots conservatives, he and a small group of allies launched the VDare website near the end of 1999, and the publication soon emerged as the leading venue for hard-core anti-immigration views, often presented with a sharp racialist tinge. Although immigration has always remained its overwhelming focus, coverage soon extended to other controversial topics of a similar hue which were also generally excluded from the conservative mainstream, including black criminality, racial differences, Jewish influence, and IQ studies. Much of this material would have hardly seemed out of place in the National Review of the 1990s, but had now been exiled to the web.


Jared Taylor and Peter Brimelow had become racialist partisans and publishers via the unsurprising route of journalism, but a third leading figure, Kevin MacDonald, instead had a purely academic background.

Born in 1944, MacDonald had earned his Ph.D. in biobehavioral sciences in 1981 and after a post-doctoral fellowship in psychology became a faculty member in the California State University system a few years later, soon beginning to focus on evolutionary psychology. The debate over group evolutionary strategies has traditionally been a highly contentious topic in the field, and according to his own account, MacDonald became interested in exploring the issue within the human context. Jews have been recognized as a distinct human group for thousands of years and there exist copious historical records of their activities and behavior, so they seemed an ideal subject for a case study.

After years of diligent research, MacDonald published A People That Shall Dwell Alone in 1994, having the subtitle “Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy.” Released by a standard academic press, the work received generally favorable reviews in academic journals and otherwise attracted no notice whatsoever. In 1998, he followed this with Separation and Its Discontents subtitled “Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism,” attracting fewer reviews and once again no other attention. His final volume The Culture of Critique appeared later that same year, and was far more political and contemporaneous in its focus, as indicated by the subtitle “An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements.”

According to MacDonald, he had been shocked when his research revealed the overwhelming role of organized Jewish groups in transforming America’s political and intellectual life during the course of the twentieth century, most notably with regard to our immigration policy, an important history that had remained concealed from him and nearly all other Americans. Although released by the same academic press, this last work was almost entirely ignored by the scholarly journals that had reviewed the previous two volumes of his trilogy.

Despite the highly controversial nature of MacDonald’s historical findings, I suspect that most of his subsequent notoriety and his entrance into political activism was due to his participation in David Irving’s high-profile libel lawsuit. Irving, one of Britain’s most successful historians, had been under heavy attack for many years by Jewish groups outraged over the contents of his best-selling World War II histories, and by the time of his London trial in 2000, he was a beleaguered figure, soon to be financially ruined by the heavy judgment against him. Irving’s looming fate naturally intimidated most of his potential scholarly supporters, and MacDonald was the only witness willing to testify on his behalf, providing an account of the past activities of organized Jewish groups. Such involvement naturally brought the California academic to the attention of the right-wing groups who had rallied on Irving’s behalf, but more importantly led MacDonald to be targeted by Irving’s numerous Jewish foes, who immediately began orchestrating harsh media attacks against him.

Campaigns of public vilification are sometimes counter-productive, and I suspect that the vast majority of individuals who first discovered MacDonald’s work did so from reading pieces like “Evolutionary Psychology’s Anti-Semite” by Judith Shulevitz in Slate, then America’s premier opinion webzine, with its close competitor Salon publishing a similar hit-piece. That was certainly true in my own case, and my curiosity at those denunciations led me to order the books of his trilogy, which I soon began to read, finding them very judicious in their approach and scholarly in their tone. But the religious and historical contents proved so tremendously dull that after reading the first volume and starting the second, I put the books aside and moved on to other things.

A few years ago, I finally returned to those works, finding the first two volumes much more interesting now than I had before, and the third volume even more so. All these works had originally been published by a highly-reputable academic press, but in 2018 the ADL finally succeeded in pressuring Amazon into taking the unprecedented step of purging them from its book store, which holds a near-total monopoly on online book sales in the Western world. However, all three books are conveniently available in HTML form on this website, so those so interested can read them and decide for themselves:

  • The Culture of Critique
    An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements
    Kevin MacDonald • 1998 • 247,000 Words

For the last couple of decades, immigration has been an especially hot-button issue among right-wing activists, with the 1965 Immigration Act regularly portrayed as a horrific political betrayal that doomed American society. MacDonald’s research demonstrated that organized Jewish groups had been a central force behind passage of that legislation, a goal they had tirelessly pursued for over 40 years. As a consequence, MacDonald was soon lionized as a political hero in those circles, and the very scholarly tone of his books greatly enhanced his credibility. Meanwhile, the harsh vilification campaign by his Jewish critics severely damaged his personal standing at his Long Beach campus, producing many painful moments and further driving him toward his new collection of right-wing admirers.

Within a few years, MacDonald had become a leading figure in the racialist camp, awarded the Jack London prize by The Occidental Quarterly in 2004, and soon afterward becoming editor of the associated Occidental Observer webzine. Over the last dozen or more years, that latter outlet has published a great deal of high-quality content, releasing articles that are often heavily footnoted and may run several thousand words in length, far more scholarly and academic in tone than what is found in nearly any other racialist publication. The webzine has also served to launch a number of promising new writers, several of whom hold Ph.D.s and have impressive research skills. Although the heaviest focus tends to be on Jewish-related issues, articles on other topics such as immigration, crime, and evolutionary biology also regularly appear.

Compared with other prominent right-wing racialists, MacDonald’s policy proposals have generally been rather vague and mild, I think mostly confined to criticism of affirmative action and calls for large reductions in immigration. His legion of fierce critics have surely mined every word he has ever written or spoken, and if anything more serious had been discovered, the material would certainly have been used to blacken his name. Yet despite the absence of any substantive proposals that fall to the right of FoxNews, his exceptionally hostile Wikipedia entry—as long as those of Taylor and Brimelow combined—contains 16 separate uses of “Nazi” or “neo-Nazi,” including the explicit statement that “He is active in the American neo-Nazi movement,” an entirely unsubstantiated accusation that I view with great skepticism. By contrast, Taylor’s Wikipedia article reports that he has been trying to “de-Nazify” the racialist right, while Brimelow’s entry contains no reference to Nazism. This further demonstrates that focusing upon Jewish misbehavior seems to escalate personal vilification to extraordinary levels, and brings to mind the famous quote frequently misattributed to Voltaire: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”

George Lincoln Rockwell, William Pierce, and David Duke

With the partial exception of Putnam, all the white racialists thus far discussed were academics, writers, and other intellectuals, or at least confined most of their activities to such pathways. But they sought major changes in American society, and effecting such changes must necessarily involve the organizing and activism aimed at achieving a measure of political power. Such activities require quite different talents and personalities, and therefore attract different individuals. Three of the leading white racialist political organizers had successive careers that stretched from the early post-war years down to the present day.

Although now largely forgotten, George Lincoln Rockwell became a somewhat prominent public figure in the 1960s, notorious as the founder of the American Nazi Party, and successfully operating as something of a political performance-artist, regularly employing a wide range of stunts and media events in order to attract considerable press coverage. Indeed, the name of his right-wing racialist organization along with its Hitler-era flags and uniforms had obviously been chosen for exactly that reason, serving as an irresistible lure for the media attention that serves as the life’s-blood of any small and under-funded political organization, which would usually prefer to be vilified rather than merely ignored.


Rockwell himself had been a reasonably successful commercial artist and entrepreneur, serving as a naval commander during World War II, and afterward being drawn toward right-wing politics. At first, his political views were fairly mainstream, and he supported the possible presidential candidacy of Gen. Douglas MacArthur and later worked for William F. Buckley, Jr. at National Review. But he gradually moved farther and farther to the right, eventually coming to regard organized Jewry as the especially nefarious source of America’s deepest problems. He founded his Nazi Party in 1959 and ran it with mixed success for the next eight years despite numerous bitter internal feuds and splits, eventually being assassinated by a disgruntled former member in 1967. He told his personal story and political evolution in two self-published books, his autobiographical This Time the World in 1961 and the posthumously-released White Power in 1966, which were unfortunately both purged by Amazon a couple of years ago, but can still be easily found online. In 1999, a comprehensive Rockwell biography by William H. Schmaltz was published by an academic specialty press, which helpfully fills in many of the gaps and omissions.

Although usually relegated to just a sentence or two in our history books and treated like a villainous clown, at times Rockwell had moved in important circles, and may have even helped influence some national events. In his autobiographical account, he describes his political education under a certain DeWest Hooker, a successful entertainment executive whom he regarded as a personal hero and mentor. Hooker was fiercely anti-Jewish and years later became a close friend of journalist Michael Collins Piper, who recounted a fascinating tale from the 1960 Presidential race in his book Final Judgment.

Jewish groups still had deep animosity for Joseph Kennedy over his strong opposition to American involvement in World War II, and the family patriarch feared that this lingering hostility would damage his son’s chances of reaching the White House. So he asked Hooker to have his friend Rockwell organize public Nazi Party demonstrations endorsing Nixon and attacking JFK, thereby solidifying Jewish support for the latter. These protests actually attracted quite a bit of media coverage, and probably helped the younger Kennedy win 80% of the Jewish vote, along with heavy campaign donations and friendly media support, perhaps tipping the balance in such a very close national election.

In an even stranger possible twist, Hooker years later reportedly explained that the original impetus for the creation of Rockwell’s American Nazi Party had actually come from the Jewish ADL, which believed that widespread media coverage of such an organization would greatly enhance their fund-raising efforts. So they allegedly approached Hooker and explained their proposal, offering to pay all the costs of publishing the Nazi literature and other materials, and he persuaded his protege to implement the idea. I think a story so bizarre is less likely to have been invented.


After Rockwell’s demise, his small organization disintegrated, but within a few years the pieces were reconstituted in a somewhat different fashion by Dr. William Pierce, a former physics professor at the University of Oregon who had abandoned academia in 1965 to devote himself to racial activism, soon joining Rockwell’s organization.

Over the next three decades, Pierce probably ranked as one of America’s leading figures on the Far Right fringe, with his National Alliance eventually including some 1,500 dues-paying members and 15 full-time staffers, and his weekly short-wave radio broadcasts potentially reached a much larger national audience. Along the way, he published The Turner Diaries, a fictionalized account of a right-wing revolution against an oppressive American government, which became a gigantic underground bestseller, having some 400,000 copies in print despite being boycotted by all regular bookstores and lacking any mainstream advertising. In 1994 there were widespread media reports that the Oklahoma City Bombing had been inspired by Pierce’s novel, which provided him a short burst of national media attention and as well as the benefits of a semi-mainstream publisher. Pierce died of cancer in 2002, after which his organization also soon disintegrated.


By far the most comprehensive discussion of Pierce and his efforts is The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds, published the year before his death by Prof. Robert S. Griffin of the University of Vermont. Pierce’s background and ideas are presented in an objective but somewhat sympathetic manner, and the book also contains a great deal of additional material on other individuals and issues from that segment of the ideological spectrum, including a long chapter on Rockwell and another on Revilo Oliver. The entire text of Griffin’s volume is conveniently readable here in HTML format:


While Rockwell’s numerous media stunts had gained him a certain measure of public attention during the first half of the 1960s, Pierce and his far larger and better disciplined organization remained almost entirely unknown throughout their three decades of activity. But during that same period, a much younger activist began following Rockwell’s play-book and gained media attention by his bold tactics, eventually becoming a nationally-recognized racialist-celebrity and political figure, first as the leader of a faction of the Ku Klux Klan and afterward as a surprisingly successful candidate for high public office. These days, the names of George Lincoln Rockwell or William Pierce would surely draw blank stares, but David Duke probably still rings a bell. As an objective measure of prominence, his Wikipedia article is much longer than those of Rockwell and Pierce combined, and carries an ADL endorsement ranking him as “perhaps America’s most well-known racist and anti-Semite.”

Duke’s high-water mark came almost three decades ago when for a couple of years he flashed like a meteor across the American political landscape. Drawing upon deep populist anger over welfare, crime, affirmative action, and other racially-charged issues, in 1990 he challenged the incumbent Democratic senator in his home state of Louisiana. Despite being massively outspent and facing an exceptionally hostile media, with both parties absolutely united against him, he stunned the country by getting over 43% of the total vote, including a landslide majority of his state’s whites. The following year, he launched a challenge to the incumbent Republican governor along similar lines, defeating him in the open primary and then once again winning a large majority of whites even while losing the run-off to a former Democratic governor, who was the recipient of a tidal wave of funding, media, and endorsements, including the active support of nearly every prominent national Republican.

Following my own successful “English” campaign in California, I had published a long 1999 cover story in Commentary discussing my state’s racially-charged political conflicts of the preceding decade, and it had attracted a good deal of favorable interest, leading me to consider writing a book that expanded my analysis to the national level. As part of my background preparation, I began reading thirty or forty books on racial issues, of which one of the longest was Duke’s My Awakening, which had been released the previous year.

I had expected it to be an ideological screed that I would casually skim and then abandon, but Duke’s book was actually something entirely different. Two decades have almost completely blurred the details, but I remember reading the entire text and being very impressed with the quality of both the style and content. Indeed, the book was so far superior to what I had expected from someone only known to me as a fringe political-activist with no serious academic credentials that I began to wonder, perhaps a bit unfairly, about the identity of the true author.

Not long afterward I shelved my potential writing plans in favor of my content-archiving project, which steadily grew in scope and ultimately absorbed most of my time and effect for the next decade. But just a few days ago, I decided to take another look at Duke’s book for the first time in twenty years. Although I merely intended to glance at a few pages, I found the material so interesting that I reread the entire text, which ran 700 pages with more than 1000 footnotes, being far longer than I had remembered.

My first surprise was the exceptionally favorable Foreword provided by Glayde Whitney, a seemingly respectable Florida professor of behavioral genetics, who described himself as a lifelong Hubert Humphrey Democrat. Whitney said that although he had never met Duke, he had independently come to most of the same conclusions over the years. Therefore, he fully endorsed the former Klansman’s controversial views on racial and genetic issues and hoped that Duke’s high public profile would finally succeed in bringing these important ideas to the attention of a much wider national audience. The former president of the Behavior Genetics Association even described Duke as “a Moses-like prophet,” and suggested that his book might play the same role that Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations had achieved with regard to the theory of capitalism.

As I read through the long text, Prof. Whitney’s characterization began to seem less and less outlandish. Although obviously pitched to a popular audience, the first major section described the important scientific facts about race, IQ, and evolutionary psychology drawn from the works of many of the academic scholars discussed above, and the material presented seemed almost entirely correct.

But what impressed me even more this time round were the other elements of the book concerning history and politics that I had probably originally disregarded. The next section ran over 250 pages and dealt with a variety of controversial Jewish issues. Back in 2000, these had probably raised some questions in my mind, but soon faded. However, over the last two decades, I had done a great deal of reading and investigation in the history of the twentieth century, and I now realized that many of my controversial findings had first been encountered—and then soon dismissed and forgotten—in the pages of Duke’s book. For example, he included a 40 page chapter strongly disputing the reality of the Jewish Holocaust, which he argued was merely a propaganda-hoax, very likely the first time I had ever encountered that shocking claim in any serious writing, and I must have reacted with extreme skepticism. But a few years ago I finally investigated the topic at length and came to very similar conclusions.

At the time, I had also never heard of the Nazi-Zionist partnership of the 1930s or the many strange aspects of Talmudic Judaism or the persecution of historian David Irving, and all of these accounts were so discordant with my mainstream understanding that they had never lodged in my memory when I read about them back in 2000. But over the last couple of years I discussed them at length in my American Pravda series, along with my reinterpretation of the Second World War. If prejudice means pre-judging ideas, then twenty years ago I was certainly quite prejudiced when I read and disregarded the historical claims of a former Klansman with only an undergraduate history degree from Louisiana State University, but in hindsight, he seems to have been entirely correct on so many of these important historical matters long before I had even become aware of them.

If we carefully separate Duke’s ideological beliefs from his factual claims, my considered opinion is that 80-90% of the latter are correct, and ironically enough his largest errors come in positions that he closely shares with most other American conservatives and right-wingers.

One of the more remarkable items in Duke’s account, impossible to verify but quite possibly true, was his long and friendly acquaintance with Prof. William Shockley, to whom he dedicated his book. Shockley’s own political notoriety had preceded Duke’s entrance onto the public stage, and given their strong agreement on issues of race and IQ and mutual demonization by the media, they supposedly had a number of phone conversations from the early 1970s until shortly before Shockley’s death in 1989. By then, Duke was already preparing his remarkable 1990 U.S. Senate run and according to his account, Shockley said that if he were thirty years younger and healthier, he would be campaigning on Duke’s behalf. Consider such a historical tableau: the physicist who had won a Nobel Prize for inventing the transistor and then created Silicon Valley campaigning in Louisiana on behalf of the former Grand Dragon of the KKK.

Along with many other important works, Duke’s book was purged from Amazon a couple of years ago, but can still be easily found online.

Erectus Walks Amongst Us

Most present-day Americans, whether young or old, have lived their entire lives undergoing a form of psychological conditioning that causes them to suffer a sort of allergic reaction at ideas that fall into certain particular categories. Some of the most notable triggers include topics involving race, ethnicity, and sex, and encountering such forbidden material may be a painful experience, with the discomfort only gradually subsiding after repeated exposures. One of the most terrifying subjects for a man is the nature of mankind.

Many of the dozens of books already discussed in this long article fall into those disturbing categories, and in some cases their contents caused me considerable unease when I first encountered them ten or fifteen or twenty years ago, whether or not I ultimately concluded that much of their analysis was mistaken. But whenever I turn my thoughts to the most controversial book I have ever read, a single obvious candidate comes to mind, a self-published work of anthropology.

I can’t recall the exact circumstances of how it first came to my attention, perhaps when I was browsing the comments of some fringe website or blogger in 2008. I went ahead and clicked a button on Amazon, receiving it a few days later while my credit card was debited \$18.00. The work has long since gone out of print, and the cheapest hard copies now sell for \$900.

The author was an individual entirely unknown to me, apparently a longtime libertarian activist and something of a polymath, holding undergraduate and graduate degrees in mathematics, physics, chemistry, economics, and law. He claimed to have spent four full years writing the book after several previous years of lengthy Internet discussions in which he and one or more collaborators had gradually worked out most of the basic ideas and done much of the research. Such claims seem plausible since the finalized text runs some 200,000 words and is supplemented with a vast multitude of illustrations, charts, and tables, along with more than 1200 detailed footnotes, most of them substantive and many quite long. The bibliography contains over 1,000 entries.

The writing itself was quite serviceable if hardly elegant, and the work seems to fit rather comfortably within the evolutionary framework provided by Coon’s racial theories from the 1960s and Rushton’s r/K analysis from the 1990s, though I hadn’t yet encountered the former at the time.

I have no serious expertise in anthropology, but the early chapters that covered genetics and evolution seemed quite correct in their detailed description of those scientific foundations, and the arguments advanced in the later ones were plausibly presented, if often revolutionary in their implications. But far more than Coon or Rushton, Richard D. Fuerle intended to turn the evolutionary history of Homo sapiens entirely on its head.

When faced with a sweeping theoretical framework of claims in a subject far beyond my personal expertise, I naturally turn to reviews and commentary, which will give me a useful starting point whether they are supportive or critical. But with the sole exception of a quite favorable and comprehensive review (PDF Version) by Jared Taylor that ran nearly 6,000 words, none existed. Not a single one of the many racialist bloggers saw fit to touch this material, thus depriving me of the extended comment-thread debates that would normally have assisted my understanding.

Faced with this dilemma, I decided to contact an eminent scholar I knew who had great expertise in exactly this subject, and gingerly asked whether he had heard of the work. As it happens, he had recently received a copy but had not bothered to look at it, and upon hearing from me decided to do so. A couple of days later, he dropped me a note saying he had already read more than half of the book, and was so extremely impressed at the vast quantity of very important information it contained that he planned to keep it close on his own shelf to use as a standard reference source. Then a day or two later, he told me that after finishing the book, he had been absolutely horrified by the theories advanced by the author. So I avoided raising that topic in the future.


I recently reread my old copy of Erectus Walks Amongst Us and the sheer volume of its material and sweep of its ideas impressed me just as much now as it had a dozen years ago. My expertise in anthropology has hardly much improved over the years, so my brief discussion of the contents should not be taken very seriously, and may merely demonstrate my own deep ignorance of the subject. Flying blind is always a risky endeavor.

The human evolutionary framework proposed by Fuerle seems to generally follow that of Coon, providing various arguments that contrary to modern orthodoxy, the different races of man actually predate the appearance of Homo sapiens itself, having evolved in the geographically-separated populations of our Homo erectus predecessors. As an example of the evidence presented, he notes that the early erectoids dwelling in Asia had shovel-shaped incisors, as do modern Asians, which seems unlikely to have been purely coincidental.

But Fuerle’s central thesis is that our reigning Out of Africa framework—the notion that Homo sapiens first evolved in Africa then spread throughout the world—should be replaced by an Out of Eurasia model, and some of his points do seem like reasonable ones.

He argues that the package of African physical traits seems to be heat-adapted, while those of Asians are cold-adapted with the Caucasian race remaining more generalized, then suggests on theoretical grounds that a heat-adapted human population would be less likely to easily evolve into cold-adapted and generalized varieties, let alone do so in as little as the 60,000 years now believed. Also, Africa’s relatively stable environment would be much less likely to provide the severe environmental challenges necessary for giving rise to a new species, especially one with far greater intelligence than its erectoid predecessors.

Under the current theory of African origins, Homo sapiens migrated out of Africa into Eurasia during the very time that the latter continent was gripped by a severe ice age that produced very difficult living conditions compared with their less impacted African homeland, which seems implausible. Moreover, Neanderthal man had already occupied Europe and parts of Asia for hundreds of thousands of years, surely being well adapted to local conditions and also having a larger brain than Homo sapiens, so it seems unlikely that small numbers of African-adapted human interlopers could have easily displaced them.

Meanwhile, Fuerle’s contrary model of human evolution argues that sapiency was first achieved somewhere in the Eurasian continent, far larger than Africa and also providing much more stressful selective pressure. And during the ice age that wrapped the globe 60,000 years ago, small bands of early Homo sapiens were driven into Africa’s more hospitable climate rather than away from it.

Not long after Fuerle’s book appeared, anthropology was rocked by the discovery that non-African DNA contained small Neanderthal elements, demonstrating that the two different species had interbred at least to some slight extent during the tens of thousands of years they overlapped in Europe and parts of Asia. Indeed, Cochran and Harpending had even suggested that such Neanderthal introgression might have involved genes crucial for the success of Homo sapiens, perhaps providing traits well-adapted to local environmental conditions, and therefore been subject to strongly positive selective pressure. Not long afterward, small traces of other pre-human hominoid DNA were found in some of the present-day populations of South-East Asia, the residue of a species called the Denisovans.

All of these discoveries of residual DNA have demonstrated that species are not nearly as rigidly separated from one another as our elementary biology textbooks had usually maintained. Indeed, numerous animal species can readily mate and produce fertile offspring although they do not usually do so under natural conditions. Fuerle repeatedly stressed exactly this point in his book, long before these waves of DNA research had firmly established the case with regard to human beings. For example, Homo neanderthalensis had always been classified as separate from our own species, but some might now argue that it was simply a different race of Homo sapiens and should instead be called Homo sapiens neanderthalensis.

When we consider the larger populations of the Sub-Saharan African continent, those living in the Horn of Africa seem to be partial outliers, both by genes and by physical attributes, being a partial mix of the peoples on either side, African Negroes and Middle-Eastern Caucasians, in some respects actually being closer to the latter except with regard to skin color. Similar hybridization is quite common in the world, notably in Central Asia, where Caucasians and Asians have intermingled for thousands of years. So our hybridization with Neanderthals is merely an extreme example of this.

Science inevitably advances, and over the last couple of decades the analysis of human DNA has substantially revised our family tree of world populations, providing quantitative results that are far more solid and exact than the crude analyses produced by past generations of physical anthropologists. If we exclude the small local populations of Australian Aborigines, African Pygmies, and a few other minor groups, humanity has traditionally been divided into three mega-races, the Caucasoids, Mongoloids, and Negroids, and that remains true today. But genetic analysis has now revealed that the first two groups cluster together much more closely, with the last is a considerable outlier. So to a good first approximation, mankind is genetically divided into Eurasians and Africans, and Fuerle makes the provocative argument that if Africans were not a living race and were instead only known from their bones and DNA, they probably would have been classified as a separate species from Eurasians.

And in a telling passage quoted in Taylor’s lengthy review, Fuerle emphasizes that the phenotypical differences between Eurasians and Africans seem follow a consistent pattern:

[V]irtually all of the racial differences between Africans and Eurasians are in traits that are primitive; there are few, if any, African traits that are more modern than Eurasian traits. The evidence comes from a large variety of very different traits: hard tissue, soft tissue, physiology, behavior, intelligence, accomplishments, and genes. And most importantly, all of the evidence is consistent. It is not the case that genes are saying blacks are modern and bones are saying they are primitive. All of the evidence is saying the same thing…

This noticeable pattern of African traits is readily explained by Fuerle’s model of human origins. If Homo sapiens first evolved in Eurasia and small bands of this new species then entered Africa perhaps 60,000 years ago, they might naturally have hybridized with the local hominids of that continent, just like other early members of their species had done with Neanderthals or Denisovans. But since the pre-existing local populations were so much larger, a much greater portion of today’s genetic ancestry might have come from those other sources.

Earlier this year, an analysis of the African genome revealed that up to 19% of the DNA appears to have its origins in “ghost populations” of the archaic pre-human hominids who had once flourished on that continent. Although these scientific results have not received the media attention they might warrant, they seem to represent a striking experimental confirmation of the remarkable predictions that Fuerle had advanced in a book published a dozen years earlier. Our standard history textbooks explain that a century ago the 1919 solar eclipse expedition by Eddington provided experimental confirmation for the predictions of General Relativity, elevating Einstein to international fame and indirectly leading to his 1921 Nobel Prize. I’ve sometimes wondered whether these recent DNA findings should be considered in a similar light.


Fuerle died in 2014 at the age of 73, thereby failing to see this apparent confirmation of his hypothesis, and I suspect he ended his life quite disappointed at the near-total lack of recognition his self-published 2008 book had achieved, especially given the many years of effort he had invested in producing it. Aside from that one long review in the American Renaissance newsletter, his work received no substantial discussion anywhere else, and seemingly fell into oblivion.

In his preface, he had described the book as the main contribution to future generations of his waning years, and he authorized anyone to freely publish or copy without royalties, also promising to shortly make it available in HTML form on a website, which he did a few months later. He later released a PDF version, with the all-important footnotes being linked back to that website. Over the years I was a very occasional visitor, but when I checked a few years ago, I discovered that the URL had lapsed some time after his death, and the website was no longer available. As a consequence, the PDF versions still in circulation lack access to the footnotes, severely crippling the value of the text.

Fortunately, the pages of the website were backed up on, and I was able to copy them to a location on our own website, including all the associated images. I also produced a modified version of the PDF in which the footnotes are once again active, now pointing to this available copy.

Those so interested may now read the work and decide for themselves how severely my own ignorance of anthropology has impaired my evaluation of his book.


Chapter 1 • A Story of the Origin of Humans
Chapter 2 • Early Humans
Chapter 3 • DNA
Chapter 4 • Evolution
Chapter 5 • Selectors
Chapter 6 • Neoteny
Chapter 7 • Genetic Distance
Chapter 8 • Evolutionary Psychology

Chapter 9 • Hard Tissue
Chapter 10 • Soft Tissue
Chapter 11 • Reproductive Strategy
Chapter 12 • Behavior
Chapter 13 • Genes
Chapter 14 • Intelligence
Chapter 15 • Civilizations and Achievements
Chapter 16 • Primitive Traits

Chapter 17 • Fossil Skulls
Chapter 18 • Modern Behavior
Chapter 19 • MtDNA
Chapter 20 • Population Differences in MtDNA
Chapter 21 • Nuclear DNA
Chapter 22 • Replacement

Chapter 23 • The Bipedal Apes
Chapter 24 • The Origin of the Eurasians
Chapter 25 • The Neanderthals
Chapter 26 • The Origin of Africans
Chapter 27 • The Origin of Asian Aborigines

Chapter 28 • Homo Africanus
Chapter 29 • Miscegenation
Chapter 30 • Hybrid Vigor
Chapter 31 • Segregation
Chapter 32 • Eugenics
Chapter 33 • Re-Classifying the Left
Chapter 34 • Egalitarianism
Chapter 35 • Individualism
Chapter 36 • Morality
Chapter 37 • Which Way Western Man?

Appendix (DNA)
Recommended Reading


Related Reading:

The Race/IQ Series
Hide 1065 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Ron Unz says:

    Given the length and topic of this article, moderation may be somewhat stricter than usual, so please do avoid unreasonable behavior.

  2. Anon[151] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m am surprised that Andrew Anglin and Brad Griffin are given a platform here. Both are well known bigots and neither of them very bright.

  3. So although Boot’s description of our website was certainly wrong, it was probably less wrong than the vast majority of his other writing…

    Ouch. LOL, but also Ouch.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman, res, ic1000
  4. The thesis of Richard D. Fuerle’s book, Erectus Walks Amongst Us, speaks to the very real possibility that the only real, problematic division between people in the United States is African vs. non-African.

    This division has existed from the beginning, with Americans of African ancestry comprising a significant minority that has never fully assimilated, despite every effort and expense, particularly over the past half century.

    The political movements during this time have not only exacerbated this division, but they have also used it as a template to copy and paste onto any other group that can be separated from European Americans for political purposes. Thus now we have a Balkanized US in which identity politics is the dominant game, and everyone is arrayed against the core, historic group of American Citizens.

    Non-European Eurasians (and non-African Latin Americans, who also are part of the larger, non-African people of the world) have been bamboozled into joining African Americans in this political game, to the detriment of everyone.

    Perhaps recognizing the truth, that humans can be conceptualized, for practical purposes, as two major racial groups, and that it is the non-Africans who can work together as modern humans, would go a long way toward healing the country and giving it a chance to compete in the future with the less divided, more organized nations that are eating our lunch.

    • Agree: JackOH, Realist, Mike Tre
    • Disagree: Dumbo
  5. cortesar says:

    The best of this world, its highest civilizations, its most sublime art, the most divine of its music has been created by White Men
    White supremacy is not a worldview or an ideology it is an obvious fact as it is one that sun rises on east and sets on the west
    Is it possible that another race or culture will create next 3000 years as Whites did previous 3 millennia?
    I very much doubt it
    Today as we see the technological and economical rise of Est, let me paraphrase Saul Bellow and ask a question

    “Who is the Tolstoy of the Chinese? The Proust of the Koreans? I’d be happy to read them.”


    Will another Bernini be ever born in the kingdom of Wakanda?

    The answer is a resounding NO

    • Agree: GeneralRipper, bruce county
    • Disagree: IronForge
    • LOL: Rdm
  6. Exile says: • Website

    This is a much more balanced and reasonable treatment than race-realists and White Nationalists/separatists would receive most anywhere else with a comparable footprint on the web. Credit where credit is due.

    We only need a fair hearing to prove the merits of our positions.

    Given the present political, social and cultural climate in America today, the time has come to have that long-awaited “national conversation about race” – and to allow all sides, pro-White, ambivalent and anti-White, to participate for a change.

    White Nationalists/separatists will have the better of the exchange in the end. I appreciate that Ron Unz is giving us the opportunity to have that fair hearing in spite of his own personal views which are not our own. It’s all we ask for and it’s all we need.

    Strong fences make for better neighbors. To the extent any kind of multiculturalism is possible or desirable, it should be voluntary on all sides. Restore the freedom of association in America and let race relations proceed on nature’s timetable rather than that of Davos or Jerusalem.

    • Agree: Stan d Mute
  7. “A strong correlation between national IQs and per capita incomes, . . . prove[s] that a nation’s IQ [is] a central factor in determining its economic success.”

    Two blatant and related fallacies are to be found in this statement.

    The cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

    The reversal of cause and effect, or “questionable cause” fallacy.

    What the correlation proves is that a nation’s economic success is a central factor in determining the highness of its IQ.

    Got it backwards. A common mistake.

    • Agree: canspeccy
  8. Toza says:

    Dear Mr. Unz,
    I congratulate you for having the patience and diligence to read and summarize all these books. Even though I don’t always agree with your views, your site and your own research and writing effort are invaluable for a healthy insight into the alternative look at history, sociology and politics.

    • Agree: Moi, Maowasayali, Ace
  9. Ghali says:

    I disagree with the author’s description. I read (very often) articles on Webzine ( While I find Phil Giraldi and a few other authors (Op-eds) very constructive and analytical, Webzine in general is very biased and often racist towards coloured people (migrants), blacks and Muslims in particular. It posted articles by extremely illiterate, racist and bigoted “writers”.
    In fact, it is not an understatement to call the Website a racist propaganda outlet. I would not be starving if Webzine is close for ever.

  10. 123131 says:

    Great information. Thank you for all you do Ron.

    • Agree: FLgeezer
  11. That last book seems incredibly interesting. I’m personally a believer in the “humans as genetically uplifted slave-race from mix of native species with alien DNA,” but this makes sense as far as later developments of the species, as well as there being various, similar-but-different branches/parallel developments. Eurasians being their own mixed-grouping makes quite a lot of sense.

    • Replies: @Realist
  12. Ron,
    A deluge of facts that need slow digestion. Thank you!

    One factor is IQ – my own experience in the Australian mining industry included working with old-world and new-world peoples and in terms of IQ I discovered that old-world people generally thought in metaphorical terms, while new-world peoples thought literally. This difference occasionally resulted in humorous incidents. If intelligence is defined as the ability to discern the essential from the inessential, then there are no differences between humans.

    Thinking metaphorically means thinking abstractly, and abstractions are physical unreal. Any IQ test that identifies and ranks abstract thinkers as superior to literalists or non-abstract thinkers, then that’s all the IQ test has achieved. The problem is that abstract thinkers, while expert at the act of thinking, are also possibly quite barking mad.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    , @John Johnson
  13. massa ron,

    what you call “white racialism” and all other racialisms have a biological basis which is insuperable. i’m surprised your very long article doesn’t mention it. namely…

    an individual will succeed in passing on more of his or her genes if the mother or father of his or her children belongs to his own ethnic group (narrowly or broadly defined) but is not a relative. individuals without a preference for their own ethne are bred out of existence.

    sex is the basis of all racialisms. this is why it shows itself at puberty and not before.

  14. Dan Hayes says:

    Spurred on by its American Renaissance review, I purchased a copy of Erectus. At that same time Jared Taylor ruefully admitted his chagrin at the picture on the book’s cover, the very same one appearing in this article’s preface. My only regret is that I loaned my copy away; of course never to be seen again!

    • Replies: @Charles
    , @Hiya Doody
  15. White Ape says:

    Hi Ron, can you please explain why you used the photograph that you have used for this article?

  16. I would like to see evidence that Neandertal-Cro Magnon were interbreeding rather than they had genes inherited from a common ancestor. After all Chimps and Humans have something like 98-99% of genes in common.

    It is amazing how genetic analyses are used to “prove” anything that has been first preconceived. Like the existence of a jewish “race”.

    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
  17. Does anyone actually believe that the average Jew can’t comprehend that race exists and that they are a distinct people from the middle east? Jewish race denial is so bizarre to me.

    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
  18. Anonymous[279] • Disclaimer says:

    Although Tucker is quite hostile to these individuals and their ideology, his book is helpful in


    this important background.

  19. Biff says:

    Amazing piece of work Ron. One of the best out there – outlining the internal evolution of racial studies/politics within the United States. What caught my attention was the speed that which the evolution took place; a lot happened in a few short years, and what once was conventional wisdom quickly morphed into heretical hearsay. Has any other society evolved/moved(is ‘evolve’ even the correct term) it’s social conscience so dramatically and so quickly? And, how can a society work on top of a scientific foundation that keeps shifting – mainly due to political winds?

    And the last bit is certainly a grande capper of a short outline of an excellent book.

  20. A very long article & I didn’t read most of it. But, the ending about Fuerle’s hypothesis is interesting & I would recommend to read at least this part.

