At TOQ Online, Ted Sallis responds to Guy White’s response. I’m crossposting this here for G.W.’s benefit. He frequently reads this site. – Hunter Wallace
Ted Sallis:
Guy White is an absolute retard. I loved the part in which he argued that “Berbers are white” because “scientists” (who?) say so, and that “the American government says so.” That’s great. The government also considers Arabs and Iranians to be “white.” Certainly if you consider Jews to be white you’ll also agree that Arabs and Iranians are white too. Note that he thinks that a picture drawn by Ancient Egyptians is somehow “proof” of his bizarre racial “theories.”
Once again, he mixes and matches figures from different papers; I’ve already critiqued his stupidity in comparing charts that contain different population groups at different levels of genetic relatedness.
Note as well that he completely ignores the data showing that Jews are Middle-Eastern-European mixes. I guess that’s the 5% of the “truth” he’s leaving out.
Guy White claims there is no evidence that Jews would be more distant from groups like Germans than say are Romanians. A detailed analysis of Jews and a variety of European populations *in the same study* has not been done, but I note a preliminary analysis:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2211542/
put the Fst distance of a predominantly Ashkenazi cluster from a predominantly NW European cluster at almost twice the distance of the NW Europeans to a predominanly SE European cluster. (I note that Heath et al puts German-Romanian Fst at less 1/5 of what the Price paper puts Jewish-NW Euro Fst, put not wanting to mix “apples and oranges” I will not make any conclusions from that).
Like I said in my essay, more work needs to be done and, unlike Guy White, I’m not making any hysterical dogmatic conclusions. It is evident – and this is the point of my essay – that the Ashkenazi are not a European ethnic group. They are a Middle-Eastern-European mix, most likely.
With respect to “confusing continents with race,” I’d point to Figure 1 here:
http://hagsc.org/myerslab/papers/LiAbsher-Science-HGDP.pdf
and, ignoring the Adygi, no more European than are the Jews, you see a clear difference in ancestral proportions between European and non-European populations. I can also point to an abstract from the 2008 ASHG from Witherspoon et al, putting European Fst differences as less than that found between Indian caste groups and less than different groups of Japanese samples. By the way, the NW Euro-Jewish Fst in the Price et al study is larger than the Indian caste/Japanese group Fsts from the Witherspoon abstract.
My point is not that “Jews are not white” (define: white), or that the Ashkenazim are not very close to Europeans. Indeed, even the Price Fst is low and if you want to extend “white” to include that level of genetic distance, fine. There is no “textbook definition” of “white Fst.”
But do NOT lie and say that the Ashkenazim are a European ethnic group, like all the gentile groups. It is not so, and the studies I cited in the original essay confirm this to the extent that the available data allow us to make a tentative conclusion.
To summarize: Guy White’s fundamental dishonesty on this topic is evident in that he completely ignores the data showing that the Ashkenazi exhibit significant amounts of modern, Middle Eastern ancestry, and that the genetic distinction between Ashkenazim and Europeans is most likely due to this Middle Eastern heritage. This is supported by the single locus marker work of Hammer, as well as the Blood paper (from which the “Patriarchs” figure was obtained) demonstrating sharing of disease alleles between Askkenazi, Sephardic, and “Oriental” Jews. And if the Ashkenazi are just the same as Europeans, how is it (Need et al), that individuals with even just one Ashkenazi grandparent (much less four!) can be distinguished from Europeans? Where’s the 5% of “missing truth?”
White is also dishonest to ignore the preliminary Fst data that show that White’s comment about Germans, Jews, and Romanians is undoubtedly wrong.
He is merely being silly when he asserts that US government racial definitions, and Ancient Egyptian drawings, are somehow relevant to modern racial science.
He is being obfuscatory when he makes believe that “continental population groups” (which many population geneticists use in lieu of the dreaded word “race”) do not share a degree of genetic commonality.
