In The New York Times, David Brooks points out some obvious truths about the Haitian earthquake. A 7.0 earthquake struck the Bay Area in California in 1989. It only killed 63 people. The earthquake itself cannot explain the devastation in Haiti.
Brooks quickly dispels several liberal myths: foreign aid will work in Haiti, the country is poor because of the legacy of slavery and colonialism, the environment is holding Haiti back. Unfortunately, he goes on to say that Haiti suffers from “a complex web of progress-resistant cultural influences” which have retarded its development.
Like Steve Sailer, I don’t believe Brooks is dumb enough to actually believe this. Racial differences in intelligence are at the root of the problem, but Brooks cannot come out and say this in the mainstream without violating PC etiquette and losing his sinecure as prominent columnist in the Obamanation.
While on the subject of race, has anyone seen a scholarly article anywhere recently about the approximate number of years of evolutionary developmental difference that exists between the sub Saharan Negro race, and the White European race? In the current ideological climate of race denial and liberal political tyranny, very few would, of course, venture to voice such research findings about anthropology and genetics. From my reading of Nicholas Wade’s book, Before The Dawn, as well as Spencer Wells’ research, it looks like there might well be 60 to 70,000 years of evolutionary differences between Negroes and Whites. All of this is predicated upon the fact that the Blacks remained in stasis in Africa, retaining their strong simian-like features and low IQ, while Whites advanced through natural selection in the harsher, winnowing climate of Europe and the Pontic steppes, to a higher level of intelligent humanity.
“In the current ideological climate of race denial and liberal political tyranny,”
What is the difference between the old Soviet Union and today’s American campus? Not much, it seems:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/11/pc-never-died
Reminds of this
Room 401 – MTV Shows
I can’t believe he put down voodoo.
Still, he mentions Barbados, and it’s a good point; Barbados is almost as black as Haiti but not nearly as bad. Why’s that? It suggests that there are cultural reasons why Haiti is so especially bad that a race-denier can legitimately dwell on.
“It suggests that there are cultural reasons why Haiti is so especially bad that a race-denier can legitimately dwell on.”
But were it so, Terrence. The differences in the development in Barbados as contrasted with Haiti can be explained by a 4% European proportion of the population in Barbados that more or less runs things and facilitates tourism, some light manufacturing and outside investment in said. Also, Haiti has a higher population density and the highest fertility rate in the Western hemisphere. In short, too many niggers (and I use that term advisedly, as does this site’s owner) packed in too close breeding like rabbits with not enough White men to keep them in line.
‘But…but…it’s our Christian duty to shield our eyes from the truth.’
Maybe for you, but not for me.
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/015376.html
Lawrence Auster: Paleoconservatives should not question Saints Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks. It is often “kneejerk meanspiritedness” to criticize King. We must respect the cultural myths of our anti-white society. Indoctrinating white elementary school students with anti-white messages is perfectly fine.
@Junghans,
Its hard to find data on the length of time separating the different races. Jared Taylor, who is very well informed, states that Africans and Whites are separated by 150,000 years, while Asians and Whites are separated by 40,000 years (http://www.prometheism.net/euvolution/jaredtaylor.html). I dont have a link to the original information he is quoting though.
@Captain Chaos,
Please refrain from using the word “Nigger”, and instead use the more polite term “Negro” or “Negroid”, which Negroid individuals find considerably more palatable.
Our new motto for the South: Haiti, coming soon to a neighborhood near you.
Barbados is almost twice as densely populated.
Yup, Barbados is more densely populated than Haiti, my bad.
It seems to me that any people’s situation is a result of a combination of inborn differences, institutions, and history. Thus Hispanic El Paso and Hispanic Juarez look very different. Black Haiti and Black Barbados look different, and many African countries are in better shape than Haiti (particularly in the crime and violence department). Finally, of course, Europe looks very different from Africa. So IQ is a factor, and it’s important, but it’s not the only factor, and Haiti seems to have an especially depressing constellation of limited quality human talent, a violent and unstable history, a parallel crazy voodoo religious tradition alongside its Catholicism, and terrible and non-functioning institutions.