  21. MarkU says:

    Given a belief in evolution, the idea that different populations of humans, adapted as they are to different environments and hence subject to different evolutionary pressures, would have identical average aptitudes in every respect, would seem to be totally absurd. If such were found to be the case then it would an astonishing and entirely inexplicable discovery which would cast serious doubt as to the validity of evolutionary theory. Such a state of affairs would be a strong argument in favour of creationism.

    Truth needs no suppression of evidence or of discussion in order to survive. Any time I see censorship in any area of debate I regard it as a good indicator of who is really on the side of truth and who isn’t.

  22. Substituting ideological slurs and demonization for rational evaluation and rebuttal has long become a commonplace in heated American policy debates…

    This is better described as a typical Jewish tactic when they know they cannot argue via meritorious lines of critique.

    At the root of all of our modern world troubles… Jewish inability to be honest.

    Hypocrisy was the Jew’s sin that Christ was so incensed by.

    Hypocrite Jews… the World’s #1 Problem.

    • Agree: Pheasant, Sulu
  23. Levtraro says:

    The serious scientific fraud at the center of Stephen Jay Gould’s influential book The Mismeasure of Man is a notorious example of this.

    I think this is unsupported by the evidence, probably just a silly exaggeration. What Lewis et al. (2011)

    demonstrated with re-analyzing Morton’s skulls (which is where your link to the alleged fraud by Gould ultimately leads) was that Morton was not fraudulent and that Gould was biased.

    That is far less than your accusation.

    I haven’t read your full essay yet but I couldn’t let that part pass without objection. Gould was Jewish, Marxist and biased but he was not a fraud.

  24. I also noted that a good 10% or more of our writers were probably “White Nationalists,” and perhaps a few of them might even arguably be labeled “White Supremacists.”

    A “White Supremacist” is someone who desires not autonomy and separation for Whites, which are the keys to White survival, but the continuation of the “diversity” zoo, only with Whites rather than Jews (and increasingly high-caste Indians) on top. If there is even one such an individual alive, he’s a contemptible moron who can’t learn from history.

    • Thanks: Pheasant
  25. In Chapter 23, I try to make the case that man evolved from a Eurasian ape, not an African ape. The only connection between the human lineage and Africans is that very early Eurasian man migrated into Africa and interbreed with an African ape, producing hybrids. Subsequent migrations by more evolved Eurasians into Africa and interbreeding with the hybrids there brought more Eurasian alleles in to Africa. Several times I say that man never left Africa except as slaves.


    Epecially as this thesis is in total contradiction with what he is trying to explain about the “mission” of the alleles.

    Sorry to shoot on a coffin, but this book is total crap and I am very surprised that Ron is promoting it.

    • Replies: @vot tak
    , @Richter
  26. This is a very good survey of the important books to read in this issue, so thank you for that. I have read only up to the point I have a quick comment about, but I look forward to reading the rest.

    About the Supreme Court and segregation decision Brown vs. Board of Education, you mentioned that Carlton Putnam argued that a scientific racialism argument should be used by segregationists rather than a State’s Rights argument. (You noted that this got a favorable decision in a lower court even.).

    As one of the (very few) Constitutionalists commenting here, I take issue with this – not your writing, of course, but Mr. Putnam’s thinking. I don’t see how a scientific argument SHOULD be involved at all. It’s not like even a “different species” argument would help, as everyone still knew in the 1950s that Amendment XIV was specifically written to cover results of the aftermath of emancipation.

    It was the 14th Amendment that was what the Brown vs. Board of Ed. decision was made on, completely erroneously in my non-SCOTUS opinion. The 14th Amendment, as discussed non-rigorously here, was about voting rights for the new citizens and Sections 3 and 4 very specifically about punishing the South for the war.

    A State’s Rights argument for segregation is perfectly valid. The use of “equal protection under the laws” clause (last clause in Section 1) was what the pro-desegregation side had going for them. The question is whether that clause had its usual meaning that related to guilt for criminal acts, due process in a court of law, etc, not the running of a State’s public schools system. There was no Dept. of Education in 1954, and education at the grade school level was no business of the Feral Gov’t at that point. There is no Constitutional basis for it being so, either.

    The Supreme Court at least used to take the Constitution seriously, but it had gotten highly political with the left-wing politician Earl Warren, his appointment by President Eisenhower being one of Ike’s biggest screw ups. I just don’t see that a scientific argument would have, or SHOULD HAVE, swayed the Supreme Court. Segregation was indeed a State’s Rights issue.

    Since I can read the Carlton Putnam book here, I can learn more about it all right here. Thank you for your great service in providing a forum for all sorts of opinion!

    • Agree: Ace
    • Replies: @Ray Caruso
  27. m___ says:

    Thanks Ron for building a contexted and textured overview of race, the matter.

  28. GMC says:

    Wow, that was a few articles in one – thanks. Took Anthro and Archeology in school and Fuerle’s look into our evolution sounds more probable than what they taught us at school, even without the latest DNA results. Especially after living in Alaska for over 3 decades , and noting that Africans do not vacation or live there, and its because it’s too darn cold. But we fly to Hawaii and even south to Seattle for a cold weather time out – any chance one gets. So, why would human nature { historically} be going in the opposite direction when it comes to our migration? Doesn’t happen — This was a great read.

  29. Re Madison Grant (1865-1937) discussed above, and his division of Europeans into the 3 ‘races’ of Nordic, Mediterranean & Alpine, some may ask where the Slavs fit in – he saw them as in large part in the ‘Alpine’ category but with significant Nordic penetration. Here, Grant’s ‘European races’ map –

    • Thanks: GMC
    • Replies: @Wielgus
    , @PetrOldSack
  30. Bemildred says:

    Thanks for publishing this material. So much has been lost, we live in a decadent age. It is amazing how many great writers turn out to be “racists” and “mysogynists” when you read their books. I can think of a variety of interesting writers from early 20th Cen. up to around 1970, who are now little seen or mentioned. It is like certain subjects have become taboo, you just can’t talk about them.

    I think our categories of race, gender, species, etc. are more or less arbitrary, conventions, not “facts”; and we would think better if we got used to that idea. But saying that can get you into all kinds of trouble.

    • Replies: @haha
  31. gotmituns says:

    I can give you the synopsis of this overlong article in one sentence. No good deed goes unpunished, as in ending segregation.

  32. JWalters says:

    I recommend this review of James Q. Wilson and Richard Herrnstein’s book Crime and human nature by James Fallows. Fallows puts the inheritable factors into perspective well. For example, he quotes the book authors:
    “There is no ‘crime gene,’ the authors write, ‘but some traits that are to a degree heritable, such as intelligence and temperament, affect to some extent the likelihood that individuals will engage in criminal activities.’” And further, “The most important ‘genetic’ factor is gender: not all men are violent criminals, but almost all violent criminals are men, especially young men.”

    On race and IQ I’d just note that a more complete picture would include coverage of the evidence on the effects of cognitively rich versus poor environments, and rich versus poor nutrition in diets.

    On the subject of Jewish influence, it is now indisputable that the standard Zionist account of how today’s Israel was established is a completely fictional history. That story holds that innocent Israelis were victims of terrorizing Palestinians. The revealed historical record shows clearly the reverse. The unarmed civilian population of Palestine was subjected to mass slaughters and ethnic cleansing by a large, well-armed Zionist army, mainly from Eastern Europe.
    “Terrorism: How the Israeli state was won”
    “A brief, unhappy history of Israeli massacres”
    “The Nakba Day denial”

    Further information is now readily available on the political maneuverings leading up to that invasion. A summary and collection of links:
    “War Profiteers and the Roots of the ‘War on Terror’”

    The deep roots of the Zionist strategy of deception have been laid bare by Jewish Israeli professor Israel Shahak in his book
    “Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years”.

    The imposition of such a gigantic lie about the founding of Israel raises the obvious question – what other lies have the Zionists imposed on America? For example, is the Holocaust story another part of the fabricated history of Israel’s founding?
    “American Pravda: Holocaust Denial”

    And the total absence of reporting on this fabricated history by the corporate media, along with the virtual absence of reporting on Israel’s on-going ethnic cleansing crimes, raises the corollary question – how did the Zionists acquire this level of control?

    • Thanks: GMC, FLgeezer
  33. An interesting, completely forgotten aspect of George Lincoln Rockwell’s career is that he was an invited, that’s correct, an invited speaker on many university campuses. He was usually treated as a fringe, but interesting speaker and allowed to give his talks. At Michigan State University he said, and I paraphrase, “The university campus is one of the last places in America where I can freely speak.”

    He was also interviewed in Playboy Magazine by Alex Halley.

    Below: a YouTube of GLR at Brown University — invited speaker.

    • Thanks: Robert Dolan
  34. JackOH says:

    Extraordinary essay, Ron, thanks.

    My personal feeling is that your guardedly favorable mention of these books and their authors implies no more than the books are worth reading. I may be a bit naive, but I see nothing that says that reading a “racialist” book demands that I treat a stranger of another race unfairly.

    I’ve read a bit of some of the authors you presented. Stoddard’s reporting of Germany and Germans in the early days of WWII is a masterpiece of unbigoted factualness. Probably read some of Boas in college, although I didn’t really understand the consequences of his thinking. I’ve known the names of some of the other authors and their areas of interest.

    I’ve mentioned in occasional comments here that my experience as a student in the 1960s rankles to this day. Blacks were being politically empowered through legitimate dissent and criminal rioting, and at the level of junior high and high school in a transitioning neighborhood, that translated into a permissive environment for unprovoked anti-White animus. In other words–racism.

    Maybe a judicious revisiting of these authors may help us achieve a sort of content-of-character standard for gauging our fellow Americans.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
  35. Jake says:

    But I spent most of that decade building a content-archiving system that provided convenient access to over a million articles from more than 200 of our leading periodicals since the mid-nineteenth century, and was stunned by the severe distortions and enormous lacunae in my knowledge which this revealed

    The difference, I believe, between polymath Ron Unz and many other polymaths is that Unz is always honest and always unwilling to whore before power. He is searching for truth. He can’t be bribed or terrified away from his search.

    • Agree: Ash Williams, John Regan
  36. Erebus says:

    Thanks for an astonishing article. I had no real concept of the depth & breadth of the American debate on race before reading it.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  37. Long article Ron. And then there is the Holy Bible, it teaches only 2 classes of mankind, the sheep and the goats. All came from Eve, so there is only one race, the human race. The goats vastly outnumber the sheep, only a few are chosen and on the narrow path, the majority are headed for destruction. This view was presented in the sermon on the mount in the 1st century. The few sheep are comprised of individuals from every nations, tribe and family. It also teaches the Kingdom of God is growing. So the numbers and influence of the sheep may be more in the future and the numbers of goats and their influence will be less in the future. The time frame of the growth of the kingdom could be thousands of years.

    • Thanks: Truth, SC Rebel
    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    , @ixpop
  38. Admittedly, I am not prepared to digest 25,000 words this morning, however I would like to comment on a general observation which a partial digestion of the content affords regarding the title of the article’s mention of “white racialism”.

    It is important, I think, to recognize how “the needle” of our definitions is (often nefariously) moved over time. And in particular, I am reminded of the progressive establishment media’s use of the term “white supremacist”. Even more particularly, I am reminded of the Chris Wallace interrogation of Trump, and the continued, endless attempted effort to back Trump into a cognitive trap of condemning “white supremacists”.

    We need to understand the progressive establishment’s latest definition of “white supremacy”:

    If you are white, and you are proud of your generational heritage, you are a white supremacist.

    If you are white, and are not ashamed or feel debilitating guilt at the alleged wrongdoings of your ancestors, you are a white supremacist.

    If you are white and believe in the Constitutional precept that “all men are created equal” and therefore do not believe that certain races should be given special consideration due to not being “white” you are a white supremacist.

    If you are white and have high self esteem, based on your abilities, your deeds, your accomplishments and your cultural values, you are a white supremacist.

    Given the above, I cringe at the thought that anyone (including Trump) would be compelled to denounce or condemn “white supremacy” as defined above. As this directly involves any discussion of “white racism” we should be vigilant, and recognise that there is a concerted effort to vigorously discriminate against the white races such that they are oppressed, shamed and punished.

    And of course, sad to say, even a 5th grader understands that “two wrongs do not make a right”. And yet “white racism” is very much in vogue today. Not the “white racism” of whites being racist, but rather that of non-whites normalizing racism against whites in a reactionary extreme.

    In the end, it is the deeds of a person or a group that define them, not the color of their skin. And by their deeds, the progressive establishment is guilty of racism against people of “non-color”. They may consider it virtuous, but they are racist bigots just the same.

    • Agree: Chaco Cortes
    • Replies: @Oldtradesman
    , @Sulu
  39. vot tak says:

    “Even the choice of preferred accusatory phrases suggests a certain amount of bad faith. My impression is that a couple of years ago members of the pro-white ideological camp were usually denounced as “White Nationalists” but more recently that term has been superseded by “White Supremacists.”

    Actually “white supremacist” and “neo-nazi” (or nazi) is the standard term that has been used to describe this freakshow since I became aware of them in the early 1970s. The “white nationalist” label I’ve been hearing only recently in the last few years. As this term is much less offensive sounding, it is obvious it is being pushed to describe the white supremacists as a way to make them appear less repulsive. Pretty much exactly like how the zionazi/nazi western establishment retermed al qaida in Syria as “moderate rebels”.

    • Agree: Olivier1973
    • Troll: GeneralRipper
  40. @Ghali

    Why do you keep calling it “Website” and “Webzine” in CAPS? Your comment must be some kind of template made up by an illiterate or foreigner or foreign illiterate.

    You’re reading the wrong stuff anyway, IMO, assuming “you” are not a bot. Try Steve Sailer, Audacious Epigone, Paul Kersey, John Derbyshire, Michelle Malkin, and Ron Paul. Without them, well, I wouldn’t be starving, and I’d actually have a lot more free time on my hands … but, I wouldn’t have much reason to visit “Webzine”.

    • Agree: Jim Christian
  41. MarkU says:

    Correlation does not prove causation. Reversal of the cause and the effect makes no difference, correlation still does not prove causation.

    Additionally any time that I see the word ‘proves’ in an argument based on statistical evidence It merely demonstrates that the author is failing to adhere to the standards normally expected of a genuine scientist.

    You actually had a chance to take the intellectual high ground on this one but you blew it.

    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @obwandiyag
  42. usNthem says:

    The Wilmot Robertson book is very good. Though it was written 50 years ago, it reads like it could have been penned yesterday.

  43. While I personally disagree with Mr. Unz on certain issues, every time I read one of his articles, I cannot but marvel at the objectivity, fairness and even courtesy with which he treats authors and ideas that are subjected to such immense and malicious calumnies almost everywhere else in “polite” society. This is all the more remarkable given that (for example) most of the authors discussed in this piece present arguments that tend to be sharply at odds with his own more inclusive, pro-Hispanic national philosophy. Yet he still wishes to give them a fair hearing, and to give others the opportunity to do the same, when so very easily he could have left them in the darkness and silence to which they were confined by the hostile government and media elites.

    Again and again, Mr. Unz has demonstrated in action as well as in words his commitment to open-minded intellectual inquiry and the free exchange of ideas. This is such a vanishingly rare thing in these incipient new dark ages of the West that it cannot be praised too highly.

    Originally, once upon a time, I was drawn to the Unz Review by antiquarian interests, specifically to its unique archive of historical documents and journals to which the author alludes here and there in the present article. I maintain today that this is by itself an achievement and a gift to the public that should, in a juster world, suffice to render him great public acclaim. And yet, in the years since, the portion of the site addressing current affairs has become more important still.

    Where else, anywhere in the world, is there a meeting place of such a scale where writers of all persuasions may share the stage? Leftists, rightists and those who defy easy stereotyping, are all allowed to be judged solely by the strength of their arguments — no matter how controversial, despised or (in all too many countries) literally illegal on pain of imprisonment and loss of civic right. Even amateur commenters such as myself are given the opportunity to engage with these varied views, and offer some such small contribution to the discussion as we might perhaps be able.

    Those of us who are old enough to remember the early Internet will recall the spirit of optimism that surrounded it, our hopes for it as an arena of liberality and democracy in the true sense of the term. While those hopes have since been tragically frustrated by the increasingly overt tyranny of Big Tech, at the Unz Review they have found a refuge. I pray that the site shall remain as their bulwark for many years yet, and in happier times to come be followed by others.

  44. MEH 0910 says:
    @Stephen Paul Foster

    James Earl Jones & Marlon Brando in “Roots: The Next Generations” (2/24/1979)

    WARNING: Clip contains explicit language! In this scene from the conclusion of “Roots: The Next Generations,” Alex Haley (played by James Earl Jones) interviews George Lincoln Rockwell, the head of the American Nazi Party, for a magazine article. Rockwell is played by Marlon Brando in a characteristically unique performance. “Roots: The Next Generations,” the sequel to the original “Roots” mini-series, aired over seven days in February 1979 on ABC.

    • Thanks: Stan d Mute
  45. @Exile

    Strong fences make for better neighbors. To the extent any kind of multiculturalism is possible or desirable, it should be voluntary on all sides. Restore the freedom of association in America and let race relations proceed on nature’s timetable rather than that of Davos or Jerusalem.

    This immediately made me think of Switzerland. Often held up as a success of multiculturalism, few manage to mention the various ethnicities, (German, Italian, French, & Romanch) have distinct boundaries and political autonomy.

    If the USA hadn’t centralized power during the Civil War, and had instead kept to a republic, we wouldn’t have had an empire, and wouldn’t be experiencing the pain of its fall.

    The original sin of the USA wasn’t slavery. Slavery would have fallen of it’s own economic inefficiency.

    The original sin of the USA was fratricide. We have yet to repent, and cleans the stain of Cain.

  46. Tom Verso says:

    Don’t hold back Ron … 25,000 words …. you are de man!

    Unz Review is so not for the morning coffee before work reader.

    Love It!

  47. Dan Hayes says:
    @White Ape

    For the explanation, you are referred to immediately preceding Item #14.

  48. Everybody has heard a few of the names mentioned in the article. But it wasn’t clear that there is a whole history connecting those names in different ways. That’s what the fascinating article shows. Ron Unz concentrates on one side of the dispute and debate, there is still the other side, I think, even if I also don’t know the history of the other side which may have began with Boas. Margaret Mead, one of the anthropologists associated with Boas, was very much criticised by Derek Freeman. But later he himself was strongly criticised by other authors and it’s not certain that Margaret Mead finally didn’t prevail.

    Maybe it would be possible to mention two authors who situate themselves on the other side of the authors discussed by Unz and who have important and interesting books: Jared Diamond and Danny (Daniel) Dorling. Both criticised some ideas of the other side. I only read one book by Diamond, Colapse, and what I know from his other ideas have other sources. But I think he tries to show the influence of geography in the development of civilizations, rather than genetics. Daniel Dorling wrote a book with the title Injustice where he also criticises geneticist ideas in relation to IQ, for instance. The question is to assess how strong their challenge of geneticism is.

  49. @Ghali

    So you want to shut down Mr. Unz’s site, which he has spent who knows how much time and money making available to the world, asking nothing in return. Because it features opinions and arguments that you dislike, beside ones you like.

    Yet Mr. Unz makes it possible for you, who contribute nothing and less than nothing, to share your opinion freely with all of the readers of his article.

    • Replies: @Ash Williams
  50. MEH 0910 says:
    @Stephen Paul Foster

    (Alex Haley Interviews George Lincoln Rockwell was originally published in the April 1966 issue of Playboy Magazine. In addition, it was also published within Alex Haley: The Playboy Interviews by Ballantine Books in July 1993.)


    • Replies: @GMC
  51. Cyrano says:

    Here is my theory about races and evolution. According to some anthropologists we all sprung from Africa – some 1 million years ago. That would make the Africans the oldest race.

    Based on that logic, they should be the most advanced – they had the most time to develop. Asiatic race is second oldest, and the white Europeans are the new kids on the block – they have been around probably barely 50 000 years – if that. So they should be the least advanced because they had the shortest time to develop – only 50 thousand years.

    It seems that there is contradiction there. But there isn’t. Because races evolve one into another, and the oldest one is the one that is going nowhere, because something more advanced already developed out of them.

    Take the example of the crocodiles – they are modern day dinosaurs, they’ve been playing the evolution game for millions of years. According to some logic they should be the most advanced creatures on earth, because they had millions of years to develop.

    That’s not how it works. I am sure that more advanced species came out of the crocodiles, but they themselves are pretty much the same like they used to be 100 million years ago. Same thing about human evolution, the newer the race is, the more advanced it is.

    This new “discovery” that we are all “equal” has nothing to do with science or evolution or whatever. It’s all political. It’s considered a progressive and liberal idea – the part where we are all “equal”.

    It’s just an effort by the good old capitalism to prove that by producing such a “progressive” and “liberal” ideas – which represent an evolution of thought – it doesn’t need to evolve itself. It’s a pretty good con.

    As long as it produces such an enlightened “ideas”, the good old capitalism can stay as backward as it was on the day it was created.

    Unfortunately, in order for something to qualify as an evolution – it has to produce something newer and better. Evolution into degeneracy doesn’t count. It’s not even an evolution, it’s just designed to deflect the attention from the fact that the system is not evolving, it’s stagnating, and in order to prove otherwise, launches degenerate ideas that will try to portray it as “progressive” and “liberal”.

    • Replies: @Olivier1973
  52. Thanks, Ron. Really very impressive overview of the literature in this area. Samizdat is what the Soviets would have called this.

  53. Stogumber says:

    Dear Mr. Unz,
    I have read with interest your account of the book written by Richard Fuerle. But I cannot see the relevance.
    Imho as long a humans are capable of interbreeding (producing fertile offfspring) they are still members of different races, not of different species. In fact, I have thought that just this is the differentia specifica (needed for a definition) between races and species.
    From this point of view, the fact that Homo sapiens and Homo Neanderthalensis can interbreed simply tells us that they were not different species, but races (even if former scientists thought otherwise).
    But in the same way, the undeniable fact that Blacks and Whites can interbreed tells us that they are different races. The same must have been the case with Homo erectus as a precursor of modern Blacks. (Except if we presume that species can redevelop to races and “learn” to interbreed afterwards, which sounds very improbable to me.)
    My simple conclusion is that racial divides are much older than expected and already the divides between Homo erectus, Neanderthalensis and Sapiens were precursors of modern racial divides.

    • Replies: @GMC
    , @Steve in Greensboro
  54. anon[427] • Disclaimer says:

    I don’t see where white nationalism, would under normal circumstances, have anything to do with Israel or their Palestinian problem. The whole idea of white nationalism and Phillip Giraldi, seems like a farce. The biggest voices against Israel are from the left, just like the 911 truthers and leftist Jews, but somehow the whole thing gets pushed to white nationalism. Looks like Jews and leftists still using white people to hide behind.
    Of course their is always the rub…
    “Even the choice of preferred accusatory phrases suggests a certain amount of bad faith. My impression is that a couple of years ago members of the pro-white ideological camp were usually denounced as “White Nationalists” but more recently that term has been superseded by “White Supremacists.” I suspect that part of the reason for this verbal shift was the obvious hypocrisy of their disparate treatment. As I noted a few years ago:”
    Then you go on to say how this is what happened to Malcom X as he was denounced as a black nationalist.
    There is always some lesson to be learned that us whites have so much in common with other people. We should stand up for the brown people of the middle east. Fight apartheid and unfairness around the world. Spread democracy far and wide? Funny people like Max Boot never really label YOU anything just your “white nationalist(?)” readers and a couple of lefty journalists, probably for good measure and to give the fbi a new tool for rooting out the dreaded whites who might like each other.
    The majority of journalists have a leftist slant and war would seem perfectly acceptable if the killing was done for people of color and to rid the world of nation states that don’t allow them to vote for stuff for themselves, even boiling it down to illegals in our country. Everyone agreeing and unison, “There’s no white nationalism/supremacists here”! Opening up our borders and convincing people to stand for their rights while negating our own and convincing the country to throw away their freedom for voting rights for people of color. Throw away their own traditions and God for foreign religions. They swear on the bible, to God, which most don’t believe in anyway. We’re all so convinced that this endless nightmare of violence and force against us, around us is something we should want to fight for with white people having been that notions biggest suckers. Always taught about freedom and always being given socialism. Always being taught about privilege and always being demeaned and robbed of any esteem. It’s not like it all just started it’s been a concerted effort for a long time. No I don’t see your readers as any kind of white nationalist or even white supremacist, just more low self esteem in a country no longer their own and no people to stand with. I see columns like this as just another provocation for everyone to jump and shout “No white nationalists/supremacists here”!

    • Replies: @anon
  55. Wielgus says:

    A rather bizarre map. I would have thought for example most Turks would have fallen into the Mediterranean category, although it is true many are quite fair-skinned.

  56. Charles says:
    @Dan Hayes

    Never, under any circumstances, “loan” a book which you want to possess and keep.

    • Agree: Realist
    • Thanks: Dan Hayes
  57. Charles says:

    An even greater service to the public than the authors on The Unz is Ron’s efforts at keeping a variety of these forbidden works – by (mostly) men who have long-since been blacklisted by mainstream media – available; and not JUST available, but free-of-charge to download and keep. Mr. Unz’s contribution in that regard is one of the MOST important by any individual in our time, period (as the saying goes).

  58. @White Ape

    Perhaps because it looks like the quintessential African dictator Robert Mugabe:


    • Agree: Pheasant
  59. @Roacheforque

    Trump condemned KKK, White supremacy, and the Proud Boys on Hannity after the “debate” with Joe Biden.

    “Let me be clear again, I condemn the KKK. I condemn all white supremacists. I condemn the Proud Boys.”

  60. It’s naïve to think that any webpage is going to be judged by anything besides its most extreme or offensive elements. I completely appreciate the broad range of articles you publish, the freedom that implies, and information and viewpoints that will never see the light of day in mainstream press — the bulk of what you do is invaluable. But the stream of flat out racist (against blacks and Jews, drearily consistent) articles, really old school nasty stuff, is pretty hard to take. It destroys your credibility. The eugenics articles are laughable, so out of date and based on long questioned assumptions and studies.

    I understand and appreciate the resistance to being targeted as anti-Semitic by the Israel lobby and their insidious allies, mouthpieces, and beneficiaries. Israel is a racist and genocidal nation. But several of your writers are consumed with visceral, irrational hatred of Jews. I’m surprised there are no articles about horns or eating Christian babies.

    You know exactly what I’m talking about. I wonder if you actually want a better world. You share the apocalyptic Christian’s desire for global mayhem, I guess.

    • Troll: Stan d Mute
    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @Anon
  61. anon[379] • Disclaimer says:

    Ron Unz, impresario extraordinaire. The cover illustration for this article is so hilariously offensive.

    But Putnam wins the Ron Unz award for tongue-in-cheek provocation. Telling rich crackers to say, “My Daddy bonked the maid, and look how stupid I am,” good luck with that.

    As Murray pointed out, it takes smart people to produce the terminal complexity of the US government. Whereas dumb Africans applied KISS and used the UDHR as government work rules, and gave people a good life in Libya. Smart people went to war against them (but backed off to avoid an ICJ injunction,) framed their ruler for Lockerbie, tried to blow him up, and finally blew up his country and buttfucked him with a bayonet. Then the Sahel collapsed in violent chaos.

    IQ is all well and good, but it needs to be viewed in light of a complementary decency quotient. There might well be some cultural/epigenetic emergent property that explains the systematic and widespread extermination program of the Jewish State, for example.

  62. ‘The major genetic risk factor for severe COVID-19 is inherited from Neanderthals’

    I wonder whether that is why Covid-19 has not been nearly as fatal in Africa as in other parts of the world.

    I also wonder what that entails for biowarfare speculations about that virus’ origin.

    • Thanks: Pheasant
  63. anon[327] • Disclaimer says:
    @Stephen Paul Foster

    Since a long time, Yid working to shut down most speech, ideas
    to prevent the ugly truth regarding Yid.

  64. GMC says:
    @MEH 0910

    Playboy, over the years has had some top notch articles . I remember one of those articles, that discussed the Nazi connection/ partners, that took care of all their banking needs and laundering of everything from art, to gold – that neutral little country called Switzerland. My wife was Swiss at the time and was totally – floored and in denial. It was in the early 90s , in Lausanne. lol

  65. Similar to Eddington, geneticists find the politically correct results they’re paid to find. Ancient “human” remains found in Bulgaria completely debunk the politically correct OoA theory.

    From my non-lying eyes:

    Neanderthals did not disappear. They evolved/mixed. Northwestern Europeans (Scandinavians) likely have the most in common with Neanderthals including the same blond/red hair and blue/grey eyes. Dark hair and dark eyes in Europe likely come from the East and Mediterranean.

    Neanderthals had the largest brains of any creature on the planet earth. Brain size and intelligence are positively correlated. Modern Europeans and Asians have Neanderthal DNA. Asians also have Denisovan DNA. Sub-Saharan Africans have no Neanderthal DNA. Blue eyes (a recessive trait) likely did not come from one common ancestor 7,000 years ago as some geneticists would have us believe.

    Politically correct science is not science. Follow the clines.

    • LOL: Sam J.
  66. @MarkU

    The reason why evolution is rejected by (cultural) Marxists is that it undermines their idea of equality upon which their whole worldview is based. Where there is evolution there is unequality. If we would ascribe a “purpose” to nature, it would be to promote evolution and thus increase inequality. Would equality be the “purpose” of Life, then that would have been achieved already long ago with the appearance of unicellular organisms. Such cells are “all equal”. Any higher evolution automatically destroys equality. Marxism is trying to reverse evolution and is therefore against nature.

    • Replies: @MarkU
    , @TheTrumanShow
  67. @John Regan

    The moment somebody is leftist or rightist the person looses objectivity.
    Here is only one base from which every person must come to pass his her judgement.
    That is if the judgement is overall beneficial to society or it is harmful to society.
    Every trend has some negative side so every detailed item must be judged individually of that particular trend.

    • LOL: TheTrumanShow
  68. Dumbo says:

    I haven’t read the article, but I’ve read the book by Fuerle (or parts of it anyway) of Erectus Walk Among Us. An interesting thesis, compromised by a not very savvy cover. I mean, I kinda like it, but it could be better… It is not even the fact that it is “racist” or politically incorrect, just bad for marketing the book in other places than WN forums. In those cases you want a more neutral or “scientific” image, I suppose.

    As for Fuerle’s thesis, I know very little about the issue and can’t say much, only that I found it interesting.

    It seems that it was proven recently that, just as Europeans and Africans mixed with Neanderthals, Africans and Australasian mixed with other humanoid populations (Denisovans, and others still not identified).

  69. Wyatt says:

    The concept of white supremacy as bogeyman always necessarily ignores any proof that it could be true while lambasting the effects of people believing that it is. Whenever I ask people about what white supremacy is and how it came about, I never get good answers. Never.

    Why would anyone ever hold white supremacist views? Because if your civilization(s) continuously reduces poverty, increases prosperity, scientific, mathematical and medical knowledge and it does so at a rate that no other civilization has achieved without collapsing like two minutes later, you have every right in the world to assume that there is at least somethingsupreme about your people. There were American missionaries in China who noted starvation, deprivation and disease that lead to such infirmity and famine that open cannibalism was visible to these foreigners. Now, because of western technology and ideas, the Chinese aren’t eating each other (just dogs). Is there any reason that, without European intervention, China wouldn’t just be undergoing the waxing and waning of empires like they have for the last ten thousand years with millions dying cuz some rampaging horde destroyed all the rice paddies?

    Now, we’re stuck with the lie of universal human equality where every population is equal to any other in terms of intelligence, temperament and responsibility. So while George Floyd, Jacob Blake and Breonna Taylor, all criminals or criminal associates, trigger rampaging hordes of blacks and their dipshit soc-prog allies to go out and burn, loot and murder their way through white business and neighborhoods, little white boys get shot and killed by those same blacks and we get nothing in the national media. Nada. If the white supremacists were real, they would have Brenton Tarrant’d every black that was even remotely responsible for this vile murder of children. But they didn’t because they’re not real.

    And the dumbest thing about this, the stupidest fucking thing that gets ignored in the white supremacism huckstering is that despite being evil racist colonizers, these white supremacists still wanted to go out and educate and evangelize and uplift others. Wouldn’t the smartest thing been to have enslaved the dumber peoples of the world like the Arabs did to Africans and exterminate anyone who had an IQ ceiling like east asians? What rapacious monsters think it’s a good idea to open up schools and hospitals in the lands of people that are totally unlike them and present threats to them?

    This is all so tiresome. Can God just burn it all down already?

    • Agree: Robert Dolan, PolarBear
    • Thanks: Katrinka
    • Replies: @SomeoneInAsia
  70. Dumbo says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Perhaps recognizing the truth, that humans can be conceptualized, for practical purposes, as two major racial groups, and that it is the non-Africans who can work together as modern humans, would go a long way toward healing the country

    It’s not clear how it will be possible to “heal the country” if blacks will still be 13% of the population. Also, while “Hispanics” are not as bad as blacks in terms of violent crime (for now anyway – some Central American countries can be quite violent), they lag behind in other aspects.

    Also, while Subsaharan Africans are he obviously less assimilable group, I don’t see that other groups are completely exchangeable with whites — even “model minority” Asians have several differences.

  71. Pheasant says:
    @Ron Unz

    ‘Perhaps when I was browsing the comments section at some fringe website’

    Hello to you to Ron!

  72. @John Regan

    @Ghali ‘s use of language clearly shows (s)he isn’t a native English speaker. I’d bet large they’re a spiteful POC.

    As they say: “No good deed goes unpunished”.

  73. Anonymous[422] • Disclaimer says:

    I am not convinced the racial/biological divisions suggested by this article — or the books (obscure or otherwise) it refers to — actually map onto the political division tearing America apart.

    I see, on one side: fanatical white millennial gentiles who have replaced Christianity with “Wokeness” as their new mental religion; left-wing jews; some upwardly-mobile high-IQ Asian and Hispanic immigrants seeking to exploit the cultural crisis for social-status gain (following “chaos is a ladder” logic); some radicalized black people (but frankly, most black people don’t seem to me to want to get involved with either side of the fight).

    On the other side: white gentiles who haven’t gulped the wokeness koolaid; right-wing jews; high-IQ immigrants who want to preserve the order of America they chose to immigrate to (following “order is a ladder” logic).

    The “jewish usurpation of anglos” framing seems wrong to me, given strong anglo support for progressive causes, once you ignore the working-class anglos. In other words, if you just look at the anglos who are as wealthy as jews, then you have no “usurpation” dynamic at all. What you have is the formation of a class, which calls for class analysis, not race/biological analysis. Newer high-IQ immigrants are split on the question of how to join this class.

  74. Pheasant says:

    Anglin is quite dumb but I have always enjoyed Brad Griffin’s (Hunter wallace) historical essays.

    • Agree: Rosie
    • Replies: @John Regan
    , @fnn
  75. alan2102 says:
    @White Ape

    “Hi Ron, can you please explain why you used the photograph that you have used for this article?”

    Seems almost calculated to provoke reaction. Deserved reaction. Which will elicit the predictable counter-reaction.

  76. Duke’s high-water mark came almost three decades ago when for a couple of years he flashed like a meteor across the American political landscape. Drawing upon deep populist anger over welfare, crime, affirmative action, and other racially-charged issues, in 1990 he challenged the incumbent Democratic senator in his home state of Louisiana. Despite being massively outspent and facing an exceptionally hostile media, with both parties absolutely united against him, he stunned the country by getting over 43% of the total vote, including a landslide majority of his state’s whites.

    I thought his high water mark was when he won election to the state legislature. I used to live in his district! Metairie has a boundary with New Orleans and sheriff Harry Lee bragged about pulling people over for driving while black and the most popular not-chain grocery store had large signs on both front doors


    I don’t vote so I never gave any thought to voting for or against Duke but he was very popular for awhile. The last I saw of him he was doing plastic surgery and testosterone injections and posing for internet photographs in tank tops. Has he ever had any of his writing published at unz? It would probably have to be ghost written because legibility is not one of his competencies as near as I can tell.