Since Guy White is free to define “white” as he pleases, and since a plausible argument for Jewish inclusion can be made, the original essay at The Occidental Observer specifically states that the issue is NOT one of inclusion/exclusion.
The issue instead is simply whether the Ashkenazi can be considered a European, western ethnic group similar to the gentile ethnic groups of Europe. As the Ashkenazi can be well distinguished from northern Europeans and from southern Europeans and from eastern Europeans (at least, Russians) (Seldin et al, Price et al, Need et al), it is difficult to understand how they can be European if they are distinct from all types of Europeans (putting aside the cultural arguments made in the original article).
The Ashkenazim are also distinct it seems from Middle Easterners as well, despite the mixed ancestry. I believe that the Ashkenazim can be considered an independent “mini-race” or “mini-subrace,” a stabilized blend of Middle Eastern and European stocks who became modified over the centuries through endogamy, drift, and selection. This may be right or it may be wrong. Let’s see future data instead of the dogmatic hysteria of Guy White and his fellows. If somehow it turns out that he’s correct, we can all admit it – but the way things stand today, with the data we have today, he is simply wrong.
Many Ashkenazi are well pleased with the genetic data, since those data generally support Jewish history, tradition, and identity. Again, I’m not sure why anyone would want to strip from this ancient people their objectively determined lineage.
The truth about race and genetics is being painstakenly built up over the years in the teeth of fierce race-denial from politically motivated “academics.” What we do not need is people allegedly “race realist” distorting these data because they do not like the implications.
The most prudent approach is to judge the current data on its merits and wait to see what the future brings.
Guy White 1
Tom Sallis 0
Both Hunter and Sallis show superhuman patience and determination by debating Guy White.
iceman
Guy White 1
Tom Sallis 0
LOL
The ankle sniping act does get rather boring, though I surmise the scars left from the shellacking “iceman” received at the hands of Sallis obviously run quite deep.
If you can’t honestly look back at this, and see that Guy White comes out on top, I question your objectivity.
For instance I hate both political parties but would easily say Kerry outdated Bush and Obama outdebated McCain.
Sallis moved the goal post so many times that he went out of the stadium.
If the question makes sense, why not reverse it and ask- “Are Whites Jews?”
The question was not “are Jews middle eastern admixed” as all Europeans are if you go back far enough. Jews are merely more recently mixed.
The question was “are Jews white” meaning anthropologically and genetically in the same category as Europeans and other Caucasoids who not mixed with other races.
Guy White is quite clueless; he used a graph showing the third and fourth principal components to claim that “Ashkenazi Jews are smack in the middle of the white race.” Of course, such a tall conclusion would only follow from a graph of the first two principal components (which capture most of the population-distinctive variance).
There is much more to deconstruct from his panegyric, but it is quite pointless to waste one’s time on such a blatant troll.
Talk about moving the goal posts. Are Jews white? No, is the correct answer.
I believe that you are the one who has a hard time with this recurring answer. So, you are only part white? So is Obama. Who cares?
Sallis quotes directly from the relevant academic literature. Guy White offers his amateur intrepretation of genetic clusters he found on Google Maps. The Jews appear to me what they have always claimed to be: the descendants of the Ancient Hebrews, a Middle Eastern population.
As the Ashkenazi can be well distinguished from northern Europeans and from southern Europeans and from eastern Europeans (at least, Russians) (Seldin et al, Price et al, Need et al), it is difficult to understand how they can be European if they are distinct from all types of Europeans (putting aside the cultural arguments made in the original article).
With NEs I agree, but not with SEs. Jews can often blend in with Southern Europeans. Richard Poe, who is distinctly Jewish (Armenoid), bragged how Italians assumed he was Italian when he traveled there.
That is one of the arguments I encountered in the HBD crowd, that Jews are basically Southern Europeans. And to discount Jews means to discount SEs.
Are Jews Caucasoid? Yes.