Brooks calls for “paternalism.”
I found that interesting. That’s acknowledging that these people are not capable of self governance! What a racist!
Thanks, Andrew. I don’t think that the promotheism.net site is active anymore. Taylor’s information about the evolutionary time differences between Whites and East Asians concurs with what I’ve found. The Negro and White evolutionary differences are very much greater, whatever they are. I haven’t seen anything recently by Rushton or Lynn, reflecting the latest genetic research on the evolutionary gap, although there may be.
I’d say between four hundred thousand and seven hundred thousand years, possibly as much as two million (years of evolutionary lag of true West-Central African Negroes behind true Euros).
Were true Euros in Europe that long ago? I thought that mankind came “out of Africa” about 50,000 or so years ago. That the Australian Aborigines are descended from this group and kept in more or less a time capsule, and that human evolution has been surprisingly dramatic and recent, mostly taking place in the last 20-30,000 years or so.
The estimates for when Negroes came out of Africa and started changing into white people range from 40K to 125K years ago, most Jews, French intellectuals, and other miscegenation advocates such as Canadian Peter Frost preferring the 40K estimate for emotional reasons.
But what was it, exactly, that came out of Africa? Was it Negroes? Hardly: there weren’t Negroes 40K-125K years ago and there weren’t Negroes in northeastern Africa (the part of Africa our African ancestors are claimed to have come out of) until 2,000 BC, so whatever came out of Africa 40 to 125 K years ago, it wasn’t Negroes.
http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/kinship_and_fertility/#c55570
Measuring the distance between Whites and Blacks in terms of years of divergence is flawed on several levels. For one, it implies a sort of elementary (but pervasive) assumption that evolution is a process of lesser creatures striving to become handsome White men. It’s inaccurate to presume that a greater evolutionary distance implies greater difference in intelligence. For example, East Asians are more distantly related to us than Turks, yet they’re more fair and intelligent than Turks.
Another thing this does is unfairly pegs Blacks as being the omega of human dimness and primitiveness. Bantoid/Congoid/West African are numerous and they’re the most familiar to Westerners. But there’s an entirely lower rung on the ladder which includes bushmen, pygmies, negritoes, and Indigenous Australians. Congoid Africans have substantial descent from populations that migrated back to Africa from Eurasia. They engaged in agriculture and designed some rudimentary trading outposts. They’re not that primitive.
I believe that Eurasians, particularly Whites, have benefited from an influx of Neanderthal adaptations that essentially comprise the difference between ourselves and the rest of the human races. As such, we may be as much as 500k years divergent from African Bushmen from that perspective. In the narrowest respect, one can demonstrate that East African Blacks borrow heavily from Semitic influences, and may be only a couple tens of thousands of years divergent from that perspective.
Blacks don’t lag behind Whites evolutionarily. One could just as easily say that we lag behind Blacks because our bodies have terrible camouflage, are very inefficient with calories, and are inferior at locomotion. Malaria kicks our asses. In fact, our flesh actually boils, developing painful rashes, when we are exposed to sunlight. How adaptive is that?
The Multiregional Theory maintains we’re partly descended from people whose ancestors had come out of Africa at the H. erectus stage, way before H. sapiens, and evolved in various regions outside of Africa for long periods before the advent of H. sapiens. Furthermore, the theory that we’re partly Neanderthal is not yet laid to rest, and if we’re partly Neanderthal we partly go back many hundreds of thousands of years in Europe and other places away from Africa.
“I haven’t seen anything recently by Rushton or Lynn, reflecting the latest genetic research on the evolutionary gap, although there may be.” – Junghans
Why has no one here read Fuerle? He goes further into Euro-Negroid racial differences than Lynn or Rushton ever have. I strongly recommend racialists to read his work.