    Harry Lee was one of the most popular politicians in Metairie history. Maybe the most. They gotta have a statue of the guy somewhere.

    • Replies: @Morton's toes
  77. Realist says:

    This is a much more balanced and reasonable treatment than race-realists and White Nationalists/separatists would receive most anywhere else with a comparable footprint on the web. Credit where credit is due.

    And I much appreciate Mr. Unz for it.

    White Nationalists/separatists will have the better of the exchange in the end. I appreciate that Ron Unz is giving us the opportunity to have that fair hearing in spite of his own personal views which are not our own.

    Specifically which views.

  78. GMC says:

    I was interested in the Fuerle part also. I took Anthro and Archeology at Wisc. { a long time ago -lol} And I have lived/traveled in about a dozen countries. Being from a close to the Arctic state-Ak. I liked his theory of – we went south , rather than, they went north. I’m not sure it is racism thing , as it is just being a natural survival instinct, when it comes to the Homo Erectus, Africanus or Neanderthals and their divides. In Russia, even being a white foreigner , I am not trusted, but go next door to Ukraine and it is much easier going — Before Maidan. Same slavic people, different attitude. Very interesting comments on this article – Thanks.

  79. Ron, are you deliberately goading the BLM mob with this? It’s by far your most provocative (and probably because it’s the best proven) work.

    What’s interesting to me is how the leftists have managed to convince so many that their senses are lying to them. Every aspect of the negro is primitive. From the wooly fur atop their head, completely unlike human hair, to the (as you noted above under Fuerle) skin, bones, brain, and metabolism, the difference is profound.

    Another thing that has bothered me is the lack of research into the effects of hybridization with the negro. Using my own sense data, I am led to suspect a higher defect rate in hybrids (much higher than the white or asian parent population).

    Obviously, long term, the negro could well be the superior human form, evolution hasn’t given us her verdict. With a billion negroes by the end of the century and fecundity that vastly surpasses all others, the trend of exporting negroes to every corner of the globe leaves the ultimate outcome very much in doubt. Perhaps the future belongs to the negro/Jew hybrid and they’ll be marveling at the extinct whites with their suicidal religious beliefs.

    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    , @TheTrumanShow
  80. Ron: a suggestion (not for the first time):

    Look into incorporating Colin Flaherty into your thesis and/or this site.

    • Agree: Supply and Demand
  81. MarkU says:
    @Franklin Ryckaert

    Absolutely, look at the damage Lysenkoism did to Soviet genetic science.

  82. Truth says:

    he seemed very skeptical that race was a scientifically valid concept, and quite surprised when I told her that saying “race does not exist” was roughly equivalent to asserting that “gravity does not exist.”

    It doesn’t. If it is heavier than air, it rises, if it is lighter than air it falls, lacking propulsion, of course.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  83. Realist says:

    As relates to Richard D. Fuerle and many others;

    Life is harder the farther you are from the center of the curve.

  84. @Levtraro

    I haven’t read your full essay yet but I couldn’t let that part pass without objection. Gould was Jewish, Marxist and biased but he was not a fraud.

    So what then? Gould was true to his Jewish nature and predilections? It would then follow that one should expect such prevarication from Jews which would severely discount the value of Ron’s articles and websites. Jewish nature = fraud?

    • Replies: @Levtraro
  85. Ron Unz is a national treasure.

  86. Realist says:

    I’m personally a believer in the “humans as genetically uplifted slave-race from mix of native species with alien DNA,”

    Interesting. Please give more info.

    • Replies: @Boomthorkell
  87. @White Ape

    That “photograph”, which heads Mr Fuerle’s book, is a composite drawing based on a photograph of a well known reconstruction of a Homo Erectus face to which eyeglasses and a collar and tie have been added. Are you triggered? Can’t acknowledge what that image reminds you of? Perhaps a Ghanian bureaucrat? I can answer all your questions. Hint: the answer to the most important question includes the words “introgression”, “SubSaharan African”, and “Homo Erectus”.

    • Agree: ThreeCranes
  88. Anon[223] • Disclaimer says:

    You mentioned that the workable majority and potentially assimilatible minorities are likely larger today then they were in 1970s, (60% white + 20% Hispanic + 8% Asian). Does that mean you think America’s racial trajectory is better today than when the book Dispossed Majority was written?
    That is a interesting way of putting it, I never thought about it like that. In that case, California must be one of the best states in the country!

  89. @Suicidal_canadian

    Jewish race “denial” is a hoax of long standing.

    Boas and early marxist thinkers determined that it would be good for the Jews to promulgate the false idea that race is a social construct, and the goal was to deracinate European people.

    So the Jewish left downplayed race and pushed egalitarianism for whites, while super-charging identity politics for non-whites, in a divide and conquer strategy.

    Jews are hyper-ethnocentric and race aware, while the Jewish power structure disallows any hint of racial ingroup preference for whites.

    The Jews deny whites the right to self determination. In fact, the Jews deny whites the right to exist.

    The west is currently undergoing the socially engineered race replacement/ethnic cleansing of whites and this movement can be directly traced to Jewish influence.

    • Agree: profnasty, mark green
    • Thanks: Ace
  90. TGD says:


    …a much more eager lightning-rod appeared in the person of physicist William Shockley, who years earlier had won a Nobel Prize for inventing the transistor.

    Shockley did not invent the transistor by himself. He started out with the idea for a “field effect” transistor. Years of experimenting got him nowhere and he took on 2 other physicists for the project: John Bardeen and Walter Brattain. The latter 2 accidentally discovered the “bipolar” transistor. They were at a loss as to how it actually worked but Shockley immediately realized what they had invented and explained how it functioned. The bipolar transistor is very complicated and involves a lot of semiconductor physics.

    The field effect transistor is not that complicated to grasp and even a layman can understand in a general way how it works. Shockley did not know that the field effect transistor had already been invented in the 1920s by Jewish physicist Julius Edgar Lilienfeld who patented the concept.

  91. @Erebus

    “Thanks for an astonishing article.”

    I second that. I’ve read many of the texts you mention and am grateful for your having put them in historical sequence. Well done, Ron, really well done.

  92. Trinity says:

    Article was much too long for me to read in one sitting, will read at a later date, skimmed down to the part of the article devoted to Rockwell, Dr. Pierce, and Dr. David Duke. I have read both, “My Awakening” by Dr. Duke and the fictional, “Turner Diaries” written by Dr. Pierce under the pseudonym Andrew MacDonald. I keep meaning to purchase, “The Secret Behind Communism” by Dr. Duke, will get around to it one day soon most definitely. I purchased both of these books about the same time sometime in the early 2000’s. I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND, “My Awakening” to anyone. The FICTIONAL “Turner Diaries,” while not well written in my opinion, and not an exciting read has proven very prophetic much like other fictional works like 1984 by Orwell or “The Camp Of The Saints” by Jean Raspail. Dr. Pierce, Raspail, and Orwell were certainly blessed with a vision of the future no doubt. And like most truth tellers, Dr. Pierce and Raspail were condemned as “racists,” “xenophobes,” blah, blah, blah.

    I would invite anyone to either read Dr. Duke’s books and/or visit his website and listen to his words on his daily radio show or read his own words on the site at and find out that the man IS NOTHING AT ALL LIKE HE IS PORTRAYED by (((the media.))) When a White civil rights leader like Dr. Duke is constantly demonized and a liar, a fraud, a buffoon like Al Sharpton has his own (((television program))) and is important enough to visit the White House on numerous occasions, it only shows how SICK AMERICA HAS BECOME.

    • Replies: @Genrick Yagoda
  93. Talha says:

    Thank you very much for the reference to “The New World of Islam” by Lothrop Stoddard. Very interesting read.


  94. KenH says:

    Carleton Putnam’s books deconstructing the claims of the racial integrationists are highly recommended and still relevant. His fears and dire predictions have been realized.

    The book Hate by Schmaltz about GL Rockwell is a very objective and even handed treatment of him and his American Nazi party.

    The Dispossessed Majority and Paved With Good Intentions are recommended for people new to pro-white racialism.

    Overall this is a very fair treatment on the subject matter of race from the standpoint of the old Anglo-Saxon elite and those opposed to the Jewish led revolution in such matters starting shortly after WWII.

    One book that isn’t mentioned is The Jewish Strategy by Revilo Oliver which is a short work documenting the Jewish assault upon the Western world starting in ancient Greece and Rome and continuing to the present. But Oliver notes that throughout history while Jews were mostly satisfied with mere exploitation of Aryan goyim their strategy post WWII has been one of extermination after the scare that Hitler and his National Socialist party gave them.

    Given the collapse of white birthrates in the West and the continued diminution of white populations in the face of mass third world immigration the Jewish desire for extermination using a variety of strategems and isms is currently succeeding.

    • Thanks: PolarBear
  95. AaronB says:
    @Paul Lacques

    It’s a mistake to look at this site as an intellectually serious site – that it is manifestly not.

    It is a place for venting the darkest corners of the human psyche. And that is a healthy and positive thing. People here can express the worst, most irrational, and hateful side of their psyches, whereas increasingly in society it is impossible to do do.

    It is the Shadow of a society obsessed with “good” and the suppression of all “evil”. But “evil” is as necessary as good.

    If people suppress their evil side, it builds and it builds. That is maybe the lesson of Christianity’s war on “evil”, something no other religion did.

    I’m a Jew. I’m aghast at most of the articles here. They are dishonest, scurrilous, deliberately false, incurious, intellectually a joke, and with the intent to promote baseless hate against all sorts of groups. Each month I think it can’t go lower, and it does.

    Should we then suppress them? Those are legitimate sides of the human psyche. You can’t have light without dark.

    What is interesting is that more mainstream society focuses on the “good” and suppresses “evil”, the more this site goes lower, more scurrilous, more dishonest, more dark and hateful.

    Mainstream society and Unz are locked in a dynamic. The “purer” one tries to get, the “lower” the other must go, to counteract that tendency and give the full range of the human psyche its due.

    “I wonder if you actually want a better world. You share the apocalyptic Christian’s desire for global mayhem, I guess.”

    A better world is precisely what he does not want. Because the mainstream wants a united world too much, he necessarily wants a more hateful and divided world.

    See the dialectic?

  96. Malla says:

    often racist towards coloured people (migrants)

    Migrants? they are infiltrators brought to the West by the Jewish elites to keep the people of the West down. Invade the World and Invite the World policy. You seem to oppose the invade the World part (which I and many WNs agree) but agree with the Invite the World policy. Which shows you see everything from your own greedy one sided perspective. You guys are not that different from Jews who shoot Palestinians.

  97. Ron,

    Many thanks for digitizing these works, for your open mind, and for The Unz Review. Open minds have been severely rationed in the America of 2020, you know.

  98. A number of people asking about why Ron used the controversial pic…..if you bothered to read the article the pic is on the cover of Fuerle’s book.

    And besides it’s a great homage to our former president!

    • LOL: Genrick Yagoda
  99. bomag says:

    Trying to please guys like you is what is ruining the West.

    • Agree: HammerJack
  100. @Trinity

    Both William Pierce and David Duke have a large number of podcasts on the ‘net. David Duke is much more measured. William Pierce (phd physicist) expresses cool intelligence in every podcast, but they are often mixed with fury. Which, given the circumstances, is the appropriate response.

    • Agree: Trinity
    • Replies: @Trinity
  101. @Olivier1973

    It is amazing how genetic analyses are used to “prove” anything that has been first preconceived. Like the existence of a jewish “race”.

    Anyone who has a DNA-based analysis of his genome done in order to determine his ancestry will quickly learn to within a percent or two what proportion of his ancestors were Ashkenazim, Sephardim, or Mizraim. When these results are compared with the percent of Jewish ancestors among all known ancestors, when that information is available, the DNA-based analysis always checks out. Such analyses can even distinguish Cohens (priestly lineage) and Levites (Temple serving lineage).

    This certainly seems proof that not only are Jews a distinct human clade (race) but that within this clade (race) are a number of readily distinguishable sub-clades (sub-races) and lineages

    • Replies: @Anonymous Jew
  102. @Buzz Mohawk

    Somewhat agree, but Canada shows us that even rich White Christians can be at each other’s throats over relatively minor differences (Quebecois v English). There’s something to be said for homogeneous nation states. It appears to be the best hope for our species. Separate by race AND ethnicity, accept the borders you’re given and engage in trade and goodwill. In theory, there’s no reason for Mexico not to be a friend and ally of the US.

    When groups are roughly equivalent in outcome/performance and one group maintains a clear majority, that seems to usually work out OK. (See NE Asians in the US – it’s hard to imagine a place that’s 90% White and 10% NE Asian having much racial tension. Even the inverse might work out OK).

    • Agree: Ash Williams, HbutnotG
    • Replies: @Supply and Demand
    , @Ace
  103. @Louis Hissink

    You might appreciate the following true story:

    My late brother-in-law was an engineer and pilot from Australia, the same place where you worked in the mining industry. He was as Australian as they get. He flew fighter planes in World War II and got shot down. He shot down five Japanese pilots himself. When he was married to my sister, he specialized in piloting rare, vintage aircraft.

    Needless to say, he was a practical man, fully capable of thinking in both the abstract and the concrete. He spoke in both metaphorical and literal terms.

    He told me the following story:

    One day, somewhere, he was assigned to fly with a copilot from Germany. When he introduced himself to the German, he said, “We will work together. You scratch my back; I scratch yours.”

    “You scratch my back; I scratch yours.”

    Well, as my brother-in-law was climbing up through the hatch, he felt the German behind him scratching his back. His new copilot took him literally.

    I don’t think you can generalize about “New World vs. Old World,” because obviously Germans are just as good as Australians at thinking both metaphorically and literally. It’s just funny.

  104. @cortesar

    Just call it White Superiority not Supremacy. I don’t think anyone wants one race lording it over another. As is often pointed out, there’s probably only a few actual White Supremacists in the US, but there are a lot of White Separatists. White Nationalism should be framed as an ethnic separatist movement, just like countless others around the world. That would give it best chance for gaining traction and makes it easy to defend intellectually. Especially if you’re willing to cede land to others – eg Hispanics can have SoCal/Southwestern US and Blacks can have the Deep South.

    Just another ethnic separatist movement. What’s wrong with that? You have a Free Tibet bumper sticker on your car. C’mon man!

  105. bomag says:

    …the time has come to have that long-awaited “national conversation about race”

    We have had that conversation, and we are now living with the result.

    The other side is not going to open it back up; they are happy to keep steamrolling us as long as they can.

  106. @Buzz Mohawk

    Excellent comment. The solution you offer in your last paragraph is way too common sensical to ever be accepted in Asylum America. Blacks are an effective psyop weapon in the oligarch arsenal.

  107. Polemeros says:

    I am puzzled, to say the least, by the absence of the many works written by Greg Johnson, of Counter-Currents.

    If there is another voice for race realism and White Nationalism more intelligent and articulate than Dr. Johnson’s, I have yet to run across it.

    And since he writes for Unz in another capacity under his nom de plume, it is even more puzzling.

    • Replies: @Cranberries
  108. lysias says:

    I consider Mizoguchi’s films fully the equal of Bernini artistically.

  109. @Pheasant

    I haven’t read all that much of Andrew Anglin but from the articles I did read back in the high tide Trumpism, he actually strikes me as a very bright guy. But since he adjusts his language and cartoonish public persona to appeal to his base of Millennials and Zoomers, it’s easy to miss if you take him at face value. Beyond any doubt he knows what he’s doing however.

    If it’s still available online, try to check out his leaked Stormer Style Guide. Whether you agree with his agenda or not, it’s a peerless introduction to the art of mindless propaganda.

  110. Thank you once again, Mr. Unz. I started reading some of the books you mention here and had trouble getting back to pressing work. I shall certainly return here. There are several of the books, which you mention that I want to read.

    BTW, back in the late 1960s, during my undergraduate days at Brandeis University, I took a physical anthropology course, which I now realize was taught by a rabid Boasian. This man had the brazen intellectual dishonesty to dismiss Carleton Coon’s rather nuanced theories of human racial evolution with the false assertion that Coon believed Whites were descended from Gorillas, Negros from Chimpanzees, and Mongoloids from Orangutangs.

    This seemed such an outrageous notion to me that I researched Coon and discovered his actual theory that racial differentiation began with Homo erectus. This theory has since been proven wrong. However, one of Coon’s arguments in favor of his theory is still difficult to explain.

    Coon noticed that Homo erectus skulls from Europe, Africa, and the Far East could be distinguished from one another by the some of the same criteria used to distinguish race in modern skulls, i.e. the pronounced nasal cavity of European/White skulls, the prognathous jaws of African/Negro skulls, and the high cheekbones of Asian/Mongolian skulls. These distinctions are obvious enough that individuals can quickly be trained to notice them. Even today I am disinclined to dismiss this fact as purely due to three instances of amazing parallel evolution. Rather, I suspect that Coon might have boon on to something and that a full explanation awaits further research and analysis.

    • Replies: @Anonymous Jew
  111. @Jus' Sayin'...

    You need to come up with an objective definition of subspecies based on things like fixation index and measurements of physical differences (eg overlap of skeletal differences). For example, going by fixation index alone, Blacks, Whites and Asians are clearly separate subspecies if we compare to the fixation index of recognized subspecies of foxes, buffalo etc. Danes v Italians? Probably not. As I understand it, Ashkenazi Jews are (very roughly) 40% Roman, 40% Eastern Med 20% Germanic/Slavic. Likely just a subgroup of Caucasians that doesn’t meet the threshold for a separate subspecies (when compared to say Germans or Italians). Different, yes, but not subspecies different.

    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
  112. Anonymous[393] • Disclaimer says:

    Anglin? You mean Eric Striker? He’s Anglin?

    • Replies: @schrub
  113. Anonymous[393] • Disclaimer says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    The book cover is most unfortunate though. It gives the impression that its thesis is blacks are ape-men. Maybe it’s a serious book, but most people will not give a book with such cover a chance.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
    , @Whitewolf
    , @Dumbo
  114. @Anonymous

    Are you Jewish?

    Asking because this seems a typical stereotypical Jewish-crypto-supremacist analysis, considering all the evidence to the contrary of your “argument”.

    Please realize this because to accept your analysis, we’d have to discount The Frankfurt School, Cloward-Piven, the ADL, Fabian Socialism, etc., ad nauseam.

    (obligatory I LOVE RON UNZ and many other Jews like him who aren’t on board with that BS waved in the air to ward off claims of point-shriek-“ANTISEMITISM!!1!(tm)”)

  115. Trinity says:
    @Genrick Yagoda

    The fictional book, “The Turner Diaries” like “The Camp Of The Saints” was written in the Seventies, and we can see both of these works of fiction becoming more real every day in America and Europe. People will probably shy away from “The Turner Diaries” because of the whole association with mass murderer Tim McVeigh, which according to (((the media))) helped form McVeigh’s distrust of the government along with the events at Waco. Hell, I never even heard of the book until the McVeigh incident and didn’t even bother to read it until years after the Oklahoma City bombing.

    Anyhow, you can very well see America turning into the America described in the “Turner Diaries.” In the book, Dr. Pierce has all the elements that we see in America in 2020. Whites turning on their own race and kinfolk, Whites being randomly attacked by nonwhites in the streets for no reason other than the color their skin and for being accused of White racism, the Jewish control of the movement, etc. It was a hard read for me despite it being a rather small book, while the much larger book authored by Dr. Duke, “My Awakening” was much easier on my eyes at least, couldn’t put that one down. Still, I would recommend, “The Turner Diaries,” as I would “Camp Of The Saints” by Raspail, I also had a hard time making it through this one. It really dragged along for me, but both are so damn prophetic that it is amazing that these books came out in the Seventies.

    • Agree: Sam J.
    • Thanks: Genrick Yagoda
    • Replies: @anarchyst
  116. Anonymous[118] • Disclaimer says:

    Their counterparts of the past included many of the foremost academic scholars and public intellectuals of that era, who openly discussed their views in leading opinion journals rather than by pseudonymous postings in dark corners of the Internet. Partly for this reason, such individuals tended to approach the same issues with far greater sophistication.

    Maybe as writers and stylists, but the viewpoints of today’s so-called ‘white nationalists’ are moderate and nuanced. They are not calling for Neo-Nazi revolution. If anything, they are most invested in a kind of universal nationalism for all people. Ramzpaul is typical. He doesn’t want whites to lord over others and doesn’t want white world to be inundated with non-whites.

    The problem for the ruling elites, mainly Jewish, is that ‘white nationalism’ is against ‘white imperialism'(especially of the Jewish-Zionist variety), and that is what they fear. If whites say NO to empire, they won’t support the current crazy foreign policy of Zion Uber Alles.

    • Agree: Ash Williams
    • Thanks: Trinity
  117. @Levtraro

    Detailed, published critiques of early editions of “The Mismeasure of Man”must have made Gould aware of errors in his presentation of other researchers’ data and his misrepresentations of others’ research . These critiques seemed to demonstrate not just accidental mistakes on Gould’s part but deliberate, systematic bias. Gould doubled down by refusing to correct these errors in all subsequent editions of his book. For me, this confirms the fundamentally fraudulent, ideology-driven nature of Gould’s work.

    • Thanks: HammerJack
    • Replies: @Levtraro
    , @john speke
  118. @Anonymous

    once you ignore the working-class anglos (…) what you have is the formation of a class, which calls for class analysis, not race/biological analysis.

    I agree – cf. David Goodhart – The Road to Somewhere. Or – Thilo Sarrazin Germany Doesn’t Need the Euro (amongst others of his books). Or Christophe Guilluy: No Society.

  119. @Louis Hissink

    I discovered that old-world people generally thought in metaphorical terms, while new-world peoples thought literally. This difference occasionally resulted in humorous incidents. If intelligence is defined as the ability to discern the essential from the inessential, then there are no differences between humans.

    Yet another attempt at trying to redefine intelligence to suit egalitarian ideals and that only leads back to the failed globalist status quo.

    Haitians have had over 200 years to figure out the essentials.

    They haven’t been able to do it. Romans had better sanitation systems.

    We can share whimsical stories about the peculiarities of tribal thinking while Haitians continue to eat mud pies because egalitarians hath declared race to not exist.

    • Replies: @Genrick Yagoda
  120. Levtraro says:

    Very good essay, erudite and nuanced yet straightforward in the building up to the last element, Fuerle’s theory.

    However, I would not rely on IQ that much as you do in your essay. IQ is a measure of intelligence in the same defective manner that the length of the shadow of a man is a measure of his height. To your credit, you recognize such problems when discussing Lynn but then you seem to forget and go on giving the impression that to you IQ = intelligence.

    I believe there are large differences in intelligence amongst human populations but we still need a technically direct measure before we can evaluate those differences accurately and reliably and put them in context. The last time I checked the literature the best idea was to devise a measure from the number of connections between neurons in brain tissue. This will give you an idea of the difficulties involved.

    • Replies: @Meimou
  121. noname27 says: • Website

    Anglin is controlled opposition 100%. I called him out years ago.

    • Agree: Trinity
    • Replies: @Truth
  122. @Dennis Gannon

    “All came from Eve”

    Eve being the name of the genetic-breeding program that produced both the sheep and goats you speak of which the Atlanteans used to repopulate the Earth after the cosmic Flood.

  123. ma says:

    “Who is the Tolstoy of the Chinese? The Proust of the Koreans? I’d be happy to read them.”

    Tolstoy was an iconoclastic Christian, so it’s not likely you will find a Chinese author of similar disposition. He is in any case not the best Russian author you could cite. Proust was a neurotic and unhealthy man, a homosexual who never worked in his life, and was supported by his mother. Probably not a man suited to most Korean readers’ tastes.

    If you are looking for accurate and wry social commentary, depth of literary characterizations, and have a taste for irony you could try Cao Xueqin-Gao E’s the Red Chamber Dream, which has been translated at least twice in to English.

    For historical lore you could try Luo Guangzhong’s Romance of the Three Kingdoms.

    For adventure you might pick up Shi Nai’an’s Water Margin, aka Outlaws of the Marsh.

    For religious and psychological symbolism there’s Wu Chengen’s Journey to the West.

    For vernacular short stories you can try the three volume set of Feng Menglon’s compilation: Stories Old and New; Stories to Warn the World; Stories to Awaken the World.

    All of the above run two to three thousand pages individually, so it might take you some time, especially if you read moving your lips.

    If your taste runs to weird tales (Poe, Lovecraft etc) then Pu Songling’s Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio could be recommended.

    For an introduction to Chinese poetry, and one offered in a more Western oriented re-translation, then Ezra Pound’s Cathay could be cited. Based on Ernest Fenollosa’s work, Pound’s juxtaposition of his Chinese translations with his translation of the Anglo Saxon Seafarer is fascinating, for reasons.

    • Thanks: Dieter Kief
  124. @Realist

    Ah, well, it’s quite a lot, but some good leads would be researching such things as “Nephilim,” Enki\Ea and the creation of man from Babylonian and Sumerian myths, the Epic of Gilgamesh, and honestly, just type in “Aliens made man” and you’ll start down the rabbit hole. Some books are flawed, but quite a few sites and books will have great research on such things as the biblical and pre biblical “clay” meaning flesh, etc.

    My logic in the whole thing is that evolution itself does not ever produce higher order life or sweeping changes, but a Japanese scientist can inject a rabbit fetus with jellyfish DNA and produce glow in the dark rabbits, or remove a mutation-inhibitor from mice and then expose them to radiation. Higher order beings intervening in lower order beings biology. It’s low level, but whose to say a suitably advanced species couldn’t or wouldn’t do a better job?

    In general, the theory goes a dissident group of aliens left to a fringe part of the galaxy to be alone and go play God and harvest gold. Took a local hominid and put some of their own DNA with it. It took the “God Gene” or mitochondria from Ish tar too stabilize the species, which is why the Babylonians write about all these weird mutations that involve mitochondrial failure in the path to develop man. This is ages and ages ago. Long before Atlantis and Lemuria and long before Ur, ha ha.

    • Replies: @Realist
  125. Wow, I just read the greatest works on White Racialism in America. Thank you Ron Unz for becoming a sanctuary for truth and knowledge. Had I access to these works 40 years ago I would be a different person by now. Better late than never.
    Now headed to the donation button.

  126. @Stogumber

    “…as long as humans are capable of interbreeding (producing fertile offfspring) they are still members of different races, not of different species. In fact, I have thought that just this is the differentia specifica (needed for a definition) between races and species…”

    Nope. Canis lupus (Gray Wolf) and Canis latrans (Coyote) are thought to be different species, but they can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. Wikipedia has a helpful entry under “Coywolf”.

    Interestingly, Gregory Cochran (co-author with Henry Harpending of “The 10,000 Year Explosion” referred to by Mr. Unz above) tweeted on 9/25/2018 as follows: “Fst (a measure of genetic difference) between Europeans and West Africans is the same as the Fst between North American Wolves and Coyotes (both 0.153)…”

    What does this mean? We are very different creatures. So different that alien taxonomists would call us different species. And if you are right that the current races are derived from what modern taxonomists call different fossil species, then perhaps some splitting of genus Homo is appropriate.

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
    , @Levtraro
  127. It is amazing how many of these books I’ve read. My research started in the early 80’s when I started to question the dogma being fed to us. The idea that we are all equal has to be the greatest non-sense foisted on the American people. It is amazing how many people believe this in the present day but then again I can understand this because it is being preached starting in kindergarten and all thru college.
    We are indeed in a major shift change if allowed to continue but I see no way out of this. Well I do see one way out of this and it will very destructive.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
    , @Seraphim
  128. jsigur says:

    racism has replaced class warfare in the bolshevik agenda. There are plenty of captured quotes made by JEWISH ELITES

  129. Richard B says:
    @Ron Unz

    Congratulations Ron. An instant classic. Arguably your most important work.

    It’s certainly one of the reasons why I’ve said many times,
    Who needs a Conspiracy Theory when you have The Unz Review?

    I'd like to think that your website in general and this article in particular could be used to direct attention to a serious matter affecting us all. Which is, the impossible to ignore incompetence of the hostile elite in regard to both theory construction and social management, and its obliviousness in even seeing a relationship between the two in matters of policy. As events of late have proven the consequences are immense.

    The reason obviously being that they simply, deliberately, and therefore, irresponsibly ignore the best data. You would think that they would know that the study of man should properly be utilized in the management of man.

    But, since it obviously isn’t, one wonders just how successful the human enterprise will be as the world we live in becomes more and more complex and unpredictable.

  130. Anonymous[247] • Disclaimer says:

    The spin is more important than the fact in political control.

    Thus, white superiority, white equality, and white inferiority can all be used to make white people welcome, ‘include’, and serve the Other. The current order manipulates all three modes among whites.


    1. How white superiority is used to make whites serve non-whites. Whites are made to feel special, rich, powerful, and accomplished. They are great whereas so many other peoples are pathetic, especially those black Africans. Therefore, superior white people should be decent and take care of all those non-whites by allowing mass-immigration and super-aid. The White Knight Syndrome. Jews play on this psychology too. Jews are forever the Holocaust Victims, and great-good whites must step up to the plate to save Jews from ‘new nazis’, such as Iranians and Philip Giraldi.
    There is also an aspect of white superiority in LGBT stuff, i.e. whites are ‘more evolved’ than the rest of humanity because they are most enthusiastic over queer culture, therefore whites should guide the world to celebrate homosexuality and trannies. So, feelings of white superiority are made to serve non-whites or to spread ‘Western Values’ via neo-imperialist globalism. Of course, no one explicitly says whites are superior, but the implication of White-Knight-ism is based on feelings of enlightened superiority. Even ‘white guilt’ is intrinsically white superiorist in that it judges whites by a higher standard. All of humanity practiced slavery and waged murderous wars. So, why are whites judged more harshly? Because they are higher beings and should have known better. “Oh, how could the white race have done such a thing?” If Arabs, Africans, and Asians did it, oh well. But whites?

    2. How white equality is used to make whites serve non-whites. Whites are told all races are equal or race is just a fantasy. There is just common humanity, and therefore, it doesn’t matter if white world is demographically taken over by non-whites or if whites mix with other races. It’s just humans and more humans. So, whites should welcome mass immigration and be either demographically replaced or miscegenated out of existence; it doesn’t matter because whatever happens, it’s just humans replacing or mixing with humans. As whites are the global minority, such an attitude would make white world subordinate to or supplanted by non-whites in the long run. What will happen to Europe if 100 millions of black Africans go there? Anyway, white equality as currently understood doesn’t bestow white people the equal right to survive as race and culture(as Jews in Israel do). It’s not about universal nationalism. Rather, whites must be erased like Palestinians and accept it as a ‘good thing’ in the name of equality.

    3. How white inferiority is used to make whites serve non-whites. Whites are made to feel that the Other, especially Jews and blacks, are so awesome that whites should worship and serve them. If we go by images than ideas, the current Western Culture is totally racial supremacist. Sports, sexual politics, and music are heavily about black dominance, black power, black prowess, and black whatever. When it comes to sports, diversity has led to something like ‘monoversity’, or monopolization by one group in a diversified world. California is very diverse with a white minority population, lots of Asians and many more browns, but its sports teams are heavily black. Europe celebrates diversity and has many more Muslims and Asians than in the past, but its sports are turning more and more black, with France leading the way. So, diversity doesn’t lead to more diversity at the top but the domination by one group. Today, the typical European Sprint Events have nearly all blacks(representing France, UK, Holland, etc.)
    ‘Monoversity’ also results in brainy fields. Technology is an open field in welcoming diverse talent from all over the world, but the top are dominated by Jews/whites, Hindus, and yellows. And finance sector over much of the world is dominated by Jews. Across Southeast Asia, diaspora Chinese dominate much of finance and economics. So, the promise of diversity hasn’t led to diversity at the top but a kind of ‘monoversity’ where more diverse peoples come under the domination of a single or few groups. Globalism promotes diversity as equal opportunity for more diverse peoples, but even if it were true, innate genetic differences turns meritocracy into ‘monoversity’ of one group or few groups hogging most of the trophies or prizes. But it’s actually worse because Jewish Power that controls globalism rigs the game to favor Jews and their allies/puppets over much of the world(Russia, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, uppity whites who believe whiteness is okay). Domination by meritocracy isn’t enough for Jews. They must also rig the game by having the US sanction Russia and Iran(and any nation that does business with them). Also, Jews, who once used to take pride as being for civil liberties, use media monopoly, platform monopoly, financial service monopoly, and all kinds of lawyer tricks to shut down speech and discussion that goes against Jewish power and its favored Narratives. At this point, ACLU is just a wing of AIPAC.

    In a way, equality of opportunity allows for even greater manifestation of racial superiority. Allowing equal opportunity in sports led to black supremacy. Allowing equal opportunity in academia, media, and finance led to Jewish domination. Even as ‘anti-racist’ whites so often point to black success in sports and music as proof of anti-white-supremacy, they ignore the implications of black supremacy. After all, if blacks totally beat whites in sports, it may disprove white or ‘Aryan’ supremacy but it also suggests black supremacy, at least in sports. And if blacks are more ‘athletic’ and rhythmic in their music that excites people, then blacks must have certain advantages in sensuality and sound. What is ‘liberal’ rock culture about idolization and imitation of blacks? Dave Marsh the famous critic always posed as a ‘liberal’ or even ‘leftist’ as someone who denounces white ‘racism’, but his entire worldview can be boiled down to whites should revere blacks because blacks are so much more awesome than whites. There’s a book called GOOD BOOTY that seems to be about how whites gained so much from the bouncing black butt.
    And what is all this Philosemitism about? It’s a case of Heil Hillel. If the West is about equality and ‘anti-racism’, why is the Law of the Current West, “Thou shalt serve Jews and Zion uber alles, especially Palestinians and Arabs?” It’s based on the notion that Jews are so awesome as businessmen, thinkers, entertainers, and etc. that white people should get on their knees and worship and serve the REAL SUPERIOR RACE. In other words, inferior whites should serve superior Jews.

    Now, how is it possible that white superiority, white equality, and white inferiority, though contradictory with one another, all serve the same purpose? Because facts are secondary to the spin they are given. Under current dogma and narrative control, all three modes have been spun to make whites serves the Other, especially Jews and blacks. Heads I win, tails you lose. It’s like the story of the Jewish guy, Christian, and the chimney. Regardless of the scenario or situation, the Jewish guy comes out on top. Different ‘facts’, but same spin.

  131. @Anonymous

    The book cover is most unfortunate though. It gives the impression that its thesis is blacks are ape-men. Maybe it’s a serious book, but most people will not give a book with such cover a chance.

    If you think that guy is ape-like, don’t come visit here in Detriot. You’ll think the Detriot Zoo has a serious escapee problem.

    • Replies: @Detroit Refugee
  132. (…) the famous quote frequently misattributed to Voltaire: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”

    While identifying a quote by its frequent misattribution is certainly an interesting development of our intellectually chaotic times, I think that it is a matter of justice to point out its author also. In this case, until evidence to the contrary, that author is Kevin Alfred Strom.

    I have located a site where one can read the text in which it appears:,_kevin/kevin_strom_works/Kevin_Strom_1991-1994/Kevin_A._Strom_19930814-ADV_All_America_Must_Know_the_Terror_That_Is_Upon_Us.html

  133. Whitewolf says:

    Given a belief in evolution, the idea that different populations of humans, adapted as they are to different environments and hence subject to different evolutionary pressures, would have identical average aptitudes in every respect, would seem to be totally absurd.

    It is totally absurd to think the different races are the same in every respect bar physical appearance. It’s ironic that the people who promote “diversity” as the ultimate goal of society also insist that human diversity is non-existent.

    • Agree: Sam J.
    • Replies: @MarkU
  134. @John Johnson

    One of the funniest things I heard on the radio was when (the very far left) NPR sent 3 of their Jew reporters (redundant, I know) to Haiti to find out where the billions of dollars went that were raised for Haiti Earthquake relief.

    They finally reluctantly came to the conclusion that……… Haitians are stupid!

    A partial transcript is below.