Are Jews European? No.
More precisely, do Jews have a European origin? No.
Does Guy White know the difference between an ancestor and a descendant?
He doesn’t know the difference between ethnicity and sub-race either.
The United States was founded by Northwestern Europeans, and most whites in America are Nordish. That the United States is NW European is much more important than whether or not Berbers, Jews, Turks, Greeks, or Sicilians are white.
http://www.racialcompact.com
Wouldn’t the anti-Semitic position be that Jews aren’t indigenous to Israel/Palestine?
“Talk about moving the goal posts. Are Jews white? No, is the correct answer.
I believe that you are the one who has a hard time with this recurring answer. So, you are only part white? So is Obama. Who cares?”
Are europeans and middle easterners who don’t have negroid or mongoloid admixture different races?
No is the correct answer.
Guy White responds again:
http://guywhite.wordpress.com/2009/12/04/cut-and-paste-or-lie-or-on-paternity-and-races/
JW,
If you are reading this, now would be as good a time as any to fire up Western Biopolitics.
The United States was founded by Northwestern Europeans, and most whites in America are Nordish. That the United States is NW European is much more important than whether or not Berbers, Jews, Turks, Greeks, or Sicilians are white.
http://www.racialcompact.com/
If we divide Caucasoid mankind into Europeans and middle easterners, we have to admit that the similarity far exceeds the variation. If anyone questions this, my response is simply “LOL.”
That’s why me and Guy white are right and Hunter, JW Holiday, and Sallis are wrong.
Ted Sallis = JW Holliday.
that explains it
I wouldn’t argue that Syrians, Palestinians, Egyptians, or Armenians are White. Caucasian, yes. White European, no. If Ashkenazi Jews are indigenous to Palestine, why should anyone expect them to be White?
It is worth noting that we never have this debate about Georgians or Armenians. The relative whiteness of the Jews is not why we find them objectionable.
I would argue that biologically they are white to the extent they aren’t mixed with Blacks. That doesn’t mean I’d be against completely decimating them if they support Sharia law.
Some anthropologists believe that the origin of Jews was the northern part of the middle east (ie, around Turkey), not the Southern. That explains why Jews cluster close to Europe but at the edge. That an admixture.
Are you referring to the Khazar theory? I thought it was discredited. To my knowledge, Jews insist the genetic data shows they are indigenous to Israel/Palestine and claim anyone who suggests otherwise is an anti-Semite.
No because the Khazars were mongols and the alleged theory claims it happened.
I’m saying the actual founders, Abraham, etc. were not equal to Arabs according to some anthropology hobbyists.
I really need to proofread my posts.
The theory claimed kahazars mass converted later on.
I’m claiming Jews were possibly always northern middle eastern from Abraham and Moses.
I agree with this. Jews are not a genetically European people. They are a European – Middle Eastern mix. That’s quite clear.
The Khazar theory is indeed discredited, however, a few Jews have considerable Khazar blood, but not many, maybe 3%. About 13% have some Khazar blood, but not much.
As a side note, I came upon this and was struck by the statement of this mulatto with vitiligo: “Today, at the age of 44, as a result of the skin condition vitiligo, I am white. Were you to see me in the street, it wouldn’t cross your mind that I’m anything other than a typical middle-aged Caucasian man.”
Can the Brits not spot a light-skinned Negroid? No wonder Jews pass for white so easily over there.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1201841/I-turned-black-white-How-skin-disordered-changed-mans-identity-place-world.html
kahazars look like this
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads9/Khazar013.jpg
There are only two reasons to explain why Jews cluster close to Europe (actually on the edge). Much closer than Arabs.
theory 1 : jews mixed a lot
theory 2 : jews were always close to europeans
I believe its quite possible Jews were always similar to Turks genetically (not the Mongol ones, the Caucasoid ones). They took in some Euro DNA, but the main reason they cluster so close is that they were always distinct from Arabs.