    Chana Joffe-Walt
    Here’s something that happens a lot in Haiti. You meet someone poor and they tell you the sad reality of their life, some challenge they face every day that keeps them poor. You hear the details and you just can’t believe the magnitude of the problem, not because it’s big and complicated, because it is so, so small.

    Adam Davidson
    For example, we met a farmer at this farm, a dusty, patchy field, nothing valuable growing on it, except in the corner, mangoes.

    Chana Joffe-Walt
    How many trees do you have?


    He has two.

    Chana Joffe-Walt
    The farmer tells us, two trees is barely enough to make a living. She wants more trees. She has the space for 100 trees. She has the time to tend them, but she has no water. Mango trees need water.


    Adam Davidson
    But then we walk across the field. And right at the far end of it is this roaring river. Right there. Right next to her farm.

    Chana Joffe-Walt
    Why is water a problem if you have water right here?


    Adam Davidson
    We talked about this question for a long time. It was really confusing. It just did not make sense to us that she couldn’t come up with some way to get water from the river right next to her farm onto her farm.

    Chana Joffe-Walt
    At one point I thought, is she lying to us? Why would she lie? Is she just lazy? Does she not have a bucket? So many questions.

    Adam Davidson
    How do you get water now?

    Chana Joffe-Walt
    Why don’t you have enough water to water these trees?

    Dozens of questions and a consultation with the local mayor–

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    , @Notsofast
  135. @europeasant

    It is amazing how many people believe this in the present day but then again I can understand this because it is being preached starting in kindergarten and all thru college.

    No more amazing than that my ancestors abandoned their ancient religion and embraced the mythology of the Jews or that people fanatically believe this idiotic crap even today solely because they were indoctrinated from birth.

    It’s no coincidence that the Jews have copied their historical success in fomenting religion to control us.

    • Replies: @europeasant
  136. Wow! A whole lot to digest.
    There are a couple of points I’d like to address while still fresh in my aging memory.
    – Nutrition plays an important role both in physical and mental development. Over 20 years ago, I heard Dr. Fraser Mustard, who had studied early childhood development, speak on the importance of proper nutrition and stimulation for brain development. In brief, he contended that whatever the child started school with, was never going to be fixed by a teacher, regardless of the resources and brilliance of teachers. That raises the question of whether US Blacks have had better nutrition and proper stimulation compared to their sub-Saharan relatives.
    On the physical side, while still working “on the floor” in a hospital more than 40 years ago, a large number of Filipina women, who were immigrants, were having C-sections. One of the obstetricians explained that they had access to better nutrition and were having North American sized babies in Filipina size bodies. Today, the 2nd and 3rd generation Filipinos are considerably larger than their parents and most are of similar size to their “White” counterparts.
    The concept of “Into Africa” was boosted by the discovery of a 7.2 million year old fossil in Greece.
    Genetics suggest that this pre-human’s DNA exists in Ethiopia and in the original inhabitants of South Africa the Khoi-San.
    The crime statistics of Hispanics is always going to be controversial. All of the illegal aliens entering the US are un-convicted criminals. As in any group, there will be good and bad. The question then becomes what are the crime rates of those entering legally. I am in no position to refute Mr. Unz’s claim on Hispanic criminality, but it where is is and who is committing it becomes as important as raw numbers. It is entirely likely that those entering legally have a similar crime rate to Whites. However, the unknown crime or suppressed crime due to the drug trade is unknown, just as it is for the immigrants coming from Asia, whether those immigrants are legal or not. In terms of the drug trade there are many involved from all races that are hidden. That aside, when one looks at the allegedly “appalling” US murder stats compared to those in Central and South America, they pale in comparison. As stated above, who in the Hispanic population is committing the crime – native American Hispanic, legal Hispanic immigrant, illegal alien Hispanic, etc becomes more relevant.

    Terrific article with great information and links. Thanks.

    • Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter
  137. anarchyst says:

    McVeigh didn’t do it. He was a patsy along with Nichols who was set up to take the fall. There is NO WAY a truck bomb could have inflicted the amount of damage to the McMurrah building that it sustained.
    The militia movement in the united States was growing stronger. The government needed a way to defuse and demonize the militia movement; the McMurrah building “false flag” incident was it.

  138. Anon[353] • Disclaimer says:

    The”To the extent any kind of multiculturalism is possible or desirable, it should be voluntary on all sides. Restore the freedom of association in America and let race relations proceed on nature’s timetable rather than that of Davos or Jerusalem.”

    Well said. However, the just and morally superior position of the restoration of the freedom of association is not going to be given or just fall into place; it is something that is going to have to be taken back and the wife doesn’t of opportunity is closing g fast.

    • Replies: @Anon
  139. fnn says:

    Anglin is the Anglosphere’s leading humorist.

  140. I’m surprised Mr Unz doesn’t know Fuerle’s book was (sort-of) reviewed by Michael A Woodley of Menie, on the academic journal ‘Medical Hypotheses’ which is published by Elsevier.


  141. Anon[353] • Disclaimer says:

    ,,,window of opportunity…

  142. @Cyrano

    Based on that logic, they should be the most advanced

    Unfortunately it is not working like that. Advanced means nothing. All current species on Earth are “advanced” alike, having adapted to the current living conditions. By the way crocodiles are not dinosaurs, birds are. With your logic, birds would be more advanced than we are, they have wings after all, while we don’t.

  143. @obwandiyag

    Then why haven’t sub-Saharan Africans (even with the benefit of globalized transference of knowledge and trade and being in possession of enormous tradable natural resources) been able to produce any societies that impress once the dancing and fornication are over with?

    • LOL: europeasant
  144. @Curmudgeon

    A very good article, only slightly flawed with that act of “bundling” Mr. Unz’s book with the others presented in same. That’s an old secondary market mortgage brokers trick.

  145. @MarkU

    That a nation’s economic success is a central factor in determining the highness of its IQ is a fact. A simple fact. Don’t give me this casuistry. You must be one of those sophomores who argues that the sun rises in the west or that up is down.

    • Replies: @MarkU
    , @Malla
  146. Whitewolf says:

    The book cover is most unfortunate though. It gives the impression that its thesis is blacks are ape-men. Maybe it’s a serious book, but most people will not give a book with such cover a chance.

    Did you come to that conclusion before or after you realised the author was actually referring to Africans?

    If the book’s thesis had been about primitive traits exhibited by Europeans would such a cover be as controversial as you imply? If not why not?

  147. Anonymous[360] • Disclaimer says:

    The best of this world, its highest civilizations, its most sublime art, the most divine of its music has been created by White Men. White supremacy is not a worldview or an ideology it is an obvious fact as it is one that sun rises on east and sets on the west. Is it possible that another race or culture will create next 3000 years as Whites did previous 3 millennia?

    Does ‘white men’ include non-European Caucasians such as light-skinned Ancient Egyptians, Libyans, Sumerians, Babylonians, Persians, and Jews?

    One key advantage of the West was the relative communicability among Europe, Near East, and North Africa. All were dominated by Caucasians though only Europeans could be said to be ‘white’. The Mediterranean is like a ocean-lake. It could be easily navigated. Thus, ideas, goods, and people traveled faster. Such contacts could lead to learning new ideas and methods. Or it boost the spirit of competition as each side had to be tough to survive in a world where one could so easily be invaded by other groups. In contrast, China and East Asia was isolated from the rest of the world. And the Himalayas mostly separated India and China. Therefore, they developed relatively mono-cultures. And the peoples in the New World were separated from the Old World by vast distances. And North America and South America were separate from one another.

    It seems an ideal civilization has the right balance of security and contact. If overly isolated, it becomes too insular and ‘inbred’, monotonous and dull. If overly exposed, it can lose too many people via emigration or lose its national character via excessive in-migration. Or all the over-emphasis on trade and travel can turn people deracinated and confused.
    Initially, Northern Europe fell behind and suffered because it was overly isolated from the action around the Mediterranean. But as the fire of civilization spread to the North, people there had both relative security and greater knowledge of the world. In contrast, Greece, parts of Italy, and Spain were always under threat of non-whites or mixed too much with them. The rise of Japan in 2oth century may owe to balance of security and contact. They emerged from isolation but still had relative independence and security. Anyway, just like Earth is not too close to and not too far from the Sun, it’s all about the right balance/distance.

    Though there is a great deal that is distinct about the West, much of the seeds of Western Civilization came from outside the West(though these seeds were still Caucasian in origin as Sumerians and many Ancient Egyptians were Caucasian). Though Greeks took non-Greek ideas and made them their own and did lots of original things on their own, would there have been Greek civilization without the earlier non-Greek ones? And would there have been the rise of Northern Europe without the influence of Greeks and Romans who culturally took far more from North Africans and Near Easterners than from Northern Europeans who were deemed ‘barbaric’. Ancient Greek texts have glowing reports about Persia and Egypt, but the Greek regarded Europeans to the north as good for nothing but as slaves. And yet, Greeks were genetically closer to Europeans than to non-white Caucasians, though it’s likely Greeks were racially closer to Persians than to Nordics. Greeks learned more from non-whites(though Caucasian) and enslaved barbarian whites. But this can be said for the few black civilizations as well. They learned more from non-blacks, especially the Arabs, while enslaving other blacks. In the 20th century, Japan learned more from whites and tried to enslave the fellow yellows.

    One thing for sure, Jewish religion that inspired Christianity and Islam had a tremendous impact, for good or ill. So, Jews had something that Europeans did not. Hindus were also great spiritualists, which is why Buddhism had a huge impact on East Asia whereas influence was far less the other way around. Do people like Moses and Marx count as whites?

    When we regard Western creativity or genius, how much of it was about uniqueness and how much of it was about individuality/opportunity? Was there something unique in the Western gene pool that made for Shakespeare and Beethoven? Or did the cultures allow space for individual expression that allowed rare genius to grow to full bloom? Take blacks and Jazz. What is often called black music developed out of blacks using white instruments and Western musical tradition. So, black music owes a lot to Western influences. Yet, there seems to be certain characteristics unique or more prominent among blacks that allowed for the emergence of new kind of musical sensibility. And Japan, which had been culturally isolated for centuries, produced some of the greatest cinematic talents when individuals there given a chance to express themselves.

    Another question is what causes cultural exhaustion? Germans used to dominate music. What happened? What happened to the Italians? Still creative and expressive but shadow of themselves. At one time, Spain seemed poised to dominate Europe but faded. France is now essentially a museum culture. Saddest of all are the Greeks. Where did all the genius go? Well, there is Vangelis the schlockmeister but a very good one. And what happened to Japanese cinematic genius? Japan also produced a number of first-rate modernist writers. Nothing happening now.

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
    , @Malla
    , @Malla
  148. @anarchyst

    Gore Vidal, that foam-at-the-mouth conservative, believed he was innocent, and put his money where his mouth was, militating on his behalf.

  149. @Steve in Greensboro

    Analogies are odious. So are comparisons (so don’t correct me, bonehead). What a bunch of bullshit.

    You quote all this pseudo-“science” crap which isn’t even not true, just crap, and then you go into aliens.

    We got your number.

  150. @MEH 0910

    Speaking of Africa, why are blacks so reluctant to return to the land of their “Roots”? I would willingly return to mine, but alas, it is already too densely crowded. Afro Americans have no such excuse. The African continent awaits and would benefit immensely from the creativity and know-how repatriated American blacks would bring to the table. They would vault to the highest rank compared to their benighted African peers. Both they and Africa in general would benefit immensely. What’s not to like? A win/win. The immense treasures of the African continent await the entrepreneurial spirit of the creative, dynamic Afro-American people. Go ahead, grab the brass ring! You have nothing to lose but your chains.

  151. Trinity says:

    I didn’t follow this horrific event too closely, it was pretty damn disturbing to me that someone would bomb a building with people just going about their jobs and a building occupied with children. This is one of 4 events that happened in my lifetime where I could actually tell you where I was and what I was doing when I heard of the news, the other three were when Elvis died, Reagan was shot and 9-11. IF the government had set out to make militia movements look bad, this event certainly would have done the trick. WHOEVER did this is a disgusting and vile cretin. However, didn’t McVeigh admit to the crime? However, after 9-11, I QUESTION EVERYTHING I hear and even most of what I see. I will look into this event more but I know very little about the real story vs. the “official narrative.”

  152. @Stan d Mute

    “No more amazing than that my ancestors abandoned their ancient religion and embraced the mythology of the Jews or that people fanatically believe this idiotic crap even today solely because they were indoctrinated from birth”

    Yes you are right but voicing those kinds of ideas will get you banished from polite society. Especially with some groups who believe in the Bible as a history book. I was about 13 when I started to question my religion. I went to a religious school (Catholic) for 8 years. I remember reading Bertrand Russel’s “Why I am not a Christian”. I’ve been reading these Taboo books in Ron Unz’s article for quite a while.

  153. Trinity says:

    Oops, there actually 5 events that happened in my lifetime that I can remember where I was and what I was doing at the time. Along with death of Elvis, Reagan being shot, the Oklahoma City bombing and 9-11 was when they declared OJ Simpson innocent of all charges. I remember the SICKENING DISPLAY of Blacks cheering outside the courtroom and in the streets, knowing damn well that they just freed a double murderer because of “Black Privilege” and a corrupt anti-White judicial system. Sorry to veer off topic.

  154. @Ron Unz

    After reading about one fifth of this article, the Biblical injunction “The sins of the fathers are visited/inflicted on the sons” came to mind. The chickens, ducks, etc., have now come home to roost.

  155. @brabantian

    Assuming the Devil´s advocate role, “How smart do you have to be to look up North and cold and wet to look for living. Being there, what does it take to stay alive, …that said, what is wrong with the decision to turn one´s heels. Assuming the memory of other parallels was lost, is the most probable reason I can think of. Help me out, the question as such was never raised to my knowledge.

  156. Moi says:

    Muslims have themselves to blame for their condition (it says so in the Qu’ran).

    • Agree: Talha
  157. Since Mr Unz found Fuerle’s book interesting, he should consider reading Anatole Klyosov’s critique of Out-of-Africa: – Biology Prof Douglas Whitman, at Illinois State University, gave a talk to AmRen (in 2014) in which he said he considers Klyosov’s hypothesis to be correct.
    Wikipedia says both Klyosov and the journal in which he publishes to be ‘pseudo-science’.

  158. Alden says:

    Thanks as always Ron. Great, enlightening article. Anyone who’s been around leftist jews as much as I have knows the writings of MacDonald, Oliver etc are the absolute truth. Glad you included the American military investigations of the1918 Jewish revolution in Russia.

  159. @Truth

    “It [gravity] doesn’t [exist]. If it is heavier than air, it rises, if it is lighter than air it falls, lacking propulsion, of course.”

    And if too many people stand on one side of an island, it may tip over, right “Truth”?

    Laughable. You are scientifically illiterate. But representative of your race. It’s no wonder I disagree with everything you’ve ever said here.

    • Thanks: GeneralRipper
    • Replies: @Truth
  160. @Anon

    Anglin is also the most censored person on the internet. How Cloudflare removed the Stormer – in a fit of rage from the CEO – should concern any rational person. But because the Stormer is so incendiary and taboo the current voices against censorship on the right either ignored this blatant act of censorship or endorsed it (as much of the right does when someone more “radical” than them gets censored). When people treated InfoWars as the first major site unfairly censored I had to laugh because the same thing had happened to Anglin and it was completely forgotten

    • Agree: John Regan
    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Bookish1
  161. fnn says:

    The “jewish usurpation of anglos” framing seems wrong to me, given strong anglo support for progressive causes…

    The article provides a long list of upper class US Anglo-Saxons who were anti-leftist on questions of race: Lothrop Stoddard, Madison Grant, E.A. Ross, Carleton Putnam, Wycliffe Draper and Carleton Coon. Anti-leftism in general was very widespread in the old WASP Establishment in the period before Pearl Harbor:


    Brewster [Sr.], described by one acquaintance as “a crustacean McKinleyite Republican,” entertained many members of Congress at his Catoctin retreat. [. . .] Brewster’s politics, however, were too extreme to be openly expressed in the mainstream GOP. His anti-Communism was so rabid and sweeping that his son remembered that “if I were considerate enough to visit him in Washington with a friend whose parents were somehow associated with the Roosevelt administration, it was natural that he should refer quite regularly to my ‘Communist friends.’” [. . .] Brewster’s political opinions and his business contacts with Germany led the FBI to start a file on him. While various information testified that he admired the Nazi system and claimed to have met personally with Hitler on visits to Germany, the FBI’s investigation revealed little aside from the fact that “BREWSTER possessed a great hatred for Jews and regarded them with suspicion at all times.”

    Brewster’s views on race and religion were perhaps most fully expressed in the works of his good friend the eugenicist Lothrop Stoddard, who believed that Anglo-Saxon civilization and America’s ancestral purity were under threat from inferior races. Stoddard was, like Brewster, a Harvard Law School graduate and sometime resident of Brookline, Massachusetts. (Brookline was, not coincidentally, the location of the nation’s first country club.) Stoddard’s works included evocative titles such as The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy and The Revolt Against Civilization: The Menace of the Under-Man.

    American society, according to Brewster and Stoddard, was a racial aristocracy under threat [. . .] Many upper-class East Coast gentlemen shared the view that snobbery and racial exclusion were necessary to preserve their elite culture, even if they stopped short of Stoddard’s conclusion that “race cleansing is the obvious starting-point for race betterment.” Although Brewster’s virulent racial opinions were welcome in polite society, most of his peers expressed themselves in more decorous terms.

    Kingman Jr. once told an interviewer that he had been “terrified” of the father who had given him “a stepmother in every port.” [. . .] The son detested his father’s fascism and ultraconservatism, and so kept some distance. [. . .]

    Kingman Sr.s paranoid racism, extreme anticommunism, and unbridled hatred of Franklin Roosevelt reflected an entire class’s inability to cope with drastic change.

  162. The Bell Curver guys Murray and Herrnstein were connecting intelligence and class structure in the USA and they were right to suggest that IQ was highly important in all sorts of things and that a certain percentage of IQ was heritable and perhaps some races had different levels of measurable intelligence than others.

    The books full title was: The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life

    I was too lazy and stupid to read the book but as a right wing populist who is a member of the new political party called WHITE CORE AMERICA I have my skepticism in regards to Mr. Murray and his seeming intention to excuse the horrible behaviour of the greedy and vile JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire.

    It seems this high IQ Scottish Blockhead Muttonhead Murray — I have Givens ancestry so I can call him a Scottish blockhead — has been writing books that leave out the part where the JEW/WASP Ruling Class knows all this general knowledge about race and intelligence and then just goes ahead and creates policies designed to further concentrate wealth and power and then the Ruling Class uses its control of the corporate propaganda apparatus to demonize and attack regular American Whites of modest means who refuse to kowtow and cringe before the new anti-White religious dispensation that has been set forth.


    Mr. Murray just implies that these phenomena of Ruling Class depredations upon regular White Core Americans is just happening and that it is a part of managerial capitalism or a sign of the times or the spirit of the age or something and Murray never writes about the evils of the nation-wrecking attack on White Core America by the 1965 Immigration Act which has brought 50 or 60 million foreigners and their spawn to the USA.

    Mr Murray seems to write as if this was just a process instead of a premeditated attack on the European Christian ancestral core of the USA.

    In short, my problem with Murray is his seeming to let the JEW/WASP Ruling Class off the hook for their malevolent and evil and treasonous use of mass legal immigration and mass illegal immigration as a demographic weapon to attack and destroy the European Christian ancestral core of the USA.

    Murray showed some guts in Vermont against those vicious and vile snots in Vermont who attacked him and I only got pushed by a geezer at a Teddy Cruz presidential primary town hall, so I give him credit for some bravery.

    Here is Obama on Murray and Herrnstein’s Bell Curve book from 1994 on NPR:

    The idea that inferior genes account for the problems of the poor in general, and blacks in particular, isn’t new, of course. Racial supremacists have been using IQ tests to support their theories since the turn of the century. … With one finger out to the political wind, Mr. Murray has apparently decided that white America is ready for a return to good old-fashioned racism so long as it’s artfully packaged and can admit for exceptions like Colin Powell.

    Tweet from 2014:

  163. Dumbo says:

    I agree. As I said before, it’s not a question of being “politically correct” or not, it’s really a question of marketing. A supposedly scientific book doesn’t look right with a cover like that and only appeal to WNs, not to “normies” or the general public (well, assuming that anyone in the general public would have interest in that in anyway. But, I think a neutral cover would suit it best, and let the reader have his own conclusions. Of course, the thesis of the book is quite “racist” in itself, I suppose (or “racialist”), but it’s not necessarily so polemic. I mean, it was proven that Europeans and Asians have some Neanderthal genes, and Africans and Australasian some Denisovan genes, so why couldn’t Africans also have Erectus genes.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  164. The error of evolution has poisoned the minds of many and so most men now consider that Adam was a knuckle-dragging idiot and man has progressed to the point where he is now.

    The truth is that Adam was the most intelligent human created and it has been downhill ever since.

    • Agree: Seraphim
    • LOL: Stan d Mute
  165. Levtraro says:
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    Or his bias, as you said (deliberate, we don’t know; systematic, is redundant, bias always is systematic). I think fraud implies fabrication or misuse of data. Maybe you have a more extended understanding of fraud.

  166. Levtraro says:
    @Stan d Mute

    You can understand it that way if you like it.

  167. Anon[843] • Disclaimer says:

    Small errors catch my eye and if I were a writer, I’d want them pointed out to me.

    1. David Reich has never been the “head” of the Broad Institute. His Wikipedia biography indicates that he has been an associate of the Broad. Eric Lander’s Wikipedia article and the Broad’s website indicate that Lander was the founding director and president of the Broad and he remains the “head” to this day.

    2. It’s not clear whether the year 1955 refers to the year that the structure of DNA was discovered or to the year that the discovery was rewarded with a Nobel Prize. In either case, the year is wrong. The structure was discovered in 1953 and the Nobel Prize was awarded in 1962.

    There’s no need for this bit of copy editing to be included in the comments.

    • Thanks: Ron Unz
  168. @obwandiyag

    “What the correlation proves is that a nation’s economic success is a central factor in determining the highness of its IQ.”


    Economies do not spontaneously arise.

    Economies are devised by the minds of men, typically smart men.

    Economic successes are the effects of economic cause — the design of the economy, i.e., the rules of permissible interaction. So for example, the rules of weights and measures, the rules of property, i.e., the right of ownership with respect to chattel, works and credit (debt).

    Those rules did not fall as manna from heaven. Smart people made up those rules. Smart men (IQ) drives design, which drives result.

    Successes by definition are EFFECTS. Effects never can be causes.

    An abstraction, i.e, an economy, can not affect something that is the result of something physical, i.e., intelligence flowing from the mind. Prolonged selection for incremental intelligence as a means of survival of populations would do so but the incremental rise of intelligence would be owing to a physical factor such as superior, nutrient-dense food.

    Intelligence comes from the mind and the mind comes from DNA. Some races have more powerful minds, i.e., more intelligent minds, than others. IQ is a way to measure it and shows the ratio of thinking age to chronological age indexed to the age average by which 100% of people can solve a grouping of puzzles.

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
    , @anonymous
  169. @Jus' Sayin'...

    It may be due to the admixture of local archaic humans with the the new incoming modern humans. Over time, only genes for certain, beneficial traits will get selected while others are selected against. Thus, Whites don’t have a random slice of 3-4% Neanderthal DNA, but instead a highly selected and purposeful 3-4%. (Same with Asians and Africans). This may be reaching, but it’s hard to otherwise reconcile this mystery of the DNA and archeological evidence not matching. I too remember the continuity of archaic to modern human skull shape from my anthropology courses as evidence for the Multiregional theory of human evolution.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
  170. Anon[353] • Disclaimer says:

    “What the correlation proves is that a nation’s economic success is a central factor in determining the highness of its IQ.”

    Ron is actually closer to the truth than you are. You are the one committing the logic fallacy. The best example I can think of to show your error is the tremendous creation of wealth and general rising of the standard of living for hundreds of millions of people due to the discovery of the division of labor that lead to the industrial revolution.

    • Replies: @acementhead
  171. B.B. says:

    Michael Anthony Woodley criticizes Richard D. Fuerle for misapplying fixation index statistics to two noncomparable DNA types in arguing for a species-like level of genetic differentiation between Eurasians and Africans.

  172. Levtraro says:
    @Steve in Greensboro

    Very interesting info about the coywolf. It seems that different but related species still with the same number of chromosomes can interbreed.

  173. @Mr John Gritt

    Anybody who uses LOLZ is beneath acknowledgment.

  174. Dutch Boy says:

    My introduction as a young man to the subject of race and IQ was “The Geography of Intellect” by Nathaniel Weyl and Stefan Possony. Their thesis that races and their qualities were created by adaptation to their physical environments struck me as plausible then as it still does.

  175. anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr John Gritt

    if you took the same image and painted it white with matted long brown hair, everyone would go “neanderthal” and the cover would be perfectly natural except, well maybe have to get rid of the glasses. No one would find it offensive.

  176. Life can be better than it is. Far better than it’s ever been before. Our children/ grandchildren can inhabit a perfect world. If only we of Euro folk . face up to perfect truth- that vile hate filled creatures wish to destroy us and create a nightmare world, and have the power to destroy.
    But we Eurofolk have the will, the inventiveness, the wisdom and resolve, to identify our oppressors and isolate them. There are Fourteen words, which stand now, as ever for our salvation. Let them be engraved on every, single Euro heart. And we will win through to a lovely, peaceful New/ new world order. And this abominable, anti white-hate state, will be just a note in history for our grandchildren to laugh at.

    • Agree: Bookish1
  177. Derer says:

    Useful revival of forgotten bibliography from Ron Unz, thanks.

    Historically the various non-white tribes’ existence in Europe is usually concluded by the last superficial sentence “vanished by assimilation”. How could European recessive white race survive the numerous invasions and temporary dominance of the Mongoloid or Negroid tribes. The role of dominant/recessive traits in evolution of various human tribes is lacking explanation.

    Despite the above, I predict that in 2395 we will have only one race…dark with slanted eyes and possibly one religion, but squabbles in quest for power will continue.

  178. Anon[353] • Disclaimer says:
    @Paul Lacques

    You have to define what you mean by “better” in order for your question to be answered honestly accurately.

    And, ask and you shall receive:

    It’s close enough.

  179. anon[139] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    is it unreasonable Ron Unz to call you a racist for the gorilla face you gave us above as a Black man…with spectacles even?

    and for that reason alone, as well as the extraordinary length of your article is there any reason at all to devote the time to read it in these circumstances… a blog on the internet?

    what on earth is there to say about the the racial issue in these conditions, that requires the space you have taken up and the pressure you put on interested parties to read at such length here?

    and I would wager good money that in that huge article, you do not once mention the real basic issue with Racism in the world, especially racism centered on Black people out of Africa…that racism is a Jewish resource, conceived of, developed, honed and established by Jewish interest in the world. and that on every occasion racism subsided it was revived by the Jewish dominated media – just like it is being revived and supported right now by the Jewish media, in which favor, the Unz Review is doing a disgustingly manful job indeed, in the Jewish interest by keeping racism alive

    I put it to you Unz, based on the evidence right here on your Unz Review, that you and your review are a disgustingly fake and racist entity, and that your purpose is not to solve racism, but to ensure that racism against Black people lives on strong, as one shield, misdirection among many, and protection for the Jewish people, as the Jews take the rest of the human species to the cleaners

    I bet in all you wrote above there you mane not mentioned anything of the sort…and for that reason also you will not post up this criticism of your and your Review

    I try to rad the Unz Review as many bylines I am interested in pop up here. but it is getting so I cant stand this place anymore for the utter racism of this net location, the awful games Unz plays with the lives of Black people and his stable of race baiting ‘riters…including himself. I am planning to stay away from this space. lets see if Unz will post this up?

  180. @anarchyst

    @Trinity – Anarchyst is right. See Brigadier General Benton Parton’s report to Congress. Look Benton Parton up first, he was in charge of everything that blew up for the Air Force.

    The only words people need to understand from the report are Inverse Square Law. It applies to every force radiating outward.

    The “bomb blast” from the truck couldn’t even knock over bicycles that were closer to the truck than the massive destruction of the building. Like everything else where “they” are involved, the OKC bombing is fabricated.

    • Thanks: Trinity
    • Replies: @Getaclue
  181. Rosie says:
    @Pop Warner

    Anglin is also the most censored person on the internet. How Cloudflare removed the Stormer – in a fit of rage from the CEO – should concern any rational person. But because the Stormer is so incendiary and taboo the current voices against censorship on the right either ignored this blatant act of censorship or endorsed it (as much of the right does when someone more “radical” than them gets censored).

    Anglin is not “more radical” than the dissident right. He just hates women. White advocates are not obliged to go to bat for someone who openly fantasizes about throwing their white daughters, sisters, nieces, and cousins in a rape dungeon come the revolution.

    If you attack almost everyone almost all the time, including all nonwhites, all whites who are female, fat, gay, Christian, or whatever else, you only have yourself to blame when you find you have no friends.

    • Replies: @Talha
  182. Trinity says:

    Lets be honest, the racial differences particularly between Black and White are OBVIOUS. To borrow words from the “Great Emancipator” himself, ” I have urged the colonization of the negroes, and I shall continue. My Emancipation Proclamation was linked with this plan. There is no room for two distinct races of white men in America, much less for two distinct races of whites and blacks.”

    President Lincoln, beloved by even leftoids, well at least until the last few decades where even Lincoln is now a “nazi,” went on to say this about the differences between the black and white race. “You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this be admitted, it affords a reason at least we should be separated.”

    Of course, “Honest Abe” lived over 150 years ago and times were very different. The only race “suffering” in 2020 and that has been suffering for the last half century and counting is the white race. The Jew and the black race do not suffer living among Whites, far from it, they prosper off the blood, sweat and tears all from Whitey. The current Black/Jew and White relationship is one of predation and parasitism and guess who is the one being preyed upon and bled white? ( no pun intended.) I’ll close with this, I heard an American Indian on a video recently telling these ignorant retards out in cyberspace, that his ancestors owned slaves, not Black slaves but other tribes of Indians enslaved each other. And then the Native American went on to talk about how racist Blacks in America were, and that Whites were trying to act Black and were always sucking up to Blacks. DAMN. This guy sounds just like a “nazi.” An American Indian “nazi.” haha. EVERYONE KNOWS THE TRUTH. BLACK, WHITE, YELLOW, BLACK, RED, JEW OR GENTILE, RUSSIAN OR GERMAN, ENGLISH OR IRISH, EVERYONE KNOWS THAT WHITES ARE BEING PLAYED FOR SUCKERS.

    • Agree: Father O'Hara
  183. @John Regan

    If you check out earlier articles in the Daily Stormer, the seem to be more serious and trying to emulate publication like The Occidental Observer, the was getting him nowhere so he decided to make more “trollish” articles which was a huge success. I have to admit it was his work that got me into racialism, us zoomers just have a shorter attention span due to years of video games and TV it seems, although the more intellectually curious did delve deeper into the issue and read literature as well. Anglin has been pivotal in popularising racialist ideas for sure, I agree with your assessment that he is pretty smart.

  184. Talha says:

    I’mma guess homeboy doesn’t do too well with the lady-folks, eh?


    • LOL: Rosie
  185. @anon

    You are arguing from a deep so ditch you could never hope to dig yourself out of.Even with the advantage of an Euro designed manufactured steel spade. Which your race couldn’t devise- despite occupying a land that In short you have absolutely nothing whatsoever- on your case but ‘And more the point you occupoid a land so rich in iron as to be red0 but yould did not ‘get it’ and instead of making \$bizillions from extravation, selling your fellow blacks to Jews and Araps. What a pathetic, uselessless lot.

    • Replies: @anon
  186. Wow! This article will surely be regarded as a magnum opus of Ron Unz, it would be interesting to know how long this took for him to piece together and write from the moment he had the idea to write such an article to the moment it was completed to a satisfactory degree. It took me the better part of an evening to read!

    Thanks you for providing a very detailed history of American racialism, this one will be bookmarked and will serve as a launching point for further research, certainly this article seems to point towards millions of words of relevant literature.

    I had never heard of Erectus Walk Amongs Us, the cover is very provocative and I appreciate you providing a link for is to read it.

    All in all, this article shows why The Unz Review is second to none as far as alt-media goes, may it continue to grow. I am surprised the usual suspects haven’t come for it yet, perhaps they think such a potent source of information is better to leave alone, lest it be popularised by the Streisand Effect?

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  187. SC Rebel says:

    I can’t believe you are equating Brad with Andrew. They are not the same in the least.

    I love how people that care about their culture and people have all of a sudden become bigots.

    Every other country apparently has the Woke stamp of approval, save for European dominant countries. We apparently aren’t allowed to care about our people or culture.

    Quite interesting indeed.

  188. @Levtraro

    I haven’t read your full essay yet but I couldn’t let that part pass without objection. Gould was Jewish, Marxist and biased but he was not a fraud.

    His book is entirely a fraud and thus he is a fraud.

    He is selling this idea that all racial studies (and thus racial differences) are false because the authors were biased. He completely ignored thousands of studies showing racial differences.

    Why didn’t he simply re-measure the skulls? Why didn’t Gould commission a new study? How hard would it be to measure African and European skulls? Answer: Because Gould knows the truth and is intentionally deceiving his readers. Keep in mind his book was “peer reviewed” and yet the section on Morton’s skulls was entirely unsupported speculation by Gould: He must have cheated cause he was a Bad White.

    The whole thing is a fraud. Leftists know that that race can’t be studied openly so they write egalitarian bedtime stories like Mismeasure of Man and Guns, Germs and Steel.

    They know they are lying and just hope that most people don’t get on the internet to fact check them. Unfortunately most Whites fall for argument by authority so it works. Mismeasure is often required in college and liberal professors are not going to point out Gould is the fraud while Morton’s measurements were accurate.

    • Thanks: HammerJack
  189. Very interesting article. My knowledge on anthropology is very limited, so I cannot judge on Fuerle and his positions and particularly not whether they are controversial or not. Yet there was a recent discovery by a Madelaine Böhm and colleagues (Tübingen, Germany, Nature Nature 575:489–493 (2019) doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1731-0) which lends support to Fuerles hypotheses. In fact, the German group argues that upright gait might have developed in Europe several million years earlier than African primate specimen suggest. Their claim is based on the very recent discovery of a great ape/ hominide in Bavaria. That would be consistent with Fuerle hypothesis, but not with an African origin.

  190. iffen says:

    So what?

    • Replies: @Talha
  191. BenKenobi says:
    @Stan d Mute

    Perhaps the future belongs to the negro/Jew hybrid and they’ll be marveling at the extinct whites with their suicidal religious beliefs.

    Not gonna happen.

  192. anon[139] • Disclaimer says:

    you are in the right place optimology..the Unz Review.

    if you think the way you write even if english is not your first language you are of the level that fits Unz’s requirements…an idiot who follows, doing himself all the damage those who exploit you wants you to do.
    good luck!

  193. Talha says:



    • Agree: iffen
  194. @Trinity

    Lincoln said:

    I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races … I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

    You say: An American Indian “nazi.” haha.

    Hey, you never know, those antisemites seem to be everywhere…

    • Thanks: Trinity
    • Replies: @nebulafox
  195. @Genrick Yagoda

    What many don’t realize is that Haiti has very few mulattoes. They killed a lot of them off in the revolution.

    In the US a lot of the “talented tenth” is mulatto. US school teachers and admins in Black areas are heavily mulatto.

    I think what we need to do is send Haiti a few thousand White-hating feminist women.

    Let’s get a new mulatto talent pool going.

    Will be a learning experience for both sides. Well mostly for the women I suppose.

  196. @anon

    There is no “racism.”

    Do you get upset by all of the morons on Twitter calling for the killing of white people?

    Do you protest the idiots all over the media that demonize innocent white people?


    But a monkey pic has your panties in a bunch?

    • Thanks: GeneralRipper
    • Replies: @anon
  197. MarkU says:

    Yes, that is a point worth making too, somehow in their minds it somehow makes sense to say that race does not exist but racism does.

    • Replies: @Malla
  198. @Charles Pewitt

    Obama : “…Mr. Murray has apparently decided that white America is ready for a return to good old-fashioned racism so long as it’s artfully packaged and can admit for exceptions like Colin Powell…”

    Would Obama be ready to admit that those “exceptions” are mostly light Mulattos like octoroon Colin Powell or at least half-white like himself?

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
  199. @Mick Jagger gathers no mosque

    “…The truth is that Adam was the most intelligent human created and it has been downhill ever since…”

    The “most intelligent humans” don’t believe that man was “created”, nor do they believe in naive Biblical myths such as the story of Adam and Eve.

  200. Let’s have a Racial Superiority Month.

    Pick a month and have all races eschew the inventions of other races.

    Then we can do one for the Sexes.

    And, for a real hoot, one for the 31 Genders recognized by NYC

    • Agree: GeneralRipper
  201. vot tak says:
    @White Ape

    Because it is insulting and plays into the way white supremacists view black people, and would draw them into reading the article and posting comments about it. Which would obviously also increase the page counts for the site.

    • Troll: GeneralRipper
  202. Realist says:

    Thanks, I’ll check out your references.

  203. Truth says:

    Are you going to take some bananas to your relatives in the zoo today? I have heard they are hungry.

  204. Truth says:

    I’m am surprised that Andrew Anglin and Brad Griffin are given a platform here. Both are well known bigots and neither of them very bright.


    That’s why they are given a platform.

  205. @Anonymous

    “Well, there is Vangelis the schlockmeister but a very good one”

    Have you heard of Nikos Skalkottas, Jani Christou and Iannis Xenakis? I am restricting myself to only purely classical composers.

  206. Truth says:

    Yeah, he is a lil Swaggy, though.

  207. Bookish1 says:
    @Stephen Paul Foster

    That would not happen in these times. College campuses used to show the NAZI documentary `Triumph of the Will’ back in the 60s but they dont now that I know of.

  208. vot tak says:

    The pupose of unz review is to give v dare zionazi-gay, and various other israeli assets, a wider view. The site includes many writers with different views, but predominantly headlines articles by white supremacists or those allied to the same zionazi-gay divide and conquer psywar.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Derer
  209. Getaclue says:
    @Genrick Yagoda

    He proved the building blew “out” not in — the major bombs were in the building and that caused the damage and deaths not the truck bomb associated with McVeigh — the Feds had to be in on it and plenty of them “called in sick” that day — leaving the Day Care children to be murdered while they were elsewhere — this is you “Federal Law Enforcement” at work — protecting you just like they did in 911….

  210. MarkU says:

    Why put words into my mouth and then insult me as if I had said them? I was agreeing with you regarding the deficiencies of the post you were complaining about but pointing out that you had spoiled your case by falling into the exact same error in reverse. Did that really require a hostile and insulting comeback?

    Clearly there is going to be a correlation between intelligence and economic success. Unravelling the causal aspects implied in that relationship is considerably more difficult than simply stating that one causes the other. Both factors obviously have an impact on the other to some degree.

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
  211. Notsofast says:
    @Genrick Yagoda

    Did they ever find out where the missing billions are? If not maybe they should ask bill clinton and geo. h.w. bush.

  212. great artice, Ron–really enjoyed it

  213. That’s right, Mr. Empire of Dust, dismiss one arguably nerdy guy’s arguments by nit picking out one little itty bitty nerdy interjection in his entire piece. You must believe that you have accomplished the equivalent of collapsing one guy’s math theorem by (correctly) spotting a single erroneous math operation in the middle of the blackboard that brings it all crashing down.

    You’ve done no such thing here.

  214. This is certainly one of the best articles of Mr. Unz.

    I would like to suggest the mention of two more seminal works on race, and those are:

    1) Carleton Stevens Coon, The Races of Europe (actually about the racial history of Europe and North Africa and the Middle East), which can be read free on line.

    2) For those who can read German: Egon Freiherr von Eickstedt, Rassenkunde und Rassengeschichte der Menschheit (“Racial science and racial history of humanity”), written by a physical anthropologist who served under NS Germany (but later on denounced Hitler). This magistral book has not been reprinted and can only be found in some libraries.

    Nothing promotes the progress of knowledge and understanding more than the braking of taboos. (Ask Galilei).

  215. Anon[584] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous Jew

    “…Over time, only genes for certain, beneficial traits will get selected while others are selected against. …”

    Orly??? and so why don’t we have a functioning copy/set of genes necessary for the production of vitamin c ??? Very few animals are deficient in this regard. It is highly beneficial to have those genes.

    The fact is that almost every animal on the planet is missing something in regard of beneficial genes.

    And it is known in some cases why this is not necessarily problematic.

  216. anon[139] • Disclaimer says:
    @Robert Dolan

    are you serious?

    wipe your glasses! there is so much of great importance in what I have said where to begin?

    what did I accuse Ron Unz of?

    you say then that Ron Unz is not promoting racism on this board against Black people?
    you say that all racism is not a Jewish asset, developed by them?

    do you understand the age of decolonization for eg! what was the process of decolonization?

    a bit of it involved independence ceremonies, but under that the Zionist took every central bank of every country given their ‘Independence’ by their colonial masters.
    and that age began by the mid 19-fifties and ended when some 20-30 years later, the heights of white racism in the world…1950-1990… that gave rise to MLk and Malcom, the NOI and a whole lot more
    take a good look at the world between that period to get a grip on modern racism. and look at what’s been happening to racism since 1990. it eased off to the extent there was a relative rise in the prosperous participation of Black people in western societies that has reflected itself most significantly in intermarriage and breeding between Black and white, but also between Blacks and all other ethnics.

    its demographic impact is obvious as the mixed kids are often in the public eye doing whatever they do in excelsis. mixed offspring are all over the place now and by the fact or their high quality profile one would think it would have had a positive impact on racism but it apparently is not having such an effect


    why is it not having such an impact?

    that most likely due to the work of such as the Unz review right here with its stable of racist writers relentlessly stoking the racism of those who remain racist like the crowd here on this thread. and if we look across the spectrum of Blogs and general established median we see the exact same thing as what’s going on here on the Unz Review.

    the question begs: who owns and controls all media including so-called ‘Alternative Blogs’? that’s right! Ron Unz, the Jewish people generally. and they are stoking racism for all they are worth with Black people at the receiving end of all of it, totally framed up as in the BLM movement which is white driven, bought and paid for and controlled movement.

    the Zionists need racism…for social division and relentless social antagonism and civil war. to have an object to blame and highlight to deflect attention from themselves, as means to exploit people, to keep people wo might challenge their social control down and out of it

    the granting of Independence back in the day was make social control far more efficient than direct colonial control which had become very expensive. costs had to be eliminated so what better then to get the colonized to pay for their own domination.

    that is what the age of independence was all about.. to eliminate imperial costs but at the same time increase to total control of the formerly colonized countries. the formerly controlled in ‘independence were made to pay all their expenses while under an even greater form of exploitation and control than their previous colonization. and the massive program of racism in the USA and the west in general was support and cover for the massive exploitation the age of independence was…also to aid in keeping niggers in check, to tamper expectations of the ordinary Black masses.

    and protect Jews as a massive form of misdirection

    and pray tell who were behind all of this if not our friendly Zionist banker friends. that is how come every third world government is a western satrap. and those regimes and peoples who fought back were invaded and blitzed by war, or color revolutionized and regime-changed, or sanctioned to death and more

    you think that this is some silly little thing I made reference to in my comment. why in the hell would Unz use that picture on the masthead of his article?

    don’t you think that Ron Unz knew is playing to the converted and wanted to reinforce their racism, to make such as you happy to see the ‘Go-rilla’ as you would prefer to see Black people, as all and ever form nigger in your mind?

    I do so think myself.

    continue looking. there is whole lot more to see if you racist myopia does not blind you to reality

    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
  217. anon[139] • Disclaimer says:
    @vot tak

    yeah well exactly!

  218. @anon

    That is not a “gorilla face”, it is a drawing, copied from a photo of a well known reconstruction of a Homo Erectus face. Anyone, including yourself and others like you here that get angry that the picture is racist, readily identify it as a black man, a SubShararan African. Anyone who looks at the picture instantly sees the resemblence to a black, and it is not just the skin tone, it is the facial structure, the jaws, the tiny ears. This is visual confirmation of the latest studies of the genetics of SubSaharan Africans which show a 19% introgression of at least two unknown archaic non-human hominins. The only possible candidate for the two archaic non-humans is Homo Erectus, confirmed by the visual resemblence of Afros to Homo Erectus. Homo Erectus was a crude small brained hominin that Homo Sapiens evolved out of and left behind, it should be extinct, but some humans in Africa decided to mate with two different sub-species of Homo Erectus and the result is the SubSharan African. You are going to have to face it black guy, you are devolved, not by devolution, but by a ghetto sex party with non-humans, it probably looked like a typical rapcrap video.

    • Agree: Stan d Mute, American Citizen 2.0
    • Disagree: Biff
    • Thanks: ThreeCranes
    • LOL: Sulu
  219. @Anonymous Jew

    You need to come up with an objective definition of subspecies

    You are changing the terms of the discussion. This was not whether Jews are a subspecies but whether Jews are a race. To make explicit my implicit definition of race, I define it as a genetically distinguishable clade. Actually, this would also serve as a reasonable definition of subspecies.

    DNA testing demonstrates that Asshkenaz, Sephardic, and Oriental Jews Jews are all genetically distinguishable clades. This is not all that surprising in human subpopulations that have practiced extreme endogamy for some 2,500 years, i.e. clades with a long history. Your talk of fixation indices and physical differences just obscures the issue.

    Modern science has proven Ashley Montagu et al. wrong. Jews are genetically distinguishable from the populations within which they are found.

  220. E_Perez says:

    “His coverage probably constitutes one of the most objective and comprehensive American accounts of the mundane domestic nature of National Socialist Germany

    As even its title implies, Stoddards “Darkness” is far from being objective. It only lacks the hysteric aggressiveness of the Jewish dominated Roosevelt government and US media.

    The title may even be considered cynical, because it refers to (and sometimes mocks) the blackout in Berlin, where the Germans had to turn out night-lighting, fearing British civil bombings. It deliberately alludes to the “dark” dictatorship which the bright democracies are facing.

    When the brave Stoddard goes into the darkness, Dante is not far: ‘Abandon hope all ye who enter here’ – at least for Joe sixpack in 1939.

    No, Stoddard is even handed only when you have been brainwashed by “eighty years of increasingly unrealistic Hollywood propaganda.”

  221. Glaivester says: • Website

    Does anyone else look at that picture and thing of President Olongo Featherstone-Haugh from The Probability Broach?

  222. @Anonymous Jew

    Your explanation is one possibility. But I’m not entirely convinced by it.

    Your explanation posits the transmission of characteristics through several hundred thousand years of evolution and across several different species of genus Homo, in regions whose climate, topology and ecology underwent dramatic changes over the course of this time. It seems a stretch to me that under these circumstances such cross-species transmissions and evolution could interact in a way that preserved fundamental differences in skull morphology.

  223. @anon

    I thought it was Wesley Snipes!

    • LOL: Trinity
    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  224. Malla says:

    Japan learned more from whites and tried to enslave the fellow yellows.

    Not true. Japan wanted the other East Asians to modernize and face the West with it. This is obvious by the “Datsu-A Ron” editorial of the “時事新報” newspaper published in March 16, 1885 by Fukuzawa Yukichi who also founded Keio University for Korean and Chinese students. Later on Japan faced a threat from Communism.

  225. @anon

    My point is that you have selective outrage.

    Blacks rape 20,000 white women during a slow year. 90% of inter-racial violence is black on white.
    But you don’t care about that because all you can blab about is racism racism racism.

    The term “racist” has been played out. The sting is gone. Nobody CARES if they are called a racist. It’s meaningless.

    Forgive me if I’m skeptical of someone who claims their words are of “great importance.” (That seems like a bad case of ego inflation.)

    Yes, I do agree that the jews use race to divide and conquer. It’s obvious. The jewish media incites black on white hatred and violence.

    The NAACP was founded by jews.

    MLK had jewish handlers.

    There is no white “racism” to speak of. Whites have been deracinated, atomized, demoralized, and ruined all over the western world.

    And I blame the jews for it. I guess we can agree on that.

    • Agree: GeneralRipper
    • Replies: @anon
  226. nebulafox says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Swatstikas are commonly found around temples throughout East and Southeast Asia. It was a religious symbol long before the Nazis adopted it. I haven’t been to India, but I’ve heard that it is common there, too.

    • Replies: @Anon
  227. Malla says:

    though these seeds were still Caucasian in origin as Sumerians and many Ancient Egyptians were Caucasian

    Yes, more than just Caucasian. The Sumerians were known to portray themselves with blue eyes.

    It is also likely (from the above video) that the Sumerians had come from Central Asia to Iraq. It may seem like there have been Aryan migrations/invasions even before the “official” Aryan invasions of South Asia and the Middle East. The official Aryan invasions (as now proven by science) was just one of a many series of invasions/ migrations from Central Asia into the Middle East and South Asia, with the ancestors of the Sumerians migrating/ invading before them and followed by peoples like the Scythians after them.

    Also this is interesting, there were blue eyed people in the ancient Levant too.
    What were Blue Eyed People doing in Northern Israel 6,500 years ago?

    A large-scale genetic study of the ancient population of Peqi’in revealed that the Chalcolithic culture in the region developed by waves of migration from Anatolia and the Zagros mountains about 6500 years ago. This study was carried out by an international team of researchers led by Dr. Hila May and Prof. Israel Hershkovitz from the Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Dr. Dina Shalem from the Institute for Galilean Archaeology Kinneret College and the Israel Antiquities Authority, and Éadaoin Harney and Prof. David Reich of Harvard University.


    It shows that the people of Peqi’in have ancestry related to that of earlier ancient groups from Anatolia and Iran – and not seen in earlier peoples from the Levant. This suggests that a migration into the region, bringing people who our genetic data showed had a high rate of blue eyes that were previously rare in the region, may have triggered the development of the Chalcolithic culture.

    DNA Study Finds Early Inhabitants of Israel Were Blue-Eyed and Fair-Skinned

    • Replies: @anon
  228. @Dumbo

    I agree. As I said before, it’s not a question of being “politically correct” or not, it’s really a question of marketing.

    That is exactly what I thought.

    The article has a lot of nuanced opinion but most people will see the cover and assume that the author is arguing that Blacks are apes.

    The reasoning behind the selection of the image is irrelevant.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  229. American Citizen 2.0 says:

    I like the way EA Ross used the word “Sport” to describe Europeans. The only other place I have ever seen the word used that way is the title of the novel Sport Of Nature.

    “Sport” used in that way means “mutation” so far as I know. Or alternatively it means something like how we would use the word “shoot” in “bamboo shoot”.

    So yes, we are universally loathed by literally every other group of people on earth. We also are friendly, altruistic, and charitable…. Unlike any other group of people I have ever met in my entire life, where people will victimize and harm you for personal gain even when the gain is tiny.

    That “altruism” instinct, which leads to such weird aberrations as us having “animal rights” ideas and animal shelters for homeless pets when every other culture on earth seems to hate dogs (for example), isn’t something I have seen in other groups ever in my life. People will rip you off, kidnap you, kill you, steal your stuff, etc.

    Why we turned out that way really is a kind of “Sport” of Nature like EA Ross says. Unfortunately, we are the only group of people on Earth whose genocide has been literally screamed from every mainstream media source there is for years now and oddly enough… not one single non-white person I have ever heard speak about politics has expressed even the slightest bit of hesitation in wishing for the genocide of white people. But then again we are the people who made both genocide and slavery illegal. So there’s that.

    Seems like we are basically doomed. There are billions and billions of people aligned against us, waiting to just move into our houses once we are gone. I don’t know what anyone can do to avert this catastrophe. No one seems to even want to avert it anymore.

    It’s lonely at the top.

    • Agree: E_Perez
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Erebus
  230. @AaronB

    It’s a mistake to look at this site as an intellectually serious site – that it is manifestly not.

    It is a place for venting the darkest corners of the human psyche. And that is a healthy and positive thing. People here can express the worst, most irrational

    This is not an intellectually serious site?

    Do you know how long it takes to break down the “race doesn’t exist” outlook of even someone with a PhD in some “racial/victim studies”? They can’t even last 5 minutes here. What is modern Academia based on if they can’t stand 5 minutes in a forum with us “irrational” types?

    Yes the mainstream has deemed the discussion of race on the internet to be “dark and irrational” but then the modernist or egalitarian with a degree in the subject stumbles and bumbles over simple questions. Their only resort is to scream DATS RAYCISS and run away.

    Have you taken a look at America recently? The status quo simply isn’t working and part of that status quo is to lie about race and suppress anyone that thinks critically about what we are told.

    You have been fully indoctrinated if you believe this is the dark side. Over a trillion has been spent on egalitarian plans and liberals in California have actually resorted to keeping SAT scores from the public. Where did all that money go? Was it not based on rational egalitarian plans to equalize everyone? This is total insanity and you want the great lie to keep going because it feels better.

  231. Ron Unz says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    This article will surely be regarded as a magnum opus of Ron Unz, it would be interesting to know how long this took for him to piece together and write from the moment he had the idea to write such an article to the moment it was completed to a satisfactory degree.

    Thanks for the very kind words. It certainly was one of my longest projects, though I wasn’t entirely sure where I was going until I had gotten well into it.

    I’d say it took me at least six or seven weeks, including the background reading, which probably totaled around two million words. But many of the books I referenced I’d read some time ago and didn’t bother rereading, or the whole thing might have taken another month or more.

  232. anon[139] • Disclaimer says:
    @Robert Dolan

    “My point is that you have selective outrage.

    Blacks rape 20,000 white women during a slow year. 90% of inter-racial violence is black on white.
    But you don’t care about that because all you can blab about is racism racism racism.” Quoted from Roger Dolan

    you cant be serious! count the violent depredations on black people including rape, both heterosexual and homosexual and juvenile, since Columbus. just stick to america then since 1804. what do you see but plain absolute rape of Black people.

    then really take a good look at America over the time to currently and you would see a society built for what is taking place there as we speak….utter lawlessness, murder and rape etc. every evil under the sun and moon run rampant, 24/7

    and it appears that the capitalists-the Jews, have decided that now is the time to pre-empt any possibility of total, violent revolutionary change that usurps their power and are carrying out a revolution of their very own, precipitated by the Covid skamdemic.

    the Jews are bent on perpetuating their social power forever, so to prevent THE final capitalist revolution. as capitalism fails unalterably the capitalists must target white people as well, globally. the current chaos, or Jewish attack on society… includes full attack on white people, making for example the white people of the Antipodes eat themselves, along with the likes of the people of New York State and city of for eg.

    even Britain under Boris is sliding into the same form of social cannibalism. who would have thought…

    I am not concerned about rapes of white women. how many minority women got raped relatively then, during the same period by whites: what about them?

    I am not concerned about any group at all as such. relative to America, my concern is positive social change internally, that cleans up America, brings about an America that is no longer hegemonic and a threat to itself and to the world. such development should take care of all and every American woe we wallow in at the moment, including those listed here and above

    and please note: when I say ‘lots more important stuff in here’ I do not mean my words but the body of information relative to the subject which is indeed vast and important…that I alluded to

    • Troll: Stan d Mute
  233. @Bombercommand

    They made their bed, let them sleep in it.

    Good post, right down the line. Cleave to the truth.

  234. Anonymous[299] • Disclaimer says:
    @American Citizen 2.0

    I like the way EA Ross used the word “Sport” to describe Europeans.

    I think you misunderstood Ross’s anecdote.

    Ross doesn’t use the word himself. He’s conveying what one American “sinologue of varied experience as missionary, university president and legation adviser” in China told him. Ross is “left…gasping” by this man’s statement that “[Americans] who have spent twenty-five years or more out here come to feel that the yellow race is the normal human type, while the white race is a ‘sport.’” In other words, Ross is astonished that white Americans could ever come to find yellows as being normal and not strange.

    • Replies: @American Citizen 2.0
  235. Paul C. says:

    Correct. Unfortunately our gov’t has been subverted. They’re involved in ALL the “mass casualty” events. People die in some and in many they do not. Boston and Sandy Hook are examples of false flags where no one died. Most fall into this category. Orlando, Fort Hood, San Bernardino, Charleston, Vegas, one in Oregon, Navy Yard in DC, San Antonio church, Pittsburg Synagogue. ALL of them. They are “drills” that go live, run by FEMA. This is how government manufactures consent of the sleeping.

    In coordination the gov’t and media will scream we have a gun problem and need gun control. One false flag disarmed Australia. They are trying to disarm America, our last line of protection. Once disarmed, we’re as good as Russia when the same Bolsheviks genocided millions.

    This discussion over White Nationalism is a false one. WN is a racist term as far as I’m concerned. All people of all colors are Nationalists, meaning they love and care for their country. Another term for this is patriot. But the globalists who own all the Central Banks and thus have de-facto control of the governments, they can’t allow a nationalist vs. globalist conversation because they’d lose. Every thinking man is a nationalist. But the globalists have no loyalty to any country. Their loyalty is to their own people and their religion is one that clearly states their mission is to not only rule the world but to enslave the goyim.

    They seek to dispossess whites in their own countries and gaslighting is a means to that end

    Think about it, there’s not one “free” nation in the world whose central bank (((they))) don’t own. Meaning, the governments and the populations of the world have to pay interest to these criminal bankers, while the bankers purchase all the assets of each country including controlling interest in their corporations. This is where we’re at. And those who hold public office in the corporation called the United States, impersonating a true government of the people, they’re too bought and sold to do the right thing and work to preserve the USA country and people.

    Big picture, we’re in a spiritual war. The governments, the institutions of health, science, religion, law, finance, education and more, are all corrupt to the core and do not abode in the truth. That’s not to say there aren’t good people here and around the world fighting for truth. But the train is moving fast down the track and if we collectively don’t wake up enough people to derail the train into a ball of fire, we’re going to be on the receiving end of a true mass casualty.

    Hopefully many on this site now understand what COVID (Certificate Of Vaccination ID) is. It’s another step towards totalitarianism and further enslavement. They’re not even hiding it. No vaccine, no travel.

    Last point, the term White Supremacist, what does it mean? Those who use the term should define it and then give examples of who these so called people are and why. No one will do this because they can’t. White Supremacy is projection by the real supremacists.

    “By way of deception, thou shall make war”.

    • Agree: Robert Dolan
  236. anon[139] • Disclaimer says:

    I see nothing in this I should take seriously. it makes no historical sense relative to what I do take seriously and have tried to verify as I go

    • Replies: @Malla
  237. @anon

    There is virtually no white on black rape.

    Look it up. We’re talking maybe a handful every year…..literally as in FIVE…’s statistically insignificant. On the graph it would read ZERO.

    Compared to TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND BLACK ON WHITE RAPES EVERY YEAR. One year it was something like 38,000.

    TBH, I don’t think you really have any idea about what is going on in terms of race and crime. There is an epidemic of black on white crime and it’s been going on for a long time and the Jmedia totally covers it up. The idea that whites (or cops) are targeting blacks is absolute bullshit.

    The rest of it I agree with. The current hysteria is basically the jewish revolutionary spirit pouring out onto the society at large. I’m with you on that.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Bernie
  238. lavoisier says: • Website

    Truth needs no suppression of evidence or of discussion in order to survive. Any time I see censorship in any area of debate I regard it as a good indicator of who is really on the side of truth and who isn’t.

    Pretty much axiomatic today.

    • Agree: res
  239. Ron Unz says:
    @White Ape

    Hi Ron, can you please explain why you used the photograph that you have used for this article?

    You and several other commenters have focused on the top image, arguing that it’s inappropriate. I’m not sure I agree.

    First, as many have already noted, it’s from the cover of the Erectus book, which is the closing section of my article and also one of the longest. And various commenters more knowledgeable than myself about the source have already made other pretty valid points.

    But let’s say for the sake of argument that it’s a “racist” image. Well, the title of this long article is “White Racialism in America, Then and Now.” So if the entire article is about the history of American “white racism” wouldn’t a “racist” image be a pretty natural illustration?…

    • Replies: @JackOH
    , @res
  240. For example, Montagu’s early attempts to expunge the scientific notion of race came under withering criticism by leading scholars in the field, and he defended himself by denouncing his anthropological adversaries as “racists” who opposed him because of his Jewish heritage. In an on-the-record interview decades later, he explained those past conflicts by declaring that “all non-Jews are anti-Semitic,” a statement so remarkable that Shipman used it as the title of one of her chapters.

    You are mistaken about Montagu – his early work never denied the existence of human races. I could provide several quotes, but search yourself on Google Books. The history of race denial does not predate Frank Livingstone and C. Loring Brace (1960s). Montagu later adopted the position of Livingstone/Brace (and he co-authored an anthropology book with Brace in the 1970s), but his earlier work never denied human races..

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  241. What are the scholastic grades? This takes both brains plus work ethic. I see what has happened in St Louis and Baltimore and other urban centers and I believe that how a person maintains his property is a good indicator of values —-renters likewise—keep up appearances —show off the community???

  242. Well, its kinda hard to respond to short books like this in a comment. So sorry if my comment seems as scatterbrained as the book you just wrote, I tried typing it as I read

    Sometimes I get the feeling that Mr Unz as well as most rich folk have never been around very many black people, maybe thats the reason for all the fear mongering. At least thats the vibe these IQ obsessed elites give off. Those they have been around have likely been rich blacks they don’t see as a threat. Not sure if Mr. Unz actually buys into this riff raff or not. I guess if I was one of these elites I would fear the people I’ve been fucking over for centuries as well. Those will probably be the first ones coming for your scalp. Anyone that really believes black people are the reason for Americas decline, or why more white people are getting dumber must live an incredibly sheltered and privileged life. I guess their fear is justified.

    Being that I grew up around poor blacks as well as poor whites I can tell you that our problems come from the same source. Coincidentally the brown hispanics down South share the same enemy as we poor white and black folk.

    I don’t doubt that many blacks aren’t as good at some things as whites. I’ve lived in both rural Georgia, and in Atlanta for around 7 years. Theres definitely a difference in some black people in the city compared to in the country. This goes for whites as well. City white people are way bigger assholes than country folk. Many black people in the country aren’t much different than whites, depending on their upbringing, generally blacks raised by good parents are not bad to be around. Same with whites, white kids raised in alcoholic or drug abusing households generally aren’t good folks to be around. There are exceptions of course. But I don’t think you can just explain away the rotting of our country on black people.

    I’m not one to argue that everyone is the same. They’re not. But I think our society has a huge influence over how people turn out. I also agree that people of the same race go better together, and probably generally do better together. But lets not discount the fact that our media as well as “leaders” and “deep state” do everything they can to keep the racial shit pot stirred.

    I think people underestimate what growing up in poverty does to people. Its basically a lifetime of torture. Always worrying about unexpected bills that you can’t afford. Not having the money for school or higher education, not having enough money for food. Constant worry about eviction, or repossessions and loss. The uncertainty that at any moment you could get hurt and not have healthcare or can’t afford the payment. Forget something that snowballs and ends up costing you even more. The feeling of having no future to plan for. Feeling trapped and only being able to pay half the rent in bad neighborhoods because thats all that’s you can afford Also the fear of losing your job every time the economy crashes.

    Just as torture makes people say and do things they normally wouldn’t do to make the pain stop that has lasting negative effects, the constant insecurity and anxiety of poverty forces people into making decisions to get by from day to day that have harmful effects in the long term.

    This affects working class and poor people of all races. Our “economic system” is to blame. Rich people/parasites sucking up all the wealth are to blame.

    I also think its peak retard to think that our capitalist overlords would ever allow whites and black to separate. You really think they’re gonna give up one of their most effective tools of control over us? Haha. Whipping out the old race war narrative and groups to turn blacks against whites and vice versa is something they will NEVER give up. So forget about it whitey, ain’t happening. Nevermind the cheap labor aspect of it.

    Looks ike Stalin was right to throw who he did in the gulag. I don’t see any BLM or Antifas raising hell over there. Don’t see any NAMBLA groups operating in the open, Pedos being idolized, Pedo Hollywood movies, don’t see any gay parades, Russia is looking good as hell compared to the nightmare unfolding here in the glorious USA at the moment. Stalin couldn’t have been all that bad. Hahaha.

    Rich white folk created this hell. Not blacks, Latinos or ordinary whites. Don’t try to blame them or the commie boogeyman. You can’t go around looting the world, bombing the world, and enslaving the world then get mad when the blowback follows you back home. Deal with it.

    Now all the rich white libtards want to shift all the blame onto ordinary working class white folk. They want to direct all the anger at us. This is the fault of capitalism, imperialism and colonialism. Ordinary white people are victims of it as well, and we will be more on the receiving end of it now.

    Its for these reasons that I don’t take the IQ obsessed, Alt-right/WN, or radical libtards very seriously. We got much bigger problems, and they ain’t caused by some poor black folk or ordinary white people. One of these WN’s come to my small hometown here in Georgia a couple of years ago and was pretty much ran out of town, no one wanted them here. Some D-bag from Detroit. I’m willing to listen to anyone, but I can’t remember the guy saying much of anything important. It wasn’t that long ago, when I was in my teens that the Klan was passing out flyers on the square, its a dead end. Its pushed by the elites to serve their agenda of divide and rule.

    Start on Wall St, Congress, The Pentagon if you want to fix the country. I think Jeff Bezos, Steve Schwarzman, George Soros, Sheldon Adelson etc etc are much bigger threats to us than some black guy with absolutely no power. The capitalist system and its inherit instability, poverty, greed, and corruption is the root of our problem. Its also driving people crazy IMO.

    • Agree: utu, vot tak
  243. Neoconned says:
    @Ron Unz

    Mr. Unz: can you do a follow up article about speculation on the origin of the Coronavirus?

    The initial theory was some spook black team let it loose at the military Olympics event on Wuhan….is there any follow up on this?

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  244. @anon

    “how many minority women got raped relatively then, during the same period by whites: what about them?” The answer is about one hundred(100). In one year in The United States, black males rape 20,000 White women and White men rape 100 black women. Quite a disparity, considering there are more than 4 White men for each black male.

  245. Malla says:

    Which part? The possible migration of the ancestors of Sumerians from Central Asia like the Aryans after them? That is speculative but many facts (check the video) do support this possibility. But it remains speculative for the moment.

  246. Ghali says:

    My reply to you all is that you are completely illiterate racists. UNZ does no post (Giraldi, P.G. Robert. etc. do not write for UNZ, they get posted on UNZ from other websites). UNZ is spreading its own ideology with some flavour to manipulate those who can’t think, you.

    If you so concerned about the Jews taking over your countries, why don’t you try to attacking Jews in the same ways you are attacking Muslims and coloured migrants. You are idiots.

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @GoMore
  247. Ron Unz says:
    @Oliver D. Smith

    You are mistaken about Montagu – his early work never denied the existence of human races.

    Well, it’s partly a matter of definition. Note this clarifying sentence of mine a couple of paragraphs earlier:

    Although the actual fine print of [Montagu’s] biological claims was generally more nuanced, his headline writings successfully promoted the widespread notion that race was a dangerous pseudo-scientific illusion.

    Consider the title of Montagu’s famous 1942 book Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race, which was a massive best-seller for decades, and that the 1951 UNESCO statement he authored explicitly advocated dropping the term “race.” Shipman’s 1994 book seems to provide a very thorough discussion of all these issues, and even Montagu’s Wikipedia page contains the following sentence:

    He was particularly opposed to the work of Carleton S. Coon, and the term “race”.

    So you need to distinguish between Montagu’s “headlines” and his “fine print”, and recognize that the former had vastly more influence with the general public. It’s an old trick of propagandists and con-men, and Montagu clearly fell into that category.

    Consider the analogous situation leading up to the Iraq War. Virtually no one in the American government or media ever explicitly claimed that Saddam had been behind the 9/11 attacks, but their headlines and speeches so strongly implied the idea that 70% of the American public soon believed Saddam had been proven guilty.

    • Agree: Stan d Mute
    • Replies: @Oliver D. Smith
    , @Rurik
  248. Malla says:

    Just like how IQ itself does not exist or IQ differences do not exist in between races but magically exists in between “enlightened” (LOL) libtards and conservative “rednecks”.

  249. @Ron Unz

    First, thanks for an incredibly impressive albeit long piece. I am a long-time lurker and this is the first comment I have made in direct response to your work, which always tends to be detailed and interesting. I will later read the links and some of the cited works. It is very good you have preserved in PDF form volumes that will have a difficult time surviving the ongoing purges or that could just lapse due to unrelated disinterest. Your discussion of and reference to IN SEARCH OF HUMAN NATURE gives me confidence the unfamiliar works will be worth the effort.

    Intentionally or not, the meta analysis is that anthropology, eugenics and psychology are the most ruthlessly suppressed and politically policed areas of science although recent events indicate censorship will be extended to all disciplines. The reasons seem manifold but the decline of Anglo-Saxon supremacy and ascent of Jewish and Marxist influences, in many cases one and the same obviously, appear the primary motivation behind the suppression.

    A few unrelated thoughts. We really are all the poorer due to the thought policing. Even charlatans such as Rockwell (sorry, this is one subject where I disagree with your analysis) deserve the hearing you gave him. Anthropology has recovered to some degree, but it appears Boas’ propaganda is set to get another lift. Race and IQ will receive extensive scholarly treatment outside the United States, possibly in China or Japan.

    Again, thanks.

    • Agree: American Citizen 2.0
    • Replies: @boomerdoomer
  250. @Bombercommand

    That is not a “gorilla face”, it is a drawing, copied from a photo of a well known reconstruction of a Homo Erectus face.

    The glasses and suit really give it that historically accurate look.

    Anyone, including yourself and others like you here that get angry that the picture is racist

    You’re not even reading the criticisms.

    It’s a marketing problem.

    This is why corporations don’t let engineers do the marketing.

    • Replies: @Bombercommand
  251. anon[139] • Disclaimer says:
    @Robert Dolan

    there is little in media I take seriously until proven, especially the rape figures thrown around recently relative to Black on white crime.

    who compiled those rape figures…I have not see who did them? they must be verified, proven, established as fact…all years they have been compiled. I had never heard of such compilations previously.

    it is really unfortunate on the victims…any rape at all even one. but even if true especially in such egregious numbers, must mean something truly horrific about American society…and they cannot be taken in isolation

    as I said American violent depredation on its Black population over a very long period of time is a horrific fact far, far worse than 20 thousand rapes a year…if that can be imagined. and I cannot understand why you would dismiss white police on Black people summarily. that’s incredible! ridiculous in the face of all the evidence.

    I am a grown man and since I was a kid I have known white police violence against Black people…massive violence up to and including summary execution of Black people by the police, for which no penalties were ever paid by the policemen involved: Even the odd times the police who harmed Black people were themselves Black.

    American white media would never ever hide Black on white crime especially rape of white women by Black men. in the current state of American in which the elites appear to want civil war, are seemingly working very hard to produce all consuming internal American violence and social breakdown, why would they not throw Rape petrol on the flames rather than hide it? that makes no sense at all such a claim.

    I argue that were such rapes the truth such as Ron Unz would be besides himself in effort to expose it to the public at large. but to whatever extent it may be true it is part of horrific American world hegemon, ,ass murder, racist enslaver of the planet, seeking now to imprison the world under Covid vaccination: no vaccination no travel.

    we the people ought to be about making sure they cannot get away with this period. indeed we ought to be making sure that these are the last days of Jewish domination of the west…Rothschild and company to make good on the the choice they threaten: blow up the planet or submit. we have no choice. it is now or never, Ron Unz notwithstanding

    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
    , @Anon
    , @res
    , @Anon1488
  252. Anon[190] • Disclaimer says:

    Temples is SE Asia? Try a large swastika on every third building in some neighborhoods in first world Asia. Buddhism is old, prevalent, and independent of Western culture there.

    The 20th century abundance and its globalism has given a lot of Westerners a false sense of foreign cultural awareness, even as far as Europe. Get to the other side of the World and the disconnect is ten miles wide.