It is worth noting that we never have this debate about Georgians or Armenians. The relative whiteness of the Jews is not why we find them objectionable.
Interesting point. This seems to be true of Lebanese Christians as well. Nobody seems to really notice or care about this when it comes to people like Ralph Nader, Doug Flutie, Gen. Abizaid, etc. Phenotypically they’re similar, especially with coloration. Though Lebanese Christians do seem to have some slightly muted, less prominent facial features compared to Jews.
Prozium, at the bottom of this debate, I think you’ll find that it is easier for me to accept “Caucasoid=White” because you have the goal of an ethnostate with clear racial laws and I don’t. I’m a right winger, but not a WN.
If you just said “I’m making the political decision not to include Middle Easteners despite their biological similarities,” I’d understand it. It’s people like JW holiday who post psuedo-science to justify it and insult the intelligence of everyone else that deserve a response.
kikeman, you’re the only one posting “pseudo-science”. 🙄
Where has Ted Sallis/JWH posted pseudo-science? I disagree with his approach on certain issues but haven’t seen where he posted something that was outright wrong.
Considering the raking over the coals Guy White has received from his intellectual superiors in the blogosphere (n/a taking him to task for his continued claims regarding blacks and testosterone, H.W. taking him to task for ignoring evidence about disproportionate influence of Jews), Guy White’s actual score is deep in the negatives right now.
Your only interest is in seeing that Jews are classified as whites, hence you defend and promote people like Guy White and CvH. Though I will say I would be embarrassed to have either one of those fools on my side.
Your forgetting who is in the mainstream on this issue, and who is out of the mainstream. Who has a focus, and who is questioning the focus. Who is supported by American law, confederate law, hell even the original kkk considered Jews to be white (though the second branch excluded them on xenophobic grounds). Who is supported by those anthropologists which acknowledge the existence of race. It isn’t that I am pushing a radical idea. You are the radical, and I’m reading your arguments rebuking them systematically. You wns have pumped your arguments around the internet like a factory machine building textiles.
I’m not for being mainstream or submitting to the establishment, but I’m also not for posting something just because it’s controversial. I start controversies, but I make sure they are in line with my beliefs.
I agree that I should just retreat into mainstream society, as debating with you is pointless, but it’s fun to debate you guys. It sharpens my skills and I believe objective observers can see I usually outperform my opponents. Of course, you wouldn’t qualify as an objective observer.
wns talk about jews being non-white more than jews talk about the holocaust.
Problem is that if you by genes, Sardinians are way more out of the European mainstream than Jews are, so you are going to have to say that Sards are not Europeans.
Iceman, Jews came from the Turko – Armenoid – Kurd stock of 3,500 years ago. I’m not sure how Asiatic that was. When did the Asiatics come to Turkey?
Not all Turks are asiatic. Mustafa Kemel is obviously Caucasoid. I specifically said Jews are probably related to Caucasoid turks.
I’m moving on here. It’s fun to debate people, but I’m realizing I’m blowing way too much time and its kindov pointless. You hate Jews. I like Jews. leave it at that. See you on a free speech forum some day, perhaps.
What the KKK and Confederacy thought about Jews at the time is irrelevant. We aren’t neo-Confederates or neo-Klansmen (well I hope anyway). This isn’t even a political issue per se it is just a question of genetics and anthropology.
Ted Sallis even says that the practical issue of assimilating Jews exists independently of this question regarding whiteness, so I’m not sure why you have such a big issue with him. Infantile obsession with acceptance as white?
Ted Sallis isn’t making the claim that Jews aren’t Caucasian, he is merely saying that they are distant from the European average, which is true, and any anthropologist worth their salt will admit (and he has provided the data). You are just grasping at straws. You seem to have a bug up your butt over this admission, why?
I’m not exactly sure how you come to the conclusion that you are outperforming us, but if it helps your self-esteem, then feel free to hold that belief, it certainly will not deter me. I have a feeling that the objective observers will not come to the same conclusion as you, though.