    A large portion of Asians will have little idea of the 20th century western cultural implications of the swastika.

    They’re barely aware of much of modern western culture let alone of a 70 year old Jewish taboo that is essentially an attempt to suppress one of the oldest worldwide religious symbols.

  253. RobF says:

    Mr Unz, I would like to thank you. I believe this is one of the most importants posts you have ever made on your own site. It is the most revelatory of all. And as they say, “The truth that is self-evident and that which is clear for everyone to see, is not the truth. It is dribble. The truth that is through hard labor, reflection, analysis, discerned, now it is worthy.” It took me a while, but now I understand the important work you do. Svalbard Seed Museum, but for humanity. Unfortunately, all humans are not seeds – let alone the readers of your site – all of whom have among the highest IQs of the world – who seek the truth, but through their comments show, they do not understand. (As your partners have challenged you, find those who are worthy, “we give you unlimited resources and unlimited support. No one will touch you and your site”). And, Mr. Unz, I’d like to stand up and clap my hands. Your posts are exemplary in truth, but only fools see what fools want to see. I stand here and say now I know why all things have occurred the way they have occurred – and it is in the book, Homo Erectus walks amongst us. I haven’t finished reading it, but when the truth hit me, then EVERYTHING BECAME CLEAR TO ME. And being the honest, unassuming, modest man you are (…that I am not. I am afraid, and I have been sanctioned much in my life for not being more like YOU!), you have the last word: QUOTE Those so interested may now read the work and decide for themselves how severely my own ignorance of anthropology has impaired my evaluation of his book. UNQUOTE. Anyone with the IQ he has as a readers of this site, who is willing to open his heart and read this book, will also discover the TRUTH hidden within your words. Thank you, Mr. Unz. Svalbard Seed Museum for Humanity. You are the custodian, and may G_d bless all those, including you, who thought about it & made it happen…..

  254. @Franklin Ryckaert

    Exactly! The very notion / meaning of evolution is change & diversification over time from that which came before — not the impossible, monotonous reproduction of identical things.

  255. @Achmed E. Newman

    Your facts and reasoning are flawless. If a constitutional amendment were passed saying that raccoons are U.S. citizens with full rights, so they would be. Should non-Homo sapiens be citizens? That’s a whole other question.

  256. @anon

    Yes, the jewish media covers up black on white crime. MASSIVELY.

    I can’t tell if you’re really that clueless or you’re pretending. In any case I’ve grown bored with your nonsense.

    Cops do NOT target blacks for persecution. The problem is that blacks do INSANE amounts of crime.

    • Agree: Stan d Mute
    • Replies: @Frank Stone
  257. @redmudhooch

    The capitalist system and its inherit instability, poverty, greed, and corruption is the root of our problem. Its also driving people crazy IMO.

    I’m fine with that point of view. But here is what you are missing: The universities and the media are corrupt and do not offer a balance against entrenched capitalist power.

    The universities are supposed to be where the people can formulate plans to deal with problems like inequality. However the universities are completely in servitude to liberalism where White people are the problem and race doesn’t exist.

    The liberal establishment has essentially decided that race doesn’t exist and to fix the world we need to stop White people. Well that was already tried in countries like Haiti and Zimbabwe and they didn’t become utopias.

    What happens is that liberalism acts as a support system for the capitalist system by suppressing people that are capable of changing the system. They have this central belief that White men are the problem and we just need to get rid of Whites to fix everything. I saw this first hand in the University system. People like yourself are despised. They value group-thinkers that come in and just repeat buzz terms like “systemic racism” and without any serious analysis. Liberals at the highest levels also know that race does in fact exist but believe in lying which makes it all the more frustrating.

    So if you enter political circles with this attitude that you want to fix capitalism you will be hated for not taking the position that Whites are to blame. You won’t go anywhere. The mainstream media isn’t going to give you a voice.

  258. Malla says:

    The first negroid skull was found (11,000 yrs ago) far later than a Caucasian/Cro magnon back migration into Africa (about 30,000 yrs ago). Remember Cro-magnons in physique were identical to today’s Europeans. Maybe the Negroid race are Caucasoid/Cro-Magnon-Homo Erectus hybrids. There were many parallel races and species of humanoids in Africa (Ishango Skull) living parallel existence in Africa, Africa is a huge place. Most of them have gone extinct.
    That is why I was reading somewhere about Ham, son of Noah having mated with a pre-Adamic race woman on the boat during the floods and one of his son was Cush who in biblical terms represents the Negroid race. Most think Cush are the Ethiopian-Horner African types who are more Caucasoid than the “Bantu” blacks down south but in hebrew the N-word is “Kushi/Cushi”.

    ghetto sex party with non-humans, it probably looked like a typical rapcrap video.

    LOL Maybe this is how they pay homage via racial memory to those momentous events in pre-history when their Homo Sapien ancestors mass mated with Homo Erectus bitches.
    Cold climate males, Caucasoid and Mongoloid males (unlike Jew media propaganda) were quite a player lot back in those days. Mated with all kinds of hominids and primitive tropical darker races to form new races. In India, Caucasoids mated with native Ogne Aboriginal hunter gatherer females to make the huge South Asian race who are 1.5 billion strong today. In South East Asia, waves of Mongoloids from the North overwhelmed the earliest blacks in South East Asia, check out the Aeta tribals in Thailand and Orang Asli jungle tribals in Malaysia with Australoid black tribals down south in Papua New Guinea, Micronesia and Australia. Malay term “Orang Asli” (Orang->man, Alsi->Original, Aboriginal) like the Indian term “Adivasi” (translated to jungle tribal, Adi->original/Primordial/Aboriginal, vasi->to live) literally translates to Aboriginal. So Mongoloids migrating south to South East Asia, Caucasoids migrating south to the Indian Subcontinent and Caucasoids migrating south to Australia much much later would call the blacks as “Aboriginals” in their own languages.

  259. American Citizen 2.0 says:

    I think what he (Ross) is reporting is that Asians are basically normal people once you get to know them, which I think we all agree and experience in day to day interactions at work and in life in general, whereas the assessment of people who have a lot of experience with Asians would say that we are different in peculiar ways. That’s why he favorably reports/quotes a colleague calling us a “sport”. I feel the same way about Hispanics as I do about Asians. They work and generally just live normal lives. You are almost never going to find yourself sitting around smoking marijuana with a bunch of Asians and then up and decide to mob Central Park and rape and rob everyone. Yet, “wilding” and “flash robs” are extremely common in the major American city I live in (which is dominated by black people). Before the current crises of looting and mass shootings, we used to have crowds of black people descending on the downtown area to shoplift en masse as a group. That would happen several times a month in the warmer months. Hundreds of people enter a store and just grab everything they can. The police don’t even bother trying to stop it in most cases.

    In what sense are Asians “strange”? When you talk to them they generally have very normal ideas and thoughts in the sense that they have a religion, and literature, and cities with multi-story buildings and farm animals and jobs etc. Black people, on the other hand, have such a bizarre palimpsest of half-baked thoughts that it’s hard to know what to say.

    I don’t think the term “yellow” ever stuck by the way. Personally, I never referred to Asians as “yellow”. Not because I have some huge love of Asians but rather because it seems kind of contrived. I have been to Japan and Korea. They are very pale. I didn’t see them as having any yellowness. That Black/White/Yellow/Brown way of talking about race isn’t for me. I identify as European genetically when I talk about it because I like to connect the racial/genetic component of what we are talking about with the geographical component. We have a genetic history that was tied to a particular time and place on Earth. It was a cold violent place with wild animals like bears and wolves and Romans. We survived it and made some really neat-o stuff. Because we are good at things. But so are Asians.

  260. anon[139] • Disclaimer says:

    that then is the heart of the Covid Game right there…why all the panic, fake pandemic and vaccinations. this is the essence of the racism as massive social misdirection and cover for Jewish crimes against humanity

    the Covid vaccinations are to invade and harvest all human health privacy, to know humanity completely and to insert chips into human bodies to begin to control humanity permanently at the same time.

    and if we do not take the vaccinations we are imprisoned in our homes very likely, cant leave it for any reason at all, not even to go to the shop to buy food to eat, far less to get on a bus, train or plane to go any place. those who refuse vaccination wont even be able to go to their doctors office.

    but then again it is not as if those who get vaccinated would be free. they wont be as they would be controlled by the very vaccination itself. the choice would be between no freedom and no freedom and worse.

    the worse: the vaccinations would not be proven so a huge amount of human experimentation would actually be taking place with the vaccination programs. lots of people will die as a result of the faults in all the vaccinations. the authorities surely are aware of this…that this is what has happened every time with such vaccination programs. the people were victimized and the programs had to be stopped and the vaccinations destroyed in mass

    are the people going to allow Bill Gates and company to get away with crimes against the people again after so many crimes against the people?

  261. Anon[352] • Disclaimer says:

    who compiled those rape figures…

    The FBI.

    they must be verified, proven, established as fact…all years they have been compiled.

    What is the difference between verified and proven? Or are you so cognitively and intellectually sloppy that use back-to-back synonyms in an attempt to sound academic?

    These stats are from the FBI, who is the “verifier” and “prover”.

    I had never heard of such compilations previously.

    You didn’t “hear” of them where? In an alley? Around the watercooler? Are you a thruway for information to the extent that you not “hearing” of it is some type of counter-evidence in itself?

    Or does much of the world have a life outside of your general awareness?

    it is really unfortunate on the victims…any rape at all even one. but even if true especially in such egregious numbers, must mean something truly horrific about American society…and they cannot be taken in isolation

    They aren’t taken in isolation. Black have similarly high violent crime numbers the world over.

    In the United States, Blacks kill one another at a level that is 5 times the rate that Whites kill one another.

    Blacks kill Whites at 11X the rate, per capita, that Whites kill Blacks.

    We reject your insane, tired reflex to blame society for Black crime patterns.

    There is no evidence that society is to blame, as the rates are similar or worse in Africa. Europe will increasingly find out that society is not to blame for Black violent crime rates.

    It is not necessary to find another to blame for Black violent crime, unless you think them to be animals who are incapable of being responsible for their own choices and actions.

    They do the crime. they are to blame. No misplaced, completely unfounded impulse of yours to see all groups as inherently equal will justify with logic or morality to shift the blame off of Blacks for their actions.

    as I said American violent depredation on its Black population over a very long period of time is a horrific fact far, far worse than 20 thousand rapes a year…if that can be imagined.

    It absolutely isn’t, you unimaginable dolt. Neither is their barbaric inter-racial (and intra-racial) murder rate less worse.

    I see what we are now dealing with. A person that will justify any amount of crime to absolve the Black man.

    The fact is that if the Black man is prone to 20k rapes per year, then all of the segregation and chains in the world are justified to stop it. That’s before we get to their murder habit.

    I am a grown man and since I was a kid I have known white police violence against Black people…massive violence up to and including summary execution of Black people by the police, for which no penalties were ever paid by the policemen involved: Even the odd times the police who harmed Black people were themselves Black.

    Yet you choose to omit the high Black crime rate that makes policing necessary, in addition to the Police who are executed by Black men. The difference is that, generally speaking, executed Black men are criminals acting out and cops are men at work doing their jobs at which, due to the nature of crime, occasional unfortunate deaths occur. If Blacks were to lower their crime rate, those unfortunate deaths would lessen.

    American white media would never ever hide Black on white crime especially rape of white women by Black men.

    You are completely propagandized and clueless about modern politics and media. They would and absolutely do hide the Black crime figures that can be sourced on the FBI website. You are propagandized to think that the Black are powerless and oppressed, instead of politically empowered and protected by the same group that largely owns the media as well as other forces within the government. If the Blacks were not protected by the media, they’d still be in chains / under Jim Crowe / and / or policed until their crime rate was down to nothing. There would be no affirmative action. Black people effected none of that. Their puppet master did. Black people have political empowerers and protectors that assure that the numbers are hidden. That’s why we are forced to put up with BLM riots instead of moving in with SWAT and the national guard at the first hint of violence and imprisoning everyone and assigning difficult bail amounts.

    but to whatever extent it may be true it is part of horrific American world hegemon, ,ass murder, racist enslaver of the planet,

    You think that the nation that gave 500k White men in a war to end slavery, 500k White men in a war to end Nazism, and is the most diverse and inclusive nation on the planet, and who pioneered modern affirmative action and doesn’t severely persecute Black racist riots, is the racist enslaver? Compared to whom?

    Your perspective is beyond hallucination. You are lost in the woods of your consumed propaganda. Your views are ludicrous and invalid. And, again, the Black crime rates, across the board, are both barbaric and a result of their group-consistent behaviors and choices.

    • Thanks: ThreeCranes
  262. @cortesar

    Where are the Tolstoy and the Proust of the 21st century? There was only ever one Tolstoy and one Proust, so there can be no Chinese version of either any more than there can be 21st century versions of them. Saul Bellow’s question is like asking, “Where are the Confucius and the Lu Xun of the Westerners?” It’s preposterous to arbitrarily select a unique individual from one culture and demand that a different culture produce an equivalent individual (in the mind of the one making the demand). While I consider traditional Western painting, sculpture, architecture, and music to be the height of human achievement in those endeavors, that remains a subjective opinion. There is one objective fact about the Chinese that Westerners fail to acknowledge to our increasing peril: they are a formidable adversary.

  263. Aking says:

    I don’t have an opinion on the validity of the Erectus book, as i humbly admit i have not read it. But i do like to ask @Ron Unz himself the following
    However, lets say i agree with it, which I assume it means that Africans have lower IQ (plus perhaps better athleticism?), then what? How does that impact our lives? Should we advocate racists policies?
    Should we then make segregation legal? Outlaw inter racial marriages? Make them slaves again? Or should we install even more affirmative actions, to allow for the differences? Provide more free education to those who are “intelligence challenged”? Also, what about those races, such as east Asians, that some are convinced have higher IQs than whites? Should they be penalized for college admissions ( which seemed to be already done anyways, but make it official)? And given the angst of some white folks about the Chinese “aggression”, and “taking over the world”, etc, should we destroy them before they have sufficient time to make full use of their “higher IQ” to be more advanced than us ? Surely they would also think just like our paranoid white folks, and “destroy us instead”, if they are given the time to “overtake us”?
    What is the purpose of this article?

  264. @Mick Jagger gathers no mosque

    The error of evolution has poisoned the minds of many and so most men now consider that Adam was a knuckle-dragging idiot and man has progressed to the point where he is now.

    The truth is that Adam was the most intelligent human created and it has been downhill ever since.

    I’m not convinced but I do prefer the Adam/Eve explanation to liberal creationism. At least there is an acknowledgement that females are not perfect in nature.

    Liberalism states that evolution is responsible for human development but conveniently made a gender and race clause for humans that we aren’t supposed to question. The scary thing is that liberals would send us all to gulags if they could for questioning this convenient clause. We just had an egalitarian here in another thread talk about how we should be hunted down like dogs. I pointed out how the egalitarian view of race not existing completely dominates the media and schools and yet here he was talking about how we should be killed.

  265. If I may make a modest addition, there is also my non-evolutionary discussion of race realism, published here on this site.

  266. Malla says:

    the vibe these IQ obsessed elites give off.

    What? What are you smoking man? The elites suppress this knowledge of IQ differences. The elites promote interracial marriages. The elites are anti-White. The elites blame normal White people for colonialism. The elites suppress the knowledge of all the good deeds colonials did in their colonies.
    And these IQ info is not White supremacy as East Asians score higher than Whites. Why would White supremacists show East Asians above them? These are just facts that is it. East Asians are and have always been the biggest threat to global White power. Not only did Whites face horrendous Mongol invasions (which might have wiped native Whites from Central Asia), Japan was the first non white country in modern times to challenge and defeat White powers. Today China stands as a challenger superpower. Why would “White supremacists” show their biggest racial threat as smarter than them??
    Race realism is completely different than White nationalism.
    Even De Gaul had said something of the Russians after all are our racial brothers but our biggest challengers come from the yellow Race of the East. Islamic scholar Ishrar Ahmed had said the same and he had predicted Islam making alliance with Yellows against the West. And later Pakistan became an ally of China as predicted.

    As far as the common enemy of all races in the USA and probably the World are the bloodsuckers in Wall Street or the City of London, you are right. 100% right.
    And as far as Whites and blacks doing well if raised right, that can be done in different geographical nations. White nationalists are not asking for colonialism or imperialism over darkies, or to bring slavery back (indeed most of them curse Trans-Atlantic slavery for the “black problem”), they are asking for exactly the opposite, non interference in darky world and separation. When White nations become defined by “blood and soil” rather than some ideology (Christianity, Marxism, White man’s burden, Liberalism, Democracy) only then will Western Imperialism completely grind to a stop, forever. And for that you need 100% genetically White nations.

    • Replies: @Slimer
  267. Derer says:

    Do not cry “anon” discuss racism with the Zimbabwe or S.A. white farmers in their country of birth or truck driver Denny from LA…you see racism is interracial phenomenon.

  268. Erebus says:
    @American Citizen 2.0

    “Sport” used in that way means “mutation” so far as I know.

    My own use of it in such contexts is to signify a gratuitous anomaly – an inexplicable outlier on the Bell Curve.

    It works in the EA Ross context as well. Tragically enough, it also works in your sense of an evolutionary dead-end.

    I don’t know what anyone can do to avert this catastrophe. No one seems to even want to avert it anymore.

    For N. America and Europe, it would be hard to disagree, but it seems to me that Russia is actively positioning itself as the final (large) refuge. It has the land and resources, and the civilizational depth to sustain itself, and more importantly to absorb tens, even hundreds of millions of compatible refugees without batting an eye. At least part of why it’s being sanctioned and insulted by the Jewish-run West is for that very reason.

    Alternatively, should the USA’s stranglehold on Europe dissolve as widely expected, at least some of Europe will naturally come under the Russian security umbrella. With the dissolution of America’s grip will come the corollary – namely the (((Tribe’s))) grip on Europe (for which America’s is largely a proxy) will likewise dissolve.

    If so, nationalist forces will rise to the top of the political heap as the pendulum swings past the mark before it settles under Russian Hegemony. There’ll be some tense times in meantime, but if there’s a recognizably European Europe a century from now, I’d bet the farm it’ll be because something along those lines happened.

    As Bismarck said: “The secret to (European) politics is a good treaty with Russia”, and I expect there’ll be a rush to the Kremlin to sign one in the coming decades.

    • Replies: @American Citizen 2.0
  269. Malla says:

    You are idiots.

    You are thick.

    If you so concerned about the Jews taking over your countries, why don’t you try to attacking Jews in the same ways you are attacking Muslims and coloured migrants.

    The biggest opponents of Zionist control over the West and even globally are White nationalists/National Socialists/Far Right of White countries, far more than even Muslims. Followed by some BDS leftists and NOI type black movements. Why do you think the Far Right are crushed the most by most Western governments? Why do Western MSM and Hollywood (basically propaganda arm of the ZOG deep state) target White nationalists the most for propaganda? Why do they target NS Germany the most for propaganda? Why the USA which was supposedly fighting a huge struggle against Communism and the USSR make more anti-NS Germany movies and hardly much anti-Communist movies? Even the Western MSM talk about “Good Muslims and Bad Muslims” but never about “Good Nazis and Bad Nazis”Think boy think. Western counties (and nearly all White countries) are nations under occupation. WNs are the freedom fighters and rebels. “Migrants” or illegal infiltrators brought in by the ZOG deep state are to be used to create more chaos and to be used as unwitting mercenaries for the Satanic bankers against the native or majority freedom struggles of White countries. Capice.
    You are looking at it from your own interests, you oppose the Globalist elites using Western militaries and economies (sanctions) which they control as weapons against the Middle East and that is understandable. It is immoral but after all it is against your own interest, interest of your tribe/ megatribe you identify with or you belong to. But you support migration to White countries also allowed by the same Globalists because it matches the interest of your tribe to get access to White countries, the legitimate concerns of the White natives/majorities be damned. “It benefits US , we like it and support it-it harms US, we oppose it”. You guys are as tribal as the Zionists you hate.

  270. Seraphim says:
    @Franklin Ryckaert

    What makes you believe that you are “the most intelligent human”? IQ scores?

    • Replies: @Franklin Ryckaert
  271. utu says:

    I agree with several point you make like this one : “I also think its peak retard to think that our capitalist overlords would ever allow whites and black to separate.”

  272. Anonymous[377] • Disclaimer says:

    Regarding the picture, it looks very similar to Patrick Ewing:

    • Disagree: Biff
    • Replies: @Franklin Ryckaert
  273. @White Ape

    Perhaps because it strikes at the very heart of the matter: red hair, blue eyes, and a Jewish nose are not environmental artifacts.

  274. @Ron Unz

    An absolutely outstanding article Ron. Thank you. Also full of surprises which is stimulating.

  275. Anonymous[397] • Disclaimer says:

    Although it may not have been Mr. Unz’s intention this essay goes a long way in explaining the roots of what Mr. Unz referred to a few months ago as American White Nationalism’s political bankruptcy. Nearly all of the figures profiled in this essay were truth-seekers, scientists, academics or polemicists, few were interested in power dynamics and those who were can be said to have employed highly questionable strategies. Nearly all of the writings of the thinkers Mr. Unz draws from in this essay can be condensed into two central ideas:

    1. Blacks are intellectually inferior to Whites
    2. Jews act in ways highly detrimental to White interests.

    While these two ideas might be correct, they provide those who accept them no clear path to achieving political power. To understand why White Nationalism has never managed to insert itself into mainstream political discourse it is necessary to study the three ideologies that did successfully manage to upend the traditional political order during the 20th century: Marxism, Fascism and Neoliberalism.

    Rather than write out how these ideologies came to power, which I’m sure most here are familiar with, I will note here only the essential details:

    Conditions: Wartime
    Proponents: Bolsheviks, many ex-military
    Backers: workers
    Selling Point: Peace
    Advantage: Bolsheviks alone could offer peace (at least temporarily), highly militant population


    Conditions: Betrayal By Allies (fascists), Reparations (nazis), Depression (nazis), Civil Unrest
    Proponents: Fascists/Nazis (largely petite-bourgeoisie), many ex-military
    Backers: elites
    Selling Point: Return to social stability
    Advantage: elites willing to compromise due to the threat of Marxists, highly militant population

    Conditions: Stagflation, OPEC embargo
    Proponents: academics supported by elites
    Backers: elites
    Selling Point: Economic revival
    Advantage: high comfort among the population, population frustrated by inflated prices

    What Marxism, Fascism and Neoliberalism all have in common is that prior to coming to power all three developed a strong intellectual foundation and all three came to power during a moment of crisis during which people were highly frustrated by the inability of their political leaders to address their social and economic maladies. Despite their differences all three of these ideologies are interlinked with one another. Fascism could never have come to power if elites did not feel threatened by Marxism, as a result of Marxists coming to power through revolution in Russia, while neoliberalism reveals how elites naturally respond to a crisis if they are not threatened by Marxists.

    The reason why Marxism, Fascism and Neoliberalism could come to power while White Nationalism cannot is because they each offer an intuitive path toward power:

    Marxism – power through the people
    Fascism – power through an alliance of the bourgeoisie and the petite-bourgeoisie
    Neoliberalism – power through the bourgeoisie

    White Nationalism through dismissing Blacks as stupid rejects the notion of binding itself to the people and through regarding Jews as evil rejects the notion of binding itself with elites offers no clear path to power. Because White Nationalism itself offers no clear path to power, White Nationalists have split into three different camps corresponding to the three disruptive ideologies of the 20th century: nazbols, neo-nazis and neo-reactionaries/amnats.

    Of these three ideologies there are only two that offer White Nationalists any possibility of success and there is one that clearly offers White Nationalists the greatest chance of success. Neo-reactionaries and amnats are bound to fail as the bourgeoisie has nothing to gain from supporting White Nationalism and nearly everything to lose. No elite is going to prefer living in a racially homogeneous society because no elite living in such a society would ever be able to justify his exorbitant privileges. Elites obviously place a very high premium on their privileges, as is evidenced by the fact that they’ve attained them. Those most willing to accept the premise that elites merit special privileges are unsurprisingly the individuals most likely to become privileged elites themselves (others, like me, reject this system and thus have no chance of ever being elites), meaning that elites are the group of people least likely to willingly relinquish their privileges. Elites also have nothing to gain by supporting White Nationalists because the consequences the Anti-White policies they support have very little chance of affecting them personally. Many of the figures outlined in Unz’s essay ended up getting screwed over big time by elites. Revilo Oliver was purged from the National Review and kicked out of the John Birch society while George Lincoln Rockwell and William Luther Pierce were dropped by their wealthy donors as soon as their donors were alerted to the fact that they would not serve their class interests. To become a member of the elite one must adopt views that are perceived as high status. Even if an aspiring elite starts off sympathetic to White Nationalism by the time he attains a great deal of power he is very likely to have shed his former ideological convictions.

    As elites are unlikely to support White Nationalism, White Nationalists must become Marxists. Only by attacking elites and aligning with other groups including those of all races who wish to put an end to the unparalleled economic exploitation found in American society can White Nationalists have any hope of posing a threat to power. If nazbols can manage to become a threat to power it is likely that elites will do what they did in the 1930s and try to co-opt racial sentiments in an attempt to reduce the appeal of nazbols by reviving fascism. In the 21st century then a sincere White Nationalist has two options and for the time being only one: to become a nazbol.

    What I think Mr. Unz gets wrong about claiming that White Nationalism is politically bankrupt is believing that White Nationalism was ever a banner that White Nationalists could come to power under. When White Nationalists do finally break through the mainstream, when we do come to threaten power and come to power it will not be as White Nationalists derived from White Racialism, but rather an ideology far more inspiring and holistic than merely believing that Blacks are stupid and that Jews are evil.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Malla
    , @sunhunter61
  276. Biff says:

    Looks ike Stalin was right to throw who he did in the gulag. I don’t see any BLM or Antifas raising hell over there. Don’t see any NAMBLA groups operating in the open, Pedos being idolized, Pedo Hollywood movies, don’t see any gay parades, Russia is looking good as hell compared to the nightmare unfolding here in the glorious USA at the moment. Stalin couldn’t have been all that bad. Hahaha.

    You’re a funny man Hooch! Haha indeed.. ;^)

  277. Dear Mr Unz,

    This is tremendous work, and I do thank you for it.

    Do you (or one of the readers here) know where I could find an digital version of Carlton Coon’s Measuring Ethiopia?

    Kind regards,

    Abyssinia Jones

  278. @Anonymous Jew

    The 90%/10% Asian to white model was Macau until roughly 1960. Over 500 years of Portuguese ruling Asians rendered that peninsula the most peaceful territory on the continent.

  279. @Stan d Mute

    “Obviously, long term, the negro could well be the superior human form, evolution hasn’t given us her verdict.”

    Not so obviously, as it were, and no need to wait for the long term for a verdict, either. Evolutionary maladaptions are abandoned, not tinkered with or unwound. Cost/benefit and all that.

  280. anon[211] • Disclaimer says:

    The biggest voices against Israel are from the left, just like the 911 truthers

    Anyone who disparages rational people with a slur like ‘911 truthers’ is either a shill or too stupid to see reality.

  281. Cutler says:

    Thanks Ron for this article and website. on tv its 24/7 white man bad over and over and over. awful stuff

  282. GoMore says:

    Ghali is just talking with himself. Please do not bother his simple mind by answering.

  283. Anon[401] • Disclaimer says:

    I would like to see an analysis of repressed knowledge/science, to learn where all this is eventually going.

    There must be many examples of robust and simple truths that were extremely taboo by dominant social standards. So much so that merely reflecting on them in public would be enough to destroy careers (analogous to Watson). And almost no one will study them, for fear of making the wrong discovery.

    It seems to me that such states of repression must be very unstable, in the long run. Like trying to keep super-cooled water from freezing. I could be wrong, but the temperature is getting lower and lower…

  284. anonymous[147] • Disclaimer says:

    There is NO WAY a truck bomb could have inflicted the amount of damage to the McMurrah building that it sustained.

    That’s one of the clues to revealing these false flags; The claim is refuted by the evidence.

    The US couldn’t have been ignorant of Japanese intentions before Pearl Harbor.
    Lee Harvey Oswald couldn’t possibly have assassinated JFK.
    The Israeli’s couldn’t possibly have mistakenly identified the USS Liberty.
    Modest fires couldn’t possibly have collapsed 3 skyscrapers.
    The 3 Pakistani ‘terrorists’ couldn’t have been at the scenes in London on 7/7.
    Etc, etc.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  285. JackOH says:
    @Ron Unz

    Ron, for the sake of journalistic balance, would you or a colleague assemble a five-foot shelf of Black racialist literature, and present it in the same manner as you’ve done above? That literature may fall under Afro-centrist or Black nationalist or Black Supremacist rubrics, or be concealed within biographies and memoirs, or inferred from Black victimology narratives. There’s Cleaver’s Soul on Ice, and there’s sure to be literature on the Black Panther leadership. Angela Davis.

    What’s important about this literature is likely not the quality of thought, but that it exists at all, and that the fervency of belief in it translates to street level. By “fervency of belief”, I mean Black racialism has a strong retributionist and exculpatory aspect to it that appeals to Blacks at all levels.

    • Agree: res, Stan d Mute
  286. utu says:

    “What I think Mr. Unz gets wrong about claiming that White Nationalism is politically bankrupt is believing that White Nationalism was ever a banner that White Nationalists could come to power under. “ – The White Nationalists flag must be retired. The movement should be populist that appear to both ends of the spectrum. In other word w/o engaging the Left it has no chance. So the movement should has strong Marxist vein to retrieve and rescue the Left from the toxic identity politics and bring it back to the class politics.

  287. Sean says:

    “I may be Irish, but I’m not stupid”.

    Biden (for it was he) is English and French, and Irish. Of course at the time he said it all of the candidates John Delaney; Beto O’Rourke; , Kirsten Gillibrand Tim Ryan and Biden were playing up the Irish part of their ancestry. But lets look at someone with all his grandparents Irish; President John F. Kennedy. JFK’s prep school test revealed his IQ to be a modest 119.

    De Valera is not an Irish name. I would point out that even though since independence the Southern republic of Eire’s once numerous protestant middle class has disappeared by intermarriage into the Catholic population and makes up a substantial part of the upper middle class in the Southern Republic, a recent PM of Ireland was half Iranian.

    Lynn has lived in Ireland, which is still a substantially rural country, so having seen in the flesh the less diluted population of counties such as Kerry and Claire he may have more information to judge whether the Irish are genetically identical to English. Nowadays Americans claiming to be Irish have IQs slightly above the white average. Like Obama being black, it’s a social advantage because it is not–all other things being equal– a genetic advantage.

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @Alden
  288. Iris says:

    Anyone, including yourself and others like you here that get angry that the picture is racist, readily identify it as a black man, a SubShararan African. Anyone who looks at the picture instantly sees the resemblence to a black, and it is not just the skin tone, it is the facial structure, the jaws, the tiny ears.

    If somebody was to write a book about any alleged primitiveness of the White people, and was to illustrate the cover with the improbable, unique and hideous face of “white” Harvey Weinstein, who looks nothing like my family, ethnic and national circle, I would be very upset too.

  289. anarchyst says:

    Let’s not forget the “passports” found in the rubble of the world trade center, as well as building 7 being demolished.

  290. AaronB says:
    @John Johnson

    I don’t want to choose between Unz and the mainstream. Both have a dollop of truth taken to an extreme.

    I don’t want to be trapped in binary thinking. If you notice, Unz just takes the opposite extreme of the mainstream on every issue.

    This does not seem an advance to me.

    “Dark” is not necessarily a pejorative, btw. And I would say the mainstream pursuit of extreme “light” ends up creating evil. The mainstream pursuit of extreme egalitarianism creates evil.

    Its Nazis and Communists all over again. The Communists tried to deny human nature and be too “good” and created great evil. As a reaction, they also created the Nazis.

    The mainstream pursuit of extreme “good” creates a site like Unz, devoted to the “bad”, while also creating great evil in anti-white racism and the like.

    We need the fusion of opposites.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    , @haha
    , @res
  291. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Anglin knows how to reach his audience. Whatever else one thinks of him and his vulgar style, he understands public relations better than many who are highly paid professionals in the business. Unless he is secretly some CIA front with millions of dollars behind him and a battalion of RAND Corporation psychologists writing his scripts, what he accomplished in his heyday as a lone activist was very impressive by any standard. That the system went to such extreme lengths to silence him is better testimony to that than any analysis I can write up.

    Sadly, it seems he’s declined a lot since then. Like I said, I haven’t been following him, but from word of mouth he appears to have crashed and burned badly after Charlottesville. The way I hear it, most of his articles nowadays focus on whining about dastardly “neo-Nazis” and ugly women.

    One of Anglin’s key propaganda insights was the importance of presenting positive emotional messages: optimism, confidence, humor, strength. This is where nationalist advocates almost always fail. For eminently sound reasons, complainers and Spenglerian doomers do not inspire and attract a powerful following. That Anglin understood this is at least as big a part of the explanation for his success as his aggressive courting of the lowest common denominator. To renege on this insight seems almost like willful self-sabotage.

    Then again, it’s not all that surprising if having all his great and hard-won achievements erased by one stroke of a Tech tyrant’s pen made a smart but already eccentric and unstable guy go completely off the deep end.

    • Replies: @Grahamsno(G64)
  292. Malla says:

    Marxism Conditions: Wartime Proponents: Bolsheviks, many ex-military Backers: workers Selling Point: Peace Advantage: Bolsheviks alone could offer peace (at least temporarily), highly militant population

    Conditions: Betrayal By Allies (fascists), Reparations (nazis), Depression (nazis), Civil Unrest
    Proponents: Fascists/Nazis (largely petite-bourgeoisie), many ex-military Backers: elites
    Selling Point: Return to social stability Advantage: elites willing to compromise due to the threat of Marxists, highly militant population

    Great post except
    Proponents: Bolsheviks
    Backers: elites, mostly New York bankers, German bankers.
    Selling Point: Bayonet, Worker’s paradise

    I do not know about Fascism but for National Socialism
    National Socialism
    Conditions: Reparations, Depression, Cultural degradation, back stabbed by Jewish unions for the Rothschild Balfour declaration for Zion, threat of Jewish money backed Bolshevism in Germany and repeat of mass murder as it happened in Russia.
    Proponents: NSDAP
    Backers: Patriotic People including workers, ex military types.
    Selling Point: Total revival of the nation and people. Economic, cultural and spiritual.

  293. Malla says:

    De Valera is not an Irish name.

    Possible Sephardi.

    • Replies: @utu
  294. @John Johnson

    If you think I did not understand the “criticism” from “marketing” you are an idiot. However Fuerle’s book is unmarketable. I find it nearly unreadable for the many factual errors too numerous to list here(e.g. black males have higher testosterone than White Men), and yet he attempts to prove his ponderous thesis by piling on detail, a losing method. I had a PDF copy of Fuerle and deleted it as useless. Anyway the thesis of multiple geographic origins for Homo Sapiens has been around despite Fuerle but would require a lot more fossil finds, but is intriguing because Homo Erectus is found not just in Africa but throughout the World Island. What makes the Out Of Africa theory nauseating is the way it is presented to the general public: that 90,000 years ago during the last Glacial, Anatomically Modern Humans evolved in Africa and THEY LOOKED LIKE SUBSAHARAN AFRICANS and all humans today are descended from them. There is clearly something deeply wrong with that presentation, the SubSaharan African has the physical appearance of a devolved hominin, as soon as it opens its mouth stupidity issues forth, and everywhere it goes it wreaks everything. Perhaps one could propose a thesis that the SubSaharan African is an evolutionary relic, a bridge between H Erectus and H Sapiens, but there is no evidence for that, the negro is a version of Anatomically Modern Humans and does not appear to be a version of humans from the 300,000-100,000 year H Sapiens period, which would be required if that argument were valid. This is where the frontispiece illustration from Fuerle comes in, it is the only good thing in his book, and with this illustration he unintentionally stumbled on the truth, alas with out understanding what he stumbled upon. The latest genetic research of SubSaharan African DNA indicates that blacks have a substantial introgression from an archaic non-human, but which archaic? It is plainly obvious that the SubSaharan African uncannily resembles an accurate reconstruction of Homo Erectus. The illustration from Fuerle that so many find “waycist” is indistinguishable from an official portrait of a pretentious Ghanian bureaucrat. This introgression of archaic non-human DNA that produced the negro appears to have occurred about 60,000 years ago, 30,000 years after the appearance of Anatomically Modern Humans. Even if AMH evolved in Africa, they did not look like SubSaharan Africans, and greatly differed genetically, otherwise all non-black humans worldwide would have this introgression from an archaic non-human, and they dont. Since this introgression of Homo Erectus that produced the negro occurred 30,000 years after AMH appeared, a huge chunk of time, it is not unreasonable to propose that modern humans evolved outside of Africa, then some wandered into Africa, spotted some Homo Erectus WAP engaged in a Baltimore style rapcrap dance party, joined in, got some, and saddled planet Earth with the failed race of African Kangz.

    • Replies: @Malla
  295. Here’s an AR-appendix to this essay, for those looking to dig a little deeper.

    The topics are in the order that they appear in the essay.

    On Carl Degler’s In Search of Human Nature
    Two Roger Pearson books cover similar ground: Race, Intelligence, and Bias in Academeand Heredity and Humanity. As does the essay “Why Have We Unlearned What We Knew in 1900?” by Raymond Wolters
    Richard Lynn on Stephen Jay Gould’s career
    On the life and work of Madison Grant
    On Madison Grant’s book, The Conquest of a Continent
    On the life and work of Lothrop Stoddard
    On Lothrop Stoddard’s book about the Third Reich, Into the Darkness
    Lothrop Stoddard’s magnum opusThe Rising Tide of Color Against World Wide White Supremacy is available through the American Renaissance store


    Regarding the Supreme Court’s decision on Brown vs. Board of Education
    Carleton Putnam’s book, Race and Reason, is available through the American Renaissance store
    On the fight against integration, see Jared Taylor’s review of James J. Kilpatrick: Salesman for Segregation by William P. Hustwitand Thomas Jackson’s review of Science for Segregation by John P. Jackson.
    Mr. Unz repeatedly references The Funding of Scientific Racism by William H. Tucker. A better book on the same topic is The Science of Human Diversity: A History of the Pioneer Fund by Richard Lynn, reviewed by Ian Jobling here. The limits of William Tucker’s scholarship are highlighter in Jared Taylor’s review of The Cattell Controversy: Race, Science and Ideology.
    On American Statesmen on Slavery and the Negroby Nathaniel Weyl and William Marina
    On John R. Baker’s Race
    On Race: The Reality of Human Differencesby Vincent Sarich and Frank Miele
    On Arthur R. Jensen’s The g Factor

    Mr. Unz writes:

    By 2005, he [Aruthur Jensen] was widely regarded as the Grand Old Man of psychometrics, and he published an article summarizing the previous thirty years of research on racial differences in intelligence, with his co-author being Prof. J. Philippe Rushton, an evolutionary theorist who held explicitly White Nationalist beliefs.

    The referenced article is called “Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability,” reviewed by Jared Taylor here.

    Mr. Unz writes:

    [William] Shockley was a Palo Alto native, and in 1956 after inventing the transistor he had founded Shockley Semiconductor in neighboring Mountain View to commercialize his invention, choosing to relocate back from the East Coast in order to be closer to his aged and ailing mother. His difficult personality and poor management skills eventually produced an exodus of his early employees, who went on to spawn many of the most important technology companies in the region, arguably making Shockley the father of the modern Silicon Valley, which otherwise might never have come into existence. But although he is probably the most important Palo Altan in history, his controversial racialist views have prevented any appropriate recognition. For years I have driven past his simple clapboard home on Waverley Ave., which is unmarked by any plaque or historic designation, and his name has never graced any building, monument, or award.

    True to form, the American Renaissance archive has something about this.

    On the life and work of William Shockley

    Mr. Unz writes:

    At the time of the initial [James] Watson firestorm [2007], Slate was our leading online publication, generally neoliberal and well-respected, and William Saletan, one of its senior editors, began publishing a lengthy five-part series entitled “Liberal Creationism,” in which he explained the solid scientific basis of Watson’s casual remarks. But Saletan immediately encountered such a ferocious wave of denunciations that he soon apologized for having used “disreputable sources” amid widespread doubts that he would be able to keep his job.

    Jared Taylor wrote on this ordeal in his article, “Rushing for the Lifeboats

    On The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Lifeby Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray
    On IQ and the Wealth of Nationsby Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen
    On The Global Bell Curveby Richard Lynn
    Richard Lynn and Helmuth Nyborg’s replies to Ron Unz’s critiques of Dr. Lynn’s work
    On Race, Evolution, and Behaviorby J. Philippe Rushton
    On the life and work of J. Philippe Rushton
    On The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolutionby Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending
    On A Troublesome Inheritanceby Nicholas Wade
    On Paved with Good Intentions by Jared Taylor
    On Alien Nationby Peter Brimelow
    Behavioral geneticist Glayde Whitney’s best essays are collected in the book Race, Genetics, and Societyavailable through the American Renaissance store.
    On Erectus Walks Amongst Usby Richard D. Fuerle

  296. American Citizen 2.0 says:

    I agree about Russia. If the Democrats win the White House and at least one chamber of Congress, I imagine that President Kamala Harris will start a war with Russia over gay rights to please the San Francisco voters.

    Hopefully, Russia can survive. I think America is all but over. At best we are going to witness a steady decline to Brazil or Mexico level. And it pains me tremendously to say that.

  297. utu says:

    Éamon de Valera was born on 14 October 1882 in New York City, the son of Catherine Coll, who was originally from Bruree, County Limerick, and Juan Vivion de Valera, described on the birth certificate as a Spanish artist born in 1853 in the Basque Country, Spain. – wiki

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @(((They))) Live
  298. Escalade says:

    Im a bit conused. Unz states:

    “In effect, I would suggest that the heralded 300-page work by Lynn and Vanhanen constituted a game-ending own-goal against their IQ-determinist side, but that neither of the competing ideological teams ever noticed.”

    Is he suggesting that this game ending own goal disproves all the books discussed in this article?

    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
  299. Cyrano says:

    This just to show you what a con job capitalism really is: Apparently there are no genetic differences between races – we are all equal. How humane and generous of them, bestowing us with a judgement of equality from their position of superiority.

    But there are genetic differences between rich and poor. Obviously, rich people are genetically superior to the poor, which allows them to justifiably become rich.

    When it comes to races (especially the poor underclasses of every race), according to the capitalist elites – they are all blessed with the same genes which allow them to be equally poor.

    Capitalism – successfully conning people for over 300 years. One day they’re going to con themselves out of existence.

  300. sonofman says:
    @Ron Unz

    Race is a simple concept to divide human beings, but for what purpose? It is the same as acknowledging that Ford or Mercedes or Toyota are different types of cars, or that the AFC and NFC are divisions of the NFL, or that Republicans and Democrats and Greens bring different political objectives. But they are only inconclusive denominators, and their significance can only be determined by subjective evaluation.

    Cultures evolve and mature just like individuals do. The United States does have a history of bigotry, prejudice and discrimination, but it has been acknowledged as repugnant behavior that is contrary to the moral foundations of America, and so much has been done to remediate the effects and eliminate concepts of inequity from the collective conscience. America has matured to such an extent, that accusing an acting President of “White supremacy” can only be a trick used for character assassination; not only is it dubious, but it is also a reprehensible and dishonorable denigration of the people that voted and will continue to vote for him.

    Europeans have always been divided by tribal/national, religious and economical differences. But when all of these different people came to America to become independent from hierarchic determinates, and organized effective armed rebellion together with different people of African descent, they somehow became one “race” called White, and “White privilege” was created to prevent another successful African/European alliance against the Crown. And Africans, divided under the same circumstances as Europeans, were then defined as one “race” called Black.

    And IQ? What exactly does the average intelligence quotient of classified groups of people illustrate? How does intelligence affect the reason why we are all here: the pursuit of individual happiness? Why is now indoctrination facilitated more than independent analytic thought? Why is intelligent and scientific discussion being concealed, censored and cancelled? Some people want to claim superiority based upon genetic “race” intelligence, but obviously, a higher degree of intelligence is needed to recognize the deception being used and by whom to misappropriate the wealth and character of a nation.

    “Racist” and “anti-Semite” are epithets used to shame other people into submission and to concession of unreasonable demands and actions of groups that are practicing tribal narcissism (fascism). It is unconscionable that these words are being used to terminate rational disagreement and opposition, or to invalidate comprehensive scrutiny that demolishes the credibility of their narrative.

    White supremacy and racism/anti-Semitism are tendencies that America has transcended; definitely not as intense as previously in the past. And you have to wonder about the intelligence of the majority European Americans who continue to accentuate these biases, and you also have to wonder about the intelligence of the majority European Americans who allow themselves to be stigmatized and herded like sheep.

    • Replies: @Trinity
  301. Abhivan says:

    The overarching irony after all this pointless discussion is that there is nothing to prevent those who probably have high IQ scores and rule over us to behave like morons and idiots.

  302. Trinity says:

    “Rich white folk created this hell”

    While “rich white folk” the likes of Jimmy Carter, Ted Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, JFK, Pappy Bush, Dubya Bush, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and scores of others did in fact help destroy America, they were nothing more than shabbos goy doing what their Jew ma\$\$a ordered.

    On the other hand, “rich white folk” the likes of Henry Ford and Walt Disney warned the people of this kind of shit that would happen and as usual NO ONE LISTENED. Truth tellers like the aforementioned, Dr. Duke have been warning White America for half a century and they mocked him.

    When a person as powerful as President Nixon or as popular and influential as the reverend Billy Graham was in the 1970s are caught on tape admitting they can’t talk about Jewish control of the media, that tells you all you have to know about who has been directing this destruction of America for a century and counting. Since Woodrow Wilson, Jews have ran America into the ground one small step at a time and now they see the finish line ahead, so why not amp up their game.

  303. Ron Unz says:

    Mr. Unz: can you do a follow up article about speculation on the origin of the Coronavirus?

    The initial theory was some spook black team let it loose at the military Olympics event on Wuhan….is there any follow up on this?

    Well, I really don’t want this thread to move off-topic, but nothing much has softened the conclusions I presented in my April article:

    Indeed, the latest new information from last month has tended to strengthen them:

    • Thanks: Neoconned
  304. @Anonymous

    “As elites are unlikely to support White Nationalism, White Nationalists must become Marxists.”

    And adhere to the semitic garbage of the son of a rabbi?

    What you refer to throughout your whole comment (which I believe have considerable merit) as ‘the elite’ are today merely ruthless and clever merchants, as is it the merchant kast that has the power in todays world. They keep their power as long as money rules. That could collapse.

    But I agree with you: The ‘elites’ must go. Probably the biggest issue, and rarely mentioned, by those wanting a reliable alternative to the dismal Western societies of today. But the power vacuum must be filles by somebody from a different kast. The warriors and the high priests, not the marxist proletariat.

    No change will happen from below. It never did and it never will.

  305. Malla says:

    From a Sephardi website.
    “Eamon de Valera, former Prime Minister of Ireland, was of Sephardic ancestry. “
    His ancestors spoke Ladino, the Yiddish of the Sephardic Jews. Ladino is to Spanish what Yiddish is to German. There were many Valera surname Jews in the Caribbean. Many Jews/Marranos/Conversos went to the Caribbean and to the New World.

  306. @American Citizen 2.0

    Use of the term “yellow” by Europeans never meant skin tone. To Europeans, Asia meant China and in China a very particular shade of yellow is the color of The Emperor, the mythical ancient Chinese first emperor is referred to as The Yellow Emperor(Queen Elizabeth II when she visited China wore an outfit in that exact shade of Imperial Yellow to telegraph her status). So “Yellow People” were people living under The Emperor.

  307. @Seraphim

    Intelligent humans don’t take repartees literally.

    Still, to believe in childish myths, is not a sign of high intelligence.

  308. Trinity says:


    Do Muslims feel guilt for ruling over White Spaniards for centuries. Do Jews feel guilt for stabbing Spain in the back and helping those same Muslims take over of Spain. Yet ANOTHER TIME JEWS STABBED THEIR WHITE HOST IN THE BACK. LETS SEE, WE HAVE GREECE, SPAIN, FRANCE, RUSSIA, GERMANY, AND NOW AMERICA WITH THE REST OF EUROPE, AUSTRALIA, CANADA, any Jewish guilt out there? Do the Turks feel guilt over enslaving Greece for centuries? Barabary Slave Trade, anyone? And lest we forget, the Black race and Arabs are THE KANGZ OF THE SLAVE TRADE, not White Gentiles. And of course we all know about the Jewish role the African Slave Trade.

    The ONLY GROUP OF PEOPLE, a White American should work with to make amends for past wrongs is the American Indian. I have already mentioned a video that I saw recently where a Native American was chastising Blacks and (((BLM))) as THE REAL RACIST and telling idiotic Americans that Native Americans would kill and enslave other tribes. IF I were king for a day, the Native American and Whites with some sense of pride would share this nation and all those racist Blacks could be sent packing to Israel or Africa with their Jewish masters, same thing with the other racist nonwhites. Whitey does better without nonwhites. The BULK OF THIS NATION WAS BUILT WHEN WHITEY WAS 90% OF THE POPULATION, TO SAY THAT NONWHITES CONTRIBUTED TO BUILDING AMERICA IS INSANE. Nonwhites have done the bulk of DESTROYING AMERICA WITH THE HELP OF WHITE TRAITOR TRASH.

  309. Bernie says:
    @Robert Dolan

    Indeed. Recall the Tawanna Brawley and Duke lacrosse team rape hoaxes and the amount of outrage they caused before being exposed as hoaxes.

    If there were a real white on black rape (especially gang rape) it would be the story of the century.

    I’ve asked several times for evidence of mass white on black rape during slavery and none has ever been presented. There were examples of voluntary sex between blacks and whites (Sally Hemmings and one of Jefferson’s brothers). But this is not rape like we see with blacks mass raping whites.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  310. Malla says:

    Do you have any knowledge/ opinion about Australoids/ Asian_Australian blacks /Papuans/Melanesians/Micronesians? Also that Khoi San have some East Asian traits and according to R. Fuerle, they may be related to some archaic humans related to pre historical ancestors of Mongoloids and came to Africa and maybe mated with some other hominids there. Also that Desert Australian Abos may be related to some primitive Caucasoids. I know that there was an out of India migration into Australia but South Indians or many lower caste do show many traits similar to Australoids anyways.

    • Replies: @Bombercommand
  311. Rahan says:

    Once more,
    Thanks for being who you’ve chosen to be, Mr. Unz.
    Without this website, and without your personal writing, the world would be at least 30% crappier.

  312. John Wear says:

    Ron Unz,

    I am very impressed with the number of books you have read to write this article.

    Similar to your experience, I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of research in David Duke’s book “My Awakening”. David Duke is a genuine scholar who is definitely not a “hater” as he is frequently portrayed by our media.

    • Thanks: Ron Unz
    • Replies: @Trinity
  313. @AaronB

    I don’t want to choose between Unz and the mainstream. Both have a dollop of truth taken to an extreme.

    A dollop of truth? I’m not a fan of the conspiracy stuff but just about everything related to race is well documented.

    “Dark” is not necessarily a pejorative, btw. And I would say the mainstream pursuit of extreme “light” ends up creating evil. The mainstream pursuit of extreme egalitarianism creates evil.

    The liberals in the media and colleges are no longer at the stage of trying to create good. They are aware that they have wed themselves to a lie and are willing to destroy anything and anyone to keep that lie. They aren’t idealists. It’s more like an anti-White tribe that attacks anything that threatens it.

    We need the fusion of opposites.

    Fusion? That will never happen. Ron Unz won’t be invited to talk at a social sciences consortium even though this piece of work is far more impressive than anything put out by mainstream journals. Social scientists that go outside the mainstream are met with violence. That is no exaggeration, an intelligence researcher had her nose broken a few years ago by antifa.

    The left thinks they will lose everything if the lie is even partially compromised. In their minds they are preventing another reich even it means nihilism and the expansion of the third world.

    What we are headed towards is a 1984 style society. The left is unwilling to move an inch and prefers indoctrination and suppression to open discussion. They had to create an entire school of thought (critical theory) that suppresses objective thinking.

    I see little choice but to unravel the lie. That doesn’t mean we have to be Nazis. But we can’t formulate sound policy if we are unable to discuss our problems honestly. In fact we have a huge problem where most of the population is unable to even think clearly because they have been bombarded with so much false information.

    I am open to alternatives but we are running out of time. The left’s plan is to flood the country with third worlders so they don’t have to bother with lying to us. When Whites are a minority the left will just hold a vote to take our stuff. We also have looming debt from the billions that continued to be spent on wishful thinking based plans from our corrupt academia. Black cities are propped up with borrowed dollars and the left tells us we aren’t spending enough.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  314. Trinity says:


    To be fair, White on Black rape was prevalent LONG AGO, to deny it wasn’t is just as retarded as denying that Blacks don’t commit an overwhelming amount of violent crime in America today and that almost all interracial crime is Black on White. The average African American has some strain to one degree or another of Caucasian blood in his or her system, Muhammad Ali had Irish blood for example. Whether a lot of sex between White males and Black females was consensual, I am sure a lot of it was just forced on the Black female as well. Hell, the White man created a whole group of people who are now starting to claim they are a race, how many mestizos do you see out there. There was definitely whole lot of shakin’ going on with the White man back in the day. But the White man did nothing no other race of men is not guilty of doing as well. How many women were raped in Germany by colonial troops and Mongolians serving the Allies? How many Union soldiers and negroes raped White Southern women during Sherman’s March To The Sea. How many Brown and Black invaders are raping blonde blue-eyed Swedish women. How many Japanese or Vietnamese women were raped by Black and White American soldiers in the war?

  315. res says:
    @Ron Unz

    I don’t know about inappropriate, but I would argue it is counterproductive to lead with that if your goal is to reach anyone who is not already on board with your points.

    Excellent article, Ron. Thanks for putting that all together into a cohesive whole.

  316. Bert says:

    Gould made some contributions to evolutionary theory, but as an empiricist he was certainly a fraud. In published work on Bahamian Cerion land snails Gould claimed results that were not supported by the data. He was at his best as a polemicist, a typically Ashkenazi ability in which truth is secondary to winning.

    • Replies: @Levtraro
  317. haha says:

    “I think our categories of race, gender, species, etc. are more or less arbitrary, conventions, not facts”. LOL!
    How come you thank Ron for this article then do a “full woke” at the end? Don’t know about others but my gender is a hard fact, not a matter of speculation. I am equally certain I am a mammal, belong to a certain race of mankind, and cheerfully consent to be classified as a homo sapiens.

    • Replies: @fnn
  318. @Franklin Ryckaert

    Franklin Ryckaert says:

    Would Obama be ready to admit that those “exceptions” are mostly light Mulattos like octoroon Colin Powell or at least half-white like himself?

    I say:

    Steve Sailer wrote that Murray and Herrnstein were writing about the rise of a cognitive elite advanced through the wider system of American life by standardized testing and the like. I have noted many times that Obama is a Mulatto and that Colin Powell is a Mulatto or more White than Black and that their White blood significantly contributed to their brainpower, such as it is. Obama and Powell are mixed blood ass-kissers advanced because of their ancestry and not their brains; although Obama was smart enough to ride his opposition to the Iraq War debacle and his status as a Mulatto into the White House against Hillary and two GOP candidates who took a dive for him.

    Obama and Colin Powell are not “our” Blacks in the sense that Obama’s Negroid ancestry is Kenyan and Powell’s Negroid ancestry is some Caribbean Island and these two frauds, Obama and Powell, are using their partial Negroid ancestry to advance in the British Protestant settler nation of the United States of America. I would hope “our” Blacks think of us as “our” Whites when they hear some White foreigner babbling on like a baboon in some foreign European tongue.

    Obama and Powell ain’t in on the New York Times’s 1619 Project in my humble opinion. Obama and Powell ain’t “our” Blacks at all.

    Steve Sailer says:

    Of course, the irony is that Obama’s fabulous career epitomizes the prime subject of The Bell Curve: the rise of a “€œcognitive elite”€ facilitated by standardized testing.


    Tweets from 2015:

  319. Alden says:

    JFK’s 119 IQ is not modest It’s in the upper 10 percent of IQ. It’s considered very bright normal. Modest would be something between 105 and 110.

    De Valera is obviously not an Irish name. His mother was Irish, Eamon’s father was Spanish from a basque part of the country.

    Traveling around Ireland gives the observer no clue whatsoever to answer the questions of similarities between English, Irish Welsh and Scots. They basically look alike. DNA has solved that problem, the Irish are lumped with British. And much of that British including Irish DNA is heavily Scandinavian due to immigration starting about 1,300 years ago.

    To the casual observer, the Irish are slightly taller, more blue eyed and have much better facial features or noticeably better looking on average than the English. The Scots are on average the tallest and blondest of the British due to the very heavy Scandinavian DNA. The Scotti by the way were an Irish tribe that invaded western Scotland about a thousand years ago.

    Typical Jew, a dirty goy 119 IQ is modest.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  320. ixpop says: • Website
    @Dennis Gannon


    While it is true that God’s division of people into the saved and the damned supersedes other categories, it in no way makes those categories go away.

    God created different groups of people at the Tower of Babel. He separated them by tongue and land.


    God judges entire related people groups such as the Jebusite, Hivite, etc.

    Even in Revelation, Jesus Christ sees fit to show John that “a great multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands.” While they all have the same outcome they most certainly don’t have the same origins, and that is to God’s eternal glory. He has the power to save out of all sorts of different situations and circumstances.

    People’s backgrounds matter. We can’t ignore our differences and have any sort of effectiveness for the Kingdom.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  321. haha says:

    My friend, binary thinking is EXACTLY what is necessary to banish silliness and mental confusion. The sciences (the real ones, not the make-believe ones) and Mathematics are built on clear-cut, binary type thinking. Ain’t no such thing as the “fusion of opposites”. You either believe that 2+2 make 4 or you reserve a spot in some institution. The woke world, with its genders of the day, needs to be tossed aside, not “fused with”.

    • Agree: TheTrumanShow, FLgeezer
  322. American Citizen 2.0 says:
    @American Citizen 2.0

    I did not know that “yellow” was referring to something other than what Black/White/Red refers to.

    Thanks for the perspective/info.

  323. res says:

    who compiled those rape figures…I have not see who did them? they must be verified, proven, established as fact…all years they have been compiled. I had never heard of such compilations previously.

    Perhaps you never heard of them because they went away when Obama was president. I gave references for the statistics in this 2018 comment. It is short so I will include it in full.

    You are right. For 2016 Table 21 of the FBI arrest statistics show 5412 Blacks arrested for rape:

    I think what TheBoom is referring to (and overstating) is Table 42 of the NCVS from the DOJ. Here from 2008:
    which estimates just under 20,000 Black on White rapes (and 0 of the reverse).

    Of course, the really interesting thing in all of this is how as far as I can tell they stopped this form of the victim and offender reports in 2008:
    Gee, I wonder what happened in 2008?

    Compare the straightforward presentation in 2008 to the way they dance around interracial rape in a more recent report:

    To answer your question, the statistics were compiled by the Department of Justice as part of their National Crime Victimization Survey. Note that they include both rapes and sexual assaults.

    The data in question are on page 29 in Table 42 of this PDF.

    From their numbers you can derive 117,640 * 16.4% = 19,293 (let’s call that about 20,000 as I did above) rapes of whites by blacks. The number of blacks raped by whites is given as 0%, but the footnote indicates that is based on less than 10 cases sampled.

    Is that clear enough, or would you like me to explain further?

    Now that the source of the statistics and the magnitude of the disparity are clear, what do you have to say about that?


    Similar data from different years with some comments.

    This one is interesting because there are almost no unknown offender races for rape (contrast 2008) and there are actually an appreciable number of white on black rapes (13.5% of rapes of blacks).
    Worth noting that in that year there were 216,710 rapes of whites and 44,890 rapes of blacks (that is off population proportions, it was a bad year for black women). Giving
    216,710 * 8.8% = 19,000 rapes of whites by blacks
    44,890 * 13.5% = 6,060 rapes of blacks by whites
    So even in a year with a “small” B/W disparity in interracial rape the ratio is over 3:1.

    Same data is my earlier link, but this is just the relevant table.
    This link is a compilation of Table 42s from 1996-2007.
    The variation in perceived race of offender for black rape victims over the years is dramatic. But I see lots of zeroes with the worst years being 13.5% in 1996 (above) and 14.2% in 2002 (below).

    This blog post provides links to the full NCVS reports from 1995-2008.
    They give a table showing the percentage of rapes of blacks committed by blacks (the second column, they appear to ignore unknowns) each year.

    This blog post adds full NCVS report links and table references for 1978-1984, 1993, 1994.
    Other years appear to be available. For example, see Table 37 in 1985:
    No 1986, 1987 (Table 43), no 1988, no 1989, 1990 (Table 47), 1991 (Table 47), No 1992
    In an appendix it adds more about NCVS and a link to this detailed report about rape which has summary data for 1973-1982 in Table 8.

  324. @MarkU

    Yeah, sure, I get what you meant. It’s just that eliding the “proves” wrecks the chiasmus. There is logic and then there is rhetoric. One likes his ironies felicitously structured, ne?

  325. res says:

    If you notice, Unz just takes the opposite extreme of the mainstream on every issue.

    That’s why he defends Hispanic immigration.

    Typical fuzzy thinking fail from AaronB.

  326. @Charles Pewitt

    I read “The Bell Curve” a long time ago and even have a copy in my library. If Murray had even hinted at what you say then I doubt his book would ever be written at least in main stream publishing houses.

  327. @Ron Unz

    Yes, it depends on the definition and there are many definitions and concepts of race. What I meant by Montagu supporting the existence of human races was his defence of large/continental populations in his early literature, i.e. the tripartite racial division of “Caucasoid”, “Negroid” and “Mongoloid” that the vast majority of physical anthropologists supported in the early 20th century. If you read the 1950 The Race Question by UNESCO (drafted by Montagu), here’s what we find:

    7. Now what has the scientist to say about the groups of mankind which may be recognised at the present time? Human races can be and have been differently classified by different anthropologists, but at the present time most anthropologists agree on classifying the greater part of the present-day mankind into three major divisions as follows: (a) the Mongoloid division; (b) the Negroid division; and (c) the Caucasoid division. The biological processes which the classifier has here embalmed, as it were, are dynamic, not static. These divisions were not the same in the past as they are at present, and there is every reason to believe that they will change in the future.

    Like most anthropologists at that time (Kroeber, 1948; Coon et al. 1950) Montagu argued these continental races could be divided into smaller sub-races, for example the “Mediterranean” and “Nordic” sub-races in the “Caucasoid”, but Montagu preferred to call these smaller groups “ethnic groups”:

    8. Many sub-groups or ethnic groups within these divisions have been described. There is no general agreement upon their number, and in any event most ethnic groups have not yet been either studied or described by the physical anthropologists.

    The 1951 (revised) Statement on the Nature of Race and Race Differences by UNESCO continued to defend the existence of race in the sense of large/continental populations:

    We were careful to avoid dogmatic definitions of race, since, as a product of evolutionary factors, it is a dynamic rather than a static concept. We were equally careful to avoid saying that, because races were all variable and many of them graded into each other, therefore races did not exist. The physical anthropologists and the man in the street both know that races exist; the former, from the scientifically recognisable and measurable congeries of traits which he uses in classifying the varieties of man; the latter from the immediate evidence of his senses when he sees an African, a European, an Asiatic and an American Indian together.

    What these two statements however denied was racial supremacy and the idea differences in IQ-test scores are substantially genetic in origin (what later became Jensen’s hereditarian hypothesis):

    Most anthropologists do not include mental characteristics in their classification of human races. Studies within a single race have shown that both innate capacity and environmental opportunity determine the results of tests of intelligence and temperament, though their relative importance is disputed. When intelligence tests, even non-verbal, are made on a group of non-literate people, their scores are usually lower than those of more civilised people. It has been recorded that different groups of the same race occupying similarly high levels of civilisation may yield considerable differences in intelligence tests. When, however, the two groups have been brought up from childhood in similar environments, the differences are usually very slight. Moreover, there is good evidence that, given similar opportunities, the average performance (that is to say, the performance of the individual who is representative because he is surpassed by as many as he surpasses), and the variation round it, do not differ appreciably from one race to another.

    So to summarise:

    1. In the 1940s and 1950s, Montagu was a ‘race realist’ like Coon who argued for the tripartite racial division (“Caucasoid”, “Mongoloid”, “Negroid”) meaning large/continental populations.
    2. Like Coon et al. 1950, Montagu in his early literature thought within the continental races were sub-races at a more local level, but he preferred to call those “ethnic groups”.
    3. Unlike Coon, Montagu was a racial egalitarian arguing against the hereditarian hypothesis for IQ.

    What happened in the 1960s – is Montagu changed his position to adopt race denial – he was no longer arguing for the tripartite racial division and therefore he stopped dividing humans into large/continental populations and smaller sub-races. I have in my comments on this website in other threads explained why this happened. It never had anything to do with political correctness but scientists realised in the second half of the 20th century that the traditional big groups such as “Caucasoid” or “Mongoloid” were based on poor sampling and contained heterogenous sub-groups, invalidating their utility. As noted by Heard (2008) “physical anthropologists have noted that traits considered to be characteristic of the classical Mongoloid group were not derived from studies encompassing all of the populations that would be classified as Mongoloid.” When physical anthropologists originally came up with the “Mongoloid” racial classification they never sampled all the populations they categorised as “Mongoloid”. Later physical anthropologists realised this blunder. Furthermore, we know now these traditional races are useless in population genetics because they group together populations with significant genetic distances. It makes no sense for example to categorise a Sardinian with an Orkney Islander.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  328. Anon1488 says:

    You ‘doubt’ the statistics because you know they’re true and you’re trying to misdirect with that nonsense and don’t have anything convincing to say in response. The statistics come from the FBI, schlomo. Shitty trolling job. Ultimately you and your ethnic brethren will fail in suppressing the truth about black crime. Too many have awoken in 2020 alone.

  329. schrub says:

    Impossible. Articles by Striker and Anglin are worlds apart. Striker’s articles are repetative and routinely full of simple grammatical errors and misspellings resulting from sloppy editing. . They are also singularly devoid of any sense of humor whatsoever.

    On the other hand, Anglin’s articles are grammatically correct and obviously have been carefully proof read. In addition, many of them are absolutely hilarious and are often as clever as hell. In fact, as I think back, some of his articles are simply brilliant.

    Anglin is simply in a class by himself and that alone it the reason ((certain people)) have gone so very far out their way to stop him from publishing by cutting off all sorts of common funding. So sever has been the cut oof of funding option is indicated by the fact that Anglin is only able to receive donations in Bitcoins, cash or mailed personal checks (and mailed personal checks are very problematical for both the sender and receiver). He has also had to flee the country to parts unknown.

    A simple test: If you want to find who your enemy really fears the most, find out who they seek most to banish. Using this criteria alone, Anglin is easily one our side’s most effective propagandists, right alongside the similarly banned E. Michael Jones. (If they still allow to put you videos on Youtube, you are not much of a threat at all).

    ((They)) certainly don’t ignore Anglin. In fact, when he is in his top form he (like Voltaire over
    two centuries ago) drives ((them)) absolutely CRAZY.

    • Agree: TheTrumanShow
    • Replies: @acementhead
    , @JamesO
  330. fnn says:

    I’m not sure what the fully Woke position is on the Species Question, but if it’s the same as the one in the quote you provided it will eventually prove to be a big threat to the Endangered Species Act and the environmental movement in general.

  331. @Anon

    “…due to the discovery of the division of labor that lead* to the industrial revolution.”

    The above quote is nonsense. There was “division of labour” for centuries, if not millennia, before the industrial revolution. There were people around two thousand years ago, some of whom were carpenters, some fishermen, and some even cheese-makers.

    *Past perfect of the verb to lead is ‘led’.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @obwandiyag
  332. @schrub

    “Striker’s articles are repetative and routinely full of simple grammatical errors and misspellings resulting… ”

    They are also singularly devoid of any sense of humor whatsoever.


  333. Trinity says:
    @John Wear

    Notice how (((they))) never give Dr. David Duke the respect of the title he earned while (((they))) and their bootlicking shabbos goy talking heads always address Dr. David Duke as the former klansman or simply as David Duke. Of course a David Duke sighting on (((television))) in 2020 is as rare as a cotton patch in Harlem, unlike the 1990s when Dr. Duke was always set up against a STACKED audience on those Jewy talk shows like Donahue. Dr. Duke impressed Tom Snyder enough for Snyder to proclaim he would love to have Duke back on his show. haha. So long ago, I am sure that Snyder had to be accused of being a “nazi” for actually not hating Duke. (((They))) and their shabbos goy Irish talking heads like Shill O’Reilly or Pawn Vanity, know that they cannot legitimately win a FAIR AND UNBIASED DEBATE AGAINST DR. DUKE, so they are not about to have him anywhere near the small screen in 2020. Of course not all shabbos goyim talking heads are Irish, but as an Irishman, I felt compelled to call out POS like Donahue, O’LIElly and that super shabbos goy for Israel/Jews, Pawn Vanity. Each one these guys are PUKE WORTHY.

    These (((talking heads))) all speak with the same forked tongue, whether it is OAN, or the now leftist leaning Fox News or the complete anti-White shit show known as CNN, (((every last one of them))) are pro-Jewish, pro-Israel to nth degree. Even OAN is on board with worshiping a fake Black “reverend”, who committed adultery, plagiarized passages in his dissertation for a doctoral degree, ( the media will ALWAYS address Michael King as Dr. Martin Luther King, but they don’t extend the same courtesy to David Duke) and allegedly beat up white prostitutes. Have you ever heard any MSM (((news channel))) be critical of Jewish crime, Jewish power and influence or Israel? Did any single (((news network))) the make the Jewish connection in the Epstein/Mossad pedophile honeypot? IF you can’t figure this whole thing out in the year 2020, then you are beyond help. It would take an act of God to set your head on straight.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @John Wear
  334. Rurik says:

    In Search of Human Nature

    In my youth, the title of this book could be described as my personal obsession.

    Where did we come from? What are we? Why are we here?

    Being here, what should we do?

    These topics were my obsession, and when religion didn’t answer them to my satisfaction, I eventually ended up at anthropology.

    Race/ethnicity during that time, had nothing to do with my search, it was more spiritual/existential.

    I had discovered science, and I agreed that it was the only way to rationally seek truth.

    So I immersed myself in anthropology, (never had any money for a ‘proper’ education, let alone a university, but there was a lot at the public library and used book stores).

    Anyways, if you begin to truly understand what we are, you can even see us humans in an entirely different kind of light, than how we’re all raised to perceive us.

    Desmond Morris talked about it, and he looked at humans in this way too. As animals, distinct from other animal only by degree, and not by kind.

    You begin to see our hands and eyes and other anatomy, exactly like the rest of the primate/animal kingdom. You see us as apes, and nothing more. Sure, we’re well-adapted to walking upright, and we can say things like ‘I’m hungry, or I’m tired, or let’s kick their arses! Whereas chimps only grunt the same feelings before they eat or sleep or attack a rival troop. We’re taller and can talk and drive cars and such, but for 99.9999 percent of us, we’re hardly anymore enlightened, than when we finally discover how utterly un-enlightened we all are. Just look at the 20th century if you have any doubts. What would an ape do if he could? He’d build a weapon to kill his rivals, so that he could be the alpha baboon on the block. Tossing the stick in the air in anger/triumph, = building an atom bomb or the space race.

    But seeing things in this way (humans as plain animals, primates) is wrought. You come to understand viscerally how wrong it is to treat chimps and monkeys and other sentient beings as if they were simply things, to do with as we please. When the truth is they are our cousins.