My deal is this: if you want to be white in my book, then stop being Jewish (culturally, that is). You wont, so I have no intention on classifying you as white. But you’ll scream all day and night demanding acceptance anyway.
This discussion is useless without a scientific definition of the word ‘white’. I have tentatively defined ‘white’ as a Caucasoid belonging to the Nordid, Mediterranid, or Alpinid substocks – the principal races to be found in Europe. The question then is whether or not Ashkenazi Jews fall within any one of the forementioned categories.
National Rebirth
Antelope have declared that the Arabian Oryx is not an antelope.
Beer has declared that Lowenbrau is not beer.
National Rebirth,
The entire Nordic, Alpinic, Mediterranean system never did receive the corroboration from genetic, linguistic, or any other fields to really achieve any legitimacy. For me, I believe that the easiest way to stack things is by river valleys, haplogroups, and language families, bundling them in a way that presumes the major river valleys played a central role in human history. It all matches up very nicely.
Wikitopian,
Until geneticists are able to disentangle the numerous polygenes which determine the shape of the human skull, the distinctions between typical crania found in the various races of man cannot be described by purely genetic criteria. The study of group morphology remains essential in the taxonomic classification of man.
National Rebirth
‘Are you referring to the Khazar theory? I thought it was discredited. To my knowledge, Jews insist the genetic data shows they are indigenous to Israel/Palestine and claim anyone who suggests otherwise is an anti-Semite.’
I think the Khazar theory is out of date, but it’s not fraudulent.
By contrast, Freud, Boas, et al. are indeed fraudulent.
Likewise, Jews who claim that their genes prove they’re from Palestine are probably writing checks that their science can’t cash. Palestine had a lot of inhabitants in the ancient world. Trying to assign real estate on the basis of archaeology is not scientific.
I like the statement by Mark that Jews are Caucasoid but not European.
I would be very interested in getting a better handle on the genetic science involved. I would like to find out if olive-skinned Sicilians are European.
It should in principle be possible to avow loyalty to some genes but not others. Unfortunately I’m too ignorant of genetics at the present moment to say how one might be loyal to the genes of Hungary, and even to Romania and the Czech Republic, without any sense of loyalty to the genes of France. So at the moment my notions of nationalism might as well be stuck in the 19th century.
None of the above is meant to suggest that whites in Hungary and whites in France have any quarrel. No wars between brothers, etc.
I don’t intend to spend too much time debating this, but it should be noted that a real life ethnostate could exclude whoever it wants to. It could exclude Spanish speakers, left handers, Germans or Irish people. My point is that Jews could be excluded without JWH’s laughable genetic justification. Yes Jews are identifiable but a Newfoundland Black Labrador retriever is identifiable compared to a European Black Labrador retriever. A dog owner who can’t see that they are racially linked is suffering from linkage blindness.
I wouldn’t really care if you excluded people of Jewish ancestry from a little state in internal to America. It’s the calls for wholesale deportation from all of America that are over the top. To that extent, your goals conflict with mine and obviously that limits the capability of collaboration. I don’t get how people like Jared Taylor think they can have philosemites and antisemite work together. LOL.
I mean work together under the banner of ethno-nationalism.
I work together with all kinds of people under the banner of free speech.
“I don’t get how people like Jared Taylor think they can have philosemites and antisemite work together.”
Anti-Semites are useful to the pro-White movement in four ways.
1. Fill seats with fannies.
2. Organizational grunt work
3. Occasionally raise legitimate points about malfeasance of certain Jewish groups, individual Jews, the neoconservative agenda.
4. When the time comes for the pro-white movement to grow, throwing them under the bus is a good way to demonstrate that the mainstream pro-white group (the new BNP for instance) is not group of mouth-frothing, knuckle-dragging extremists.
Iceman still continues to miss the point.