    When a monkey is in despair, it’s exactly like when a human feels the same thing. But then look at how humans treat other humans. Worst than things.

    And so on..

    Thank you for this wonderful and exhaustive examination of an extremely salient and critical issue. Perhaps thee issue of our (mankind’s eternal follies and foibles) existence.

    What are we? Where did we come from? Why are we here?

    With modern anthropology, paleontology, biochemistry and the human genome project and other *(always intertwining) disciples, we now know the answers to those eternal questions. *James Watson is a God*.

    So knowing what we now know, the question becomes, ‘What should we do?’

    I would posit that we should try not to fuck up the planet for all the future humans (and other life forms).

    That would be imperative numero uno.

    Then, after that, ‘don’t be assholes to each other.

    This is where the Jewish question comes in. They need a stark and urgent lesson on that front!

    No more time to bloviate.

    Thank you Mr. Unz. You’re a national, (and species ; ) treasure.

    • Agree: Miro23, Biff
    • Replies: @Erebus
  335. Anonymous[364] • Disclaimer says:
    @American Citizen 2.0

    I think what he (Ross) is reporting is that Asians are basically normal people once you get to know them, which I think we all agree and experience in day to day interactions at work and in life in general, whereas the assessment of people who have a lot of experience with Asians would say that we are different in peculiar ways. That’s why he favorably reports/quotes a colleague calling us a “sport”.

    Like I said, I think you misunderstood Ross.

    He’s reporting what someone else told him, namely an American who has spent decades in China, and he finds this man’s remarks astonishing, which is why he was left “gasping.”

    Most people find their own groups to be the “normal human type”, and other groups to be a “sport” i.e. peculiar, strange, etc. Ross is “gasping” i.e. astonished to find some Americans feel otherwise, but these are Americans who have lived decades in China.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  336. Ron Unz says:

    One claim I made that I didn’t have time to solidly document was:

    Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the central fault line in American society had almost invariably been that separating black from white, with few scholars exploring any residual conflicts between different white ethnic groups.

    Edward Banfield was a leading political scientist of that era, and just out of curiosity I checked the index of his 1961 book Political Influence, a 350 page analysis of the politics of Chicago. Although that city was notoriously based upon white ethnic local machines, neither “Irish” nor “Italian” nor “Polish” appear anywhere in the index and only a single glancing mention of “Jew,” although there are 17 references to “Negro.”

    I think this tends to strongly support my impression that any discussion of white-ethnic politics was strongly disfavored in those decades.

  337. Ron Unz says:
    @Oliver D. Smith

    In the 1940s and 1950s, Montagu was a ‘race realist’ like Coon who argued for the tripartite racial division (“Caucasoid”, “Mongoloid”, “Negroid”) meaning large/continental populations.

    Well, I don’t want to get bogged down in what is partly a semantic dispute, but if you take a look at Prof. David Reich’s 2018 “revisionist” article on race in the NYT that caused such a huge stir and generated nearly 900 comments, his first sentence read:

    In 1942, the anthropologist Ashley Montagu published “Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race,” an influential book that argued that race is a social concept with no genetic basis.

    Reich went on to say:

    In this way, a consensus was established that among human populations there are no differences large enough to support the concept of “biological race.” Instead, it was argued, race is a “social construct,” a way of categorizing people that changes over time and across countries.

    So although it might certainly be true that Montagu’s “fine print” back then still acknowledged the existence of what we would call “races,” apparently both Reich (who had just published an entire book on the subject) and the editors of the NYT weren’t really aware of that.

    Headlines always tend to overwhelm fine print…

  338. @Ron Unz

    Any time spent on the lolcow Ollie is time wasted.

  339. Ron Unz says:

    Like I said, I think you misunderstood Ross.

    He’s reporting what someone else told him, namely an American who has spent decades in China, and he finds this man’s remarks astonishing, which is why he was left “gasping.”

    That’s exactly correct.

    I do realize that lots of people these days confine their analysis to Tweets and memes, but just ooking at a couple of Ross’s sentences and concluding that he was an anti-white (or pro-white) zealot is just totally ridiculous. His entire book on China is available here in easily readable format, so why not at least read a few paragraphs and then decide for yourselves:

  340. @Malla

    You have brought up a very interesting topic. Firstly, I don’t consider Fuerle a reliable source. SubSaharan Africa is a very simple topic, it is a cul-de-sac bounded by the Sahara and the World Ocean, and blacks are so stupid they never even made it to Madagascar(Austronesians did). The area you are talking about: SE Asia, Indonesia, New Guinea, and other SW Pacific island groups is a very complex topic, and the story is told by the interface of SE Asia and the various island groups(let’s leave out Australia for simplicity). Micronesia, Polynesia, Fiji, Samoa, The Philippines were colonized by the Austronesians, native Taiwanese who invented the multihull seagoing ship, magnificent mariners, we can leave them out too, as they gave places like Papua New Guinea and Melanesia a wide berth. So we are talking about IndoChina, Malaysia including the Andamans, Indonesia, New Guinea, Melanesia. The name of the game here for humans, like the animals and plants is TRANSITION(e.g. The Wallace Line). From West to East we have Old Stock Asians(Orang Asli of Malaysia/others), Negritos(Aeta tribals Philippines/Lesser Sundas/Andamans/others), Papuans, Melanesians, and we see a transition from people that look distinctly Asian(Orang Asli) to people, like the Papuans, that look(and behave) like black Africans. However genetic studies find no connection between Papuans and SubSaharan Africans. As a young lad, I thought that perhaps Papuans and Negritos were a remnant of a “great migration out of Africa”, but given the imbecility of the black African, I retained a gut level doubt they had the initiative to hike out of Uganda to Indonesia. It seems I was deceived by the poor quality photography available, for 21st century photos show the Negritos do not have the “burnt umber” complexion of the SubSaharan African, they are very deep copper, consistent with an Asian lineage, although that lineage is ancient, pre-interglacial. The Papuan is a bit more Afro looking. Still, both Negrito and Papuan have wooly head hair, that’s not Asian, and the Papuan(not the Negrito) has disturbing commonalities with the SubSaharan African: ridiculous outfits, goofy group dancing, constant pointless warfare and domestic violence, eager cannibalism, loud mouth absurd egotism, a distinctly Afro-style stupidity that produces idiocy like The Cargo Cult, and let’s not forget the headhunting. Now that we know the SubSaharan African is a hybrid of Homo Sapiens and Homo Erectus, and the H Erectus component is the source of black dysfunction, perhaps the Papuan hybridized with a remnant Homo Erectus population in Indonesia. It is known that Indonesia was a refugia for Homo Erectus up to 120,000 years ago(Sulu Man) and earlier(Java Man), and east of the Wallace Line more primitive flauna and flora persisted, and Papua is east of the Wallace Line, so the opportunity existed. I have left out the Melanesians, east of Papua, and very nasty customers to be avoided, but they benefited from the Austronesian passing through, who left behind pigs and tech, then wisely sailed on. I consider Papua, in its isolation, a special case. Michael Rockefeller certainly found Papua “special”, he ended up being “le specialete du jour”.

    • Thanks: Malla
  341. AaronB says:
    @John Johnson

    I agree with what you’re saying about the mainstream mostly.

    I’m not sure they are knowingly lying any more than race realists are knowingly lying. There really is a fairly large degree to which racial characteristics are not innate. They’re just blind to the fact that they are also, to a serious degree, innate. And vice versa for the race realists.

    I used to argue with race realists on this site all the time, and I found they will not seriously engage with evidence that challenges their insistence that racial characteristics are overwhelmingly innate – which I don’t think can be defended using the available evidence.

    And many years before that, I used to engage with blank slaters all the time, and I found the same thing. Believe it or not, among many of my old friends, I was the race realist.

    The liberals in the media and colleges are no longer at the stage of trying to create good. They are aware that they have wed themselves to a lie and are willing to destroy anything and anyone to keep that lie. They aren’t idealists. It’s more like an anti-White tribe that attacks anything that threatens it.

    Exactly. It has become about just attacking whites, not creating genuine racial harmony. Their motivation is to create racial harmony, but they think that the way to do this is to attack whites, because whites have been so dominant.

    So we see a misguided desire to completely eradicate racism actually backfires and creates evil. Had they been content with a reasonable reduction in overt displays of serious racism, they might have achieved a reasonably high level of racial harmony. Moreover, group preferences, if not extreme, are not evil – they create the interesting differences in culture that makes the world colorful.

    The problem is, Unz and the people here see these trends and respond by going to the opposite extreme. Instead, one might oppose extremism by advocating reasonable balance and compromise. Extremism opposed to extremism just leads to destruction.

    I don’t want to get too philosophical here, but the central trends in Western culture for a long time have been “centrifugal” – moving towards greater and greater division and “individuation”. Feminism separates men from women, etc. This “bifurcating” trend has been most evident in the real of ideas. A single idea is pushed to an extreme – but the opposite of any idea also has some validity.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  342. Anonymous[109] • Disclaimer says:

    Sean is an ethnic Irish guy from Scotland. He’s not Jewish. You’re taking his comments very personally and lashing out. Presumably you’re an American with Irish heritage and feel offended by his comments and take them personally.

    One thing to note is that a ton of Irish have emigrated to Britain, both England and Scotland, over the past 200 years. This means comparisons are not necessarily between pure samples. It also means that there’s been significant self-selection, with lots of the more enterprising and higher IQ Irish emigrating to Britain, North America, Australia over the past 200 years, leaving the lower IQ Irish disproportionately back in Ireland.

    British stereotypes about “thick Micks” i.e. the Irish being less intelligent than the British average have been around for a long time.

    After Irish independence, there was a mass exodus in the ’20s and ’30s of the English and Scottish descended Protestant Irish middle class that dominated the higher IQ middle and professional class in Irish towns and cities. Many of the Anglo-Irish landlords left as well. Like Sean said, those that remained and their descendants, often mixed with Catholics, make a disproportionate part of the higher IQ professional and upper middle class.

    I have spent lots of time traveling all around Ireland in recent years, and it does give you a sense of the differences between the Irish and Brits. It’s still very rural, and the people are much more laid back, and are much less enterprising and middle class in attitude. This is part of the appeal of the country to tourists from Britain and the US.

    Ireland naturally clusters genetically with Britain because it’s right next to it geographically. But there are obviously differences and they can be distinguished by DNA. The various Germanic and Scandinavian invaders seem to have had a greater genetic impact on Britain. Whereas in Ireland, small groups of Germanic/Scandinavians like the Hiberno-Normans, Vikings, and then the later Anglo-Irish and Protestant Scots, imposed minority elite rule while having little genetic impact on the overall population.

    • Replies: @Sean
    , @Eugene Norman
  343. I confess that I have not read this article entirely. I gott past Fuerle. One thought throughout my reading exist. There are no longer pure races (maybe Asians). But Europeans and blacks have been reproducing together for a long time, like Jefferson with Sally Hemmings and her off spring. You can see this amongst blacks like Obama. White features with brown skin as opposed to some black blacks, with very negroid features. So where do you draw the genetic line, between Erectus and Sapiens.

    All of these books are polemical in their analysis of race literally black and white. Nothing like that exist today. Not everyone has to be a genius to function and be productive in the world. Everyone can have their role.

    Black behavior of extremist today is insane these days. Kneeling to a support black protestors, after a career criminal has been killed. Crazy. Blacks killing blacks over a \$5 bag of pot and then getting caught for stealing the dead man’s cell phone. Black leaders should be pointing out the futility of black violence. At least the Maifia was a money maker for Italians. I do not understand their behavior and their racism like the NOI all based on half truths, not once pointing to the fatherless families.

    But I have seen sickening behavior from WN as kind of goons, walking around with big guns wanting to dominate everyone in site. I do not see this group as being superior in any way.

    The entire subject of race is a mixed bag and whatever conclusions these writers came to with regards to genetics of blacks vs. white. You cannot go back to a pure race life. You cannot. We all have to learn to live together rationally. Dominating one race is not acceptable. In the end we will all look like the starship of Enterprise all races working in the helm together. Some being pilots some being technicians.

  344. @Fran Taubman

    I confess that I have not read this article entirely. I gott past Fuerle. One thought throughout my reading exist. There are no longer pure races (maybe Asians). But Europeans and blacks have been reproducing together for a long time, like Jefferson with Sally Hemmings and her off spring. You can see this amongst blacks like Obama. White features with brown skin as opposed to some black blacks, with very negroid features. So where do you draw the genetic line, between Erectus and Sapiens.

    It’s true that American blacks are an admixed population, with just under 20% European genes on average, but the vast majority of American whites are undiluted in their European genetic heritage.

    I expect that will change in the future.

  345. Trinity says:
    @Fran Taubman

    So Fran, why is Israel so particular about who enters “their” nation? Why is bloodline so important to Jews? I thought being Jewish had to do with religion and not race or bloodline. Why then is Israel so racist against African Jews? Do you think Israel should embrace diversity and multiculturalism? Do you think the nation of Israel treats its Palestinian citizens and others like second class citizens? Hey, Fran, why was a fictional book about a love affair between a Palestinian man and an Israeli woman banned in Israel?

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  346. @AaronB

    I’m not sure they are knowingly lying any more than race realists are knowingly lying. There really is a fairly large degree to which racial characteristics are not innate. They’re just blind to the fact that they are also, to a serious degree, innate.

    The professors are fully aware that they are lying.

    This can be seen in any type of academic journal that allows submissions pertaining to race.

    If they truly believed that race didn’t exist then they would welcome any type of study that seeks to show racial differences. If race doesn’t exists then such studies would show the opposite.

    Mismeasure of Man is a good example. Why haven’t there been hundreds of skull studies to mock racial realists? Why is it only Hollywood that mocks such things? Because Anthro professors know full well that there are in fact physical differences that cannot be explained by environmental factors.

    These professors aren’t naïve hippies. They know that race exists and they hate that we are allowed to talk about it. In their view the ideal is to have such information kept from the public. Allowing such discussions not only undermine their teachings but in fact reveal their positions to be fraudulent.

    The problem is, Unz and the people here see these trends and respond by going to the opposite extreme.

    Some of the theories here are definitely questionable to say the least but the top 5-10 bloggers are far more in touch with reality than most of Academia. Unz is not the inverse or opposite of the mainstream. A very important different is that the bloggers here allow criticism. A mainstream race denier like Jared Diamond would never allow open questions in a forum because he knows full well that he is a con. Just a handful of questions about Guns/Germs would cause too much doubt and he is aware of this. Yet he is beloved and considered an expert by liberals. In fact his book is required reading for many classes along with Mismeasure.

    The mainstream relies on suppressing critics while Unz welcomes them. That is a massive difference. The mainstream narrative would fall apart like a house of cards if they allowed open criticism. That is why the mainstream newspapers turned off comments. NYTimes still allows them but they are heavily censored. They would NEVER let you mention something like Gould’s Morton fraud or point out problems with Guns/Germs.

    • Agree: Genrick Yagoda, Miro23
    • Replies: @AaronB
  347. Art says:

    Start on Wall St, Congress, The Pentagon if you want to fix the country. I think Jeff Bezos, Steve Schwarzman, George Soros, Sheldon Adelson etc etc are much bigger threats to us than some black guy with absolutely no power.

    Nice truth leaning comment – 1100 words – but not one of them “JEW”.

    There is NO hope of fixing America if the Jews are not explicitly mentioned as the leading tribe.

    • Agree: geokat62
  348. @John Johnson

    The article has a lot of nuanced opinion but most people will see the cover and assume that the author is arguing that Blacks are apes.

    For all the whining about the cover of Fuerle’s book, I just don’t get the association. Why would anyone conflate or confuse the Bantu people with apes? Surely only a racist could even conceive such an idea? So is this nothing more than concern trolling by racists?

    Silly racists, Bonobos are apes, Bantus are the missing link..

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  349. vinteuil says:

    24,800 words = about 50 pages.

    I made it about half way through.

    Presumably the point of all this shows up later, after everybody but the really committed cadres have fallen asleep or left the building.

  350. Art says:
    @Fran Taubman

    The entire subject of race is a mixed bag and whatever conclusions these writers came to with regards to genetics of blacks vs. white. You cannot go back to a pure race life. You cannot. We all have to learn to live together rationally. Dominating one race is not acceptable. In the end we will all look like the starship of Enterprise all races working in the helm together. Some being pilots some being technicians.

    Kudos to Fran Taubman!


    • Agree: Aking
  351. Farquad says:

    It’s clear to me that there was some “advanced” civilization prior to whatever catastrophe happened 12,500 years ago, which was probably a hybrid of Neanderthal, Denisovan and Sapiens. If the Sapiens did not come out of Africa (and this seems plausible), then where did they originate from? The Denisovans were in the Altai Mt. region and east, and the Neanderthal were in Europe to the west, with the blacks bottled up in Africa.

    It’s also important to remember that the Sahara goes from desert to lush wetlands on a 20,000 year period, so it is not always an effective barrier. Perhaps during the green Sahara periods other groups lived there and also blocked movement? It isn’t green for long enough times for a race or species to form there.

    Nonetheless, there was once much more genetic diversity than there is now, but there is still much more than we were all told. Race is much more than a social construct. I never wanted to look at the actual differences between blacks and whites, as I’ve been much more concerned with the actions of the jews who want global supremacy, but the blacks were dumb enough to let themselves be used as tools. Now that I’ve had to look at it I want no more to do with living with them, and call myself a white separatist.

  352. anon[317] • Disclaimer says:

    On a brighter note, Dr. Duke is Irish I believe.

  353. Rurik says:
    @Ron Unz

    Consider the analogous situation leading up to the Iraq War. Virtually no one in the American government or media ever explicitly claimed that Saddam had been behind the 9/11 attacks, but their headlines and speeches so strongly implied the idea that 70% of the American public soon believed Saddam had been proven guilty.

    I suspect that the reason Rothschild declared something to the effect that’ So long as I control the issuance of money, I care not who writes the laws’.

    is because whomever controls the money supply, controls everything else of consequence, including all the catastrophic developments of the 20th century and the impending horrors unfolding in the 21st century due to ((9/11)) and the Eternal Wars for Israel + the Orwellian dystopia they have planned for us all.

    Jewish supremacists are raised to believe that they must be supreme over all, and that their blood (racial lines) are sacrosanct, and guaranteed only by that effort. No?

    Isn’t this why they’ve used the unlimited power of the Fed (control of the money supply) to crush all opposition and resistance to their goals of absolute racial/tribal domination?

    Isn’t this the motivating principle behind all J-Supremacist intrigues and devices and machinations? Declare there are no races, in order to dominate and control/destroy all other rival races by using the nefarious power of the printing press, to buy up and control the levers of discourse/power?

    Isn’t that why the West is committing racial suicide, because if anyone in the West opposes the genocidal program of unlimited non-White immigration, the J-supremacists will crush them socially and financially? Isn’t that what happened to Joe Sobran, and what they did to James Watson and would like to do to David Duke, and anyone else who dares speak the truth?

    And all of this of course is a type of evolutionary psychology. A Darwinian evolutionary strategy to wipe out rival races/tribes, by telling them there is no such thing as race, now blend with the other races in order to destroy your race, because there is no such thing as race!

    Isn’t that it– in a nutshell?

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  354. @Escalade

    Is he suggesting that this game ending own goal disproves all the books discussed in this article?

    I am replying to you because I was briefly assaulted by the same doubt. After a little reflection and rereading, I came to the conclusion that the answer to that question is ‘no’. Lynn’s book discusses the relationship between IQ and Wealth. The other books discuss the relationship between race and IQ (and assorted other topics).

    I haven’t actually read any of those books — my conclusion is based solely on this article.

    • Replies: @Escalade
  355. Anon[353] • Disclaimer says:

    I’ll bet it was thrilling to only have to wait ~ a year or so for a cheeseburger. And who in their right mind then would have wanted to substitute a John Deere farm implement when they could toil hard for decades to provide meager sustenance for themselves?

  356. Sean says:

    Being Irish a little like being supposedly Native American, there is a family legend, but probably at least exaggerated. There are traditional Irish jokes about the Kerryman. Outside of those born in Ireland, I don’t think you’ll find many folk with more than 4 pure Irish great grandparents. Joe Rogan is 3/4 Italian. Judging the IQ of Irish in America from their diaspora might be be giving too little credit to urbanisation. New Yorkers always seem to be enterprising, so maybe it is a partly an upbringing thing.

    My feeling is all other things being equal the ethnic Irish of Ireland are on average somewhat below a Welsh, English or Scottish person. Then again, there are differences between Londoners and the rest of Britain and Dubliners have a similar advantage in Ireland I suspect. No one trying to get into Harvard is going to put themselves down as a WASP when they can stake a claim to being Irish (or Native American) no matter how tenuous.

    • Troll: GazaPlanet
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @GazaPlanet
  357. Rurik says:

    Presumably the point of all this shows up later,

    race is real. Very real.

    Western civilization is a product of the White race, and rival races want it destroyed, and every shred of its vile memory erased.

    Jewish supremacists have done all in their power to destroy the concept of race, as an evolutionary strategy to destroy rival races, and in particular, their main rival, the White race.

    Many very smart and well-intentioned men in recent history have pointed this all out, including anthropologists, for whom race is an integral aspect of their discipline. But even here, Jewish supremacists have used their near absolute power over academia and media and our collective discourse to scuttle any thoughtful inquiry into the subject of race, because they’re obsessed with race, and obsessed with blending the rival races together, in a grotesque and calculated attempt to destroy the White race. So they deceptively and maliciously claim that ‘there is no such thing as race!

    It’s like an assassin demanding that there are no such things as assassins, as he plunges the blade into your gizzard*.

    But then who can blame them? When their marks are so monumentally gullible and quiescent, in the face of depraved racial subjugation, miscegenation and looming genocide.

    Read the Protocols. It’s so easy! They even mock the stupid beast-like “minds” of the bovine goyim. And who can blame them?

    We’re like the Eloi from the Time Machine, marching into the sacrificial tombs to be eaten, because of some transfixing sounds. [‘you are racists, you are racists…’]

    * humans don’t have gizzards, I just like the way that sounds.

  358. TV channel BBC World News is announcing a program called ‘Storyville Global: Undercover in the Alt-Right’, scheduled for next Sunday, at 18:10 BRT (Brazil Time), 17:10 VET (Venezuela Time), and 16:10 CT (Central Time, which I think means U.S.A.).

    In the sneak peek they show some footage of Greg Johnson.

  359. @Fran Taubman

    I have seen sickening behavior from WN as kind of goons, walking around with big guns wanting to dominate everyone in site.

    Sure you have. Not at all civilized, like you Chosen and your unauthorized appearances before the Senate and Congress, demanding we bomb millions of Iranians to death in order to keep that shitty little sandpit safe for you Jewish Supremacists.

    And for the record, there are no such thing as White Supremacists. But as the 26 standing ovations Satanyehu received from the groveling scumbags in the House and Senate illustrate, Jewish Supremacists are the ones dominating everyone in sight.

    • Thanks: Iris, FLgeezer
  360. @Ron Unz

    Reich is wrong. And the ‘social construct’ nonsense is a very recent argument against race by non-scientists. Arguably every category is a ‘social construct’ so it’s pointless to make that argument:

    “Ian Hacking [1999] provides a list of almost forty categories that have recently been claimed to be socially constructed. The prime examples are race, gender, masculinity, nature, facts, reality, and the past. But the list has been growing and now includes authorship, AIDS, brotherhood, choice, danger, dementia, illness, Indian forests, inequality, the Landsat satellite system.” (Pinker, 2002)

    The scientific argument against race is not that race is a social construct, but race is an inaccurate method to capture genetic/phenotypic variation and putative racial groups aren’t useful.

    It is also extremely misleading to claim race denialists think or claim “race has no genetic [or phenotypic] basis”. Adam Hochman has covered this straw man in his papers. I am not aware of anyone who has ever actually claimed this. To see how stupid this position would be, take two putative races “Black” and “White”. No one denies on average the former are darker skinned than the latter, see page 12 of Hochman’s paper:

    Another false claim often made by ‘race realists’ is race denialists are politically correct. In fact if you look at the two main race denialist academics of the late 20th century Frank Livingstone and C. Loring Brace, both of them opposed PC. Brace also put out a paper criticising the claim race denialism is somehow a politically correct position.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @Checheno
  361. @Rurik

    I would suggest putting the nut (you) back in its shell. Man are you a confused nut job. Jews are completely split politically, religiously in every way. Jews do not act in unison on anything, never mind race. Most Jews are just waking up and trying to make it thru the day never mind this horseshit.

    Isn’t this why they’ve used the unlimited power of the Fed (control of the money supply) to crush all opposition and resistance to their goals of absolute racial/tribal domination?

    Isn’t this the motivating principle behind all J-Supremacist intrigues and devices and machinations? Declare there are no races, in order to dominate and control/destroy all other rival races by using the nefarious power of the printing press, to buy up and control the levers of discourse/power?

    You are a menace to humanity.

  362. @Fran Taubman

    Maybe what you say is true for America but still most Africans are black and most Europeans are white so the mixed races are still a small minority.

    But it is the racists of the past that have been most responsible for the mixed races as well as for the large number of blacks in America, and not the modern day liberals. Not content just with importing blacks from Africa, many of whom died in the ocean crossing, the slave owners set up slave stud farms to breed yet more slaves to sell on the slave markets and increase their profits:

    Octaroon females were especially favoured as they brought the highest price when sold into sex slavery, and to breed them it was the white slavemasters that had to copulate with the black slaves repeatedly over several generations. Furthermore they had to start with especially young slave girls who just reached puberty to generate those pricey octaroons as rapidly as possible. Of course in the process many more half-caste, quadroon and octaroon males were bred. The slave owners were exceptionally vile since these mixed races bred on their stud farms that they sold into slavery were their own children. And they were not only only mating with extremely young under-age girls, they were also practicing incest, since to breed an octaroon quickly, the slavemasters would have had to mate with their own half-caste and quadroon offspring, although they may have allowed non-related friends to participate in the breeding activities on these stud farms. Think about that for a while? Nice people those slave owners, eh? And how far behind those slaveowners were their white wives? I suppose if some mixed race baby happened to be born it was just added to those on the stud farms with nobody the wiser for it. Why throw away something that was profitable? And if they worried about their reputation, they could just declare that the baby was stillborn while the maid took it away to the slave quarters on the stud farms. So if you want to blame someone for the racial demographics of present day America it is those racist slave owners of the past that you have to look to and not the liberals of recent times.

    And where do you think that entire race of “coloureds” in South Africa came from? Just sprung out of thin air did it? And those white South Africans responsible for all that race mixing in earlier times weren’t known for being liberal but in fact extremely racist. Perhaps Apartheid was introduced to prevent this race mixing (although obviously not openly acknowledged) but it didn’t seem to help much so they got rid of it in the end.

    Hypocrisy is the word that springs to mind.

    • Replies: @Malla
  363. Iris says:
    @Fran Taubman

    Jews do not act in unison on anything, never mind race

    Of all the ethnic or religious groups which get insulted all the time (Blacks, Muslims, Arabs, Mexicans) or some of the time (Russians, Chinese) by the authors and commentators at the UR, Zionist Jews are the only ones with organised propaganda teams storming in a systematic manner any article critical of Israel. So much for “not acting in unison“.

    There indeed exist decent, principled Jews, of which you are not. People like you are the real reason for anti-Semitism.

  364. Erebus says:

    A wonderful comment Rurik. I found anthro supremely interesting in school, and though life took a different course followed it long afterwards through books and even subscribed to a couple anthro journals.

    We sit planted within the planet’s collection of animal life, and the notion that we’ll ever transcend that collection is an idyll, and a dangerous one at that.

    Thanks again.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  365. John Wear says:

    It’s too bad Dr. David Duke is never allowed on mainstream news networks anymore. He did an excellent job in the old days. The following is his interview with Wolf Blitzer at the Iranian Holocaust convention in December 2006.

  366. Rurik says:
    @Fran Taubman

    Jews are completely split politically, religiously in every way. Jews do not act in unison on anything, never mind race.

    have you ever heard of the expression, to do what’s good for the Jews’, Fran?

    It’s a sort of moral imperative that Jews are indoctrinated to believe is their holy of holies.

    How many Jews do you know who publically point out that the war on Iraq (obviously to benefit Israel) was (obviously) all based on ((lies and treachery and guile))?

    I mean this was the most catastrophic foreign policy disaster of our time. An atrocity against human rights and lives, a crime against all known tenets of International Law going back to Nuremburg. It has cost the American people untold tens of thousands of lives, maimed or dead. Trillions of dollars in borrowed loot. Untold billions in medical care and other losses. And not least of all, the justifiable hatred of the entire Muslim world and a karmic blowback for millions of innocent lives lost or destroyed.

    And yet let’s listen to the Jewish voices demanding an account for this historic enormity and demonic holocaust of death and suffering…

    Chuck Schumer..

    Adam Schiff..

    Jerry Nadler..

    Even Obama appointee Waserman-Scultz went to participate in Obama’s public humiliation when Bibi hectored and humiliated our president from his own capital.

    Or consider the Holocaust, for instance Fran.

    We all know today about the devil’s lies about lampshades and soap. About fake gas chambers and all sorts of lies.

    How many of those Jews you’re talking about are pointing out that the whole thing was a smear, intended to justify the horrific treatment of Germans after the war? And create a pretext for Israel, a criminal nation birthed in murder and racial supremacist terror?

    The very word ‘holocaust’ is actually a ‘projection’ of sorts, because it was really the German people that were burned alive in very real holocausts, like Dresden and Hamburg..

    How many of those dissident Jews you’re speaking of are demanding the truth, and pointing out the lies? How many are saying that we must have an honest discussion and open debate about the ‘Holocaust’, since a genocide is being perpetrated in the Jewish people’s name today. Right now.


    There are millions of Gentiles that would take exception to my characterization of the Holocaust. Because unlike the Jews, we have spirited debates about all kinds of issues and historical events, (or non-events ; )

    But it seems to me Fran, that when it come to shibboleths like the ‘holy holocaust’, that there is a near uniform, almost 100% alignment when it comes to parroting the importance of that minor event. And the lies associated with it.

    Good for the Jews itz, when they rally around their mendacity and evolutionary strategies, huh?

    You are a menace to humanity.

    You once called me dangerous.

    I’ve gotten a few plaudits and back-slaps for my efforts here, (and am grateful for them). But really, yours are some of the ones I consider most precious.

    You’ve hinted at it before, but what I’d really like to see would be for you to publically demand (like the Maven sort of did) from Ron Unz that he ban me permanently from his site.

    I confess, I too have an ego, (humble and diminutive as it is) but that would pretty much be the icing on the cake.

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  367. @Trinity

    I thought being Jewish had to do with religion and not race or bloodline.\

    Do you even have blood Trinity, because you sound like a bloodless ghoul, all bad and scary, telling the chosen to get with the program and change or understand their days are numbered. Who would put up with a Jew banning a book about a fictions love affair. RACIST!! Jews get in line and be prepared!!! We are coming for you and soon.!!

    No Jews could ever please you Trinity, it would spoil your death party.

  368. Tim too says:

    Where does this all end up? Charles Beard et al? The FDR clique massacre/rewriting of history?

    Beard also wrote on topics like these.

    It ends up in the memory hole.

  369. American Citizen 2.0 says:
    @John Johnson

    I use the site to journal about current events mostly. I like the fact that the articles often times come from a dark, weird political place because they make me think about what I really believe. As a result, I indulge a lot of thoughts on here that obviously wouldn’t fly in normal life.

    I encourage everyone to do the same. Just say what you think and then come back and read it later and see if you still think it.

    That being said, I was attracted to this site instead of the myriad other far right sites one can post on mainly because there are a lot of people who post ideas that aren’t far right. If you are posting in the comment threads on (for example) one of the stormer sites you are never going to hear anything but the farthest far right nationalist/racial ideas. That’s not very fun because it’s very predictable.

    Older guys who have nothing else to do write most of the comments on here. It’s not that big of deal. We have failed to stop gay marriage, transexual sex ed, and a thousand other leftist political programs, so it’s not like us sitting here exchanging opinions is having a major effect on the trajectory of western civilization. We are the end of the road for Europe. It fizzled. We all had opinions about its demise…. And then everyone on earth will just move on to destroying something else.

  370. Rurik says:

    We sit planted within the planet’s collection of animal life, and the notion that we’ll ever transcend that collection is an idyll, and a dangerous one at that.

    Thank you Erebus,

    It is very dangerous, because this world, and the assorted miracles on it, may be the only one of its kind in the universe. Our existence is so utterly unlikely, but here we are!

    Were it not for those amino acids, all congealing around in that soup, and then the serendipitous asteroid, that did in our rivals, and made those furry little ancestors our unlikely progenitors, this, and self-aware life in this otherwise devoid universe, would never have happened.

    But if you believe that all that’s necessary for a humpback whale or Shakespeare sonnet is the whim of some God to wave His hand, then you’ll never come close to appreciating just how unimaginably unlikely and miraculous our (and the rest of creation’s) existence actually is. And just how sinful and evil it will be for us to destroy it all out of our petty primate urges for a baboon-like domination of our rivals: (the Old Testament, red in tooth and claw ; )

    Thanks again.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  371. Bernie says:
    @Fran Taubman

    “You cannot go back to a pure race life. You cannot. ”

    Every single non-white nation seems to be doing pretty good in keeping their races not just pure but dominant in their own nations.

    • Agree: Fran Taubman
  372. @cortesar

    Today as we see the technological and economical rise of Est [sic], let me paraphrase Saul Bellow and ask a question

    “Who is the Tolstoy of the Chinese? The Proust of the Koreans? I’d be happy to read them.”

    I am surprised that Bellow had such a low opinion of the Chinese and Koreans and that he would publicly make such an ignorant statement.

    FYI, the Chinese Tolstoy is Luo Guanzhong (羅貫中); his Romance of the Three Kingdoms written in the 14th Century, or about 400 years before Tolstoy’s War & Peace (the Chinese novel predates the English novel by about 300 years, btw) has a total of 800,000 words and nearly a thousand dramatic characters in 120 chapters.

    Can’t say who’s the most celebrated Korean pederast or literary equivalent of Proust is because that’s not my area of expertise or interest… but if Saul Bellow meant what he said, then he would have to learn Chinese first before he could read Romance of the Three Kingdoms, though the novel was translated into English in 1925.

    However, upon further digging, I have discovered that you have grossly misquoted Bellow. See his Wikipedia page for his low opinion of Africans and ‘darkies’ in general:

    Bellow also thrust himself into the often contentious realm of Jewish and African-American relations. Bellow was critical of multiculturalism and according to Alfred Kazin once said: “Who is the Tolstoy of the Zulus? The Proust of the Papuans? I’d be glad to read him.”

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  373. Ron Unz says:
    @Oliver D. Smith

    Reich is wrong. And the ‘social construct’ nonsense is a very recent argument against race by non-scientists. Arguably every category is a ‘social construct’ so it’s pointless to make that argument…To see how stupid this position would be, take two putative races “Black” and “White”. No one denies on average the former are darker skinned than the latter

    Well, Reich is a high-ranking Harvard Genetics professor, who had just published a best-selling 368pp book about race, which was praised to the skies by a plethora of top-experts and publications all across the ideological landscape. And he made that “wrong” statement in the very first sentence of his very long New York Times article.

    So while you could plausibly argue that Reich and the NYT “misunderstood” Montagu, such a misunderstanding seems to have become extremely widespread, almost ubiquitous among our intellectual elites over the last three generations. I glanced over the 894 comments to Reich’s NYT piece, and it looked like most of them not only also “misunderstood” Montagu, but were so committed to that “misunderstanding” that they denounced Reich for challenging its scientific correctness. You may call such a position “stupid,” but you seem to be in a rather small minority.

    That’s just the natural outcome of Montagu’s propaganda-strategy. Promote “Race is a Dangerous Myth” in the headlines of all your books and speeches, then arrange to purge those like Coon who oppose you. After a couple of generations or so, that position—“stupid” or not—becomes almost universal outside of the narrow scientific community.

    I don’t know if you’ve read my American Pravda serie