But in all cases of “Out of Africa” you’re talking about archaic H. sapiens who came out of the northeastern tip of Africa and spread. There were no Negroes in the northeastern tip of Africa at the time these archaic H. sapiens are said to have crossed into western Asia and begun to spread. So what were they? Certainly not West-Central African Negroes, what all the Jews, French intellectuals, miscegenation advocates like Peter Frost, and other usual suspects keep trying to brainwash us into believing we’re partly descended from at only 40 thousand years remove. Yeah, try two million, more like.
Good book, free online:
http://erectuswalksamongst.us/
Must reading.
“Blacks don’t lag behind Whites evolutionarily.”
They are not capable of civilization.
“One could just as easily say that we lag behind Blacks because our bodies have terrible camouflage, are very inefficient with calories, and are inferior at locomotion.”
These conclusions are dubious. There ought to be studies to back up such claims, otherwise I’m frankly very skeptical.
“Malaria kicks our asses. In fact, our flesh actually boils, developing painful rashes, when we are exposed to sunlight. How adaptive is that?”
We are adapted to the climate of NW Eurasia and historically did not have any significant adaptive problems when limited to this environment. Malaria was not a significant threat. And I find it puzzling that you say nothing about sickle-cell anemia and the general Negroid predisposition towards worse general health.
Interesting thoughts, once again, from Wikitopian. Wish you had your own blog.
I believe Rushton and Jensen and Murray all admit that environmental factors likely explain half of the intelligence differential, genetics the other half. Correct? So, yes, “a complex web of progress-resistant cultural influences” would seem to be in there somewhere.
One problem with genetic determinism, from the white nationalist POV, is that to the extent it is accepted, it is more likely to lead to conclusion that what these “lesser” races need is more miscegenation and more colonialism, rather than the recognition that all we can reasonably do is let them rot.
Finally, can’t help but notice that once again, with Brooks, you have a culture-critiquing kike, the kind of guy many of you want to forcibly evict no questions asked from your imaginary ethnostate, going just a few days after the tragedy in the vicinity of places where no mainstream goy pundit, with possible exception of Rush Limbaugh, has the courage to go.
But we’re not talking about other criteria. We’re not talking about resistance to malaria or the ability to withstand sunlight. We’re talking about the capacity for civilization and civilized living and in that respect the word “lag” is appropriate. In other respects you’re right, it’s inappropriate: if lowness of test scores, propensity for violent street crime, abandoning your offspring if you’re a man or having a different father for each if you’re a female, resistance to malaria and to direct sunlight, creating rap music, and speaking Ebonics are your criteria, it’s inappropriate.
I don’t think Crypto Aryan has ever posted a right comment. My impression is every one of his comments has been wrong. This extends back to his start posting here. Wrong and irritating. He’s batting a thousand.
thanks fred. wish i could say the same thing about you. instead you’re just another boring simpleton, in contrast to several of your comrades here whom I strongly disagree with as well but who also do irritate me, since I don’t always have a strong rejoinder to some of what they say. people generally get irritated or angry when someone says something that they disagree with but can’t intelligently rebut.
Fred,
Crypto-Aryan is just someone from the enemy camp who wants to play at Psy-Ops. I spot people like that from a mile away. It’s a passive-aggressive pseudo-intellectualizing whininess. It’s perfectly safe to ignore such types. They aren’t part of our wolf-pack.
Follow the White Rabbit #26 is now available here: http://whiterabbitradio.net/
Fred: Evolution isn’t linear. Capacity for civilization is just the byproduct of particular traits that some races hold to varying degrees; it isn’t something that the negroes will obtain if they were to “evolve more”. And those traits came about in mainly the White and Asian races because of their environment.
On Darwinian terms, if you survive long enough to have offspring, you are evolutionarily fit.
Haitian “Protesters” blocking roads with dead bodies ??? It appears Chimp-out #2 is well under way.
http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=8415
Haiti’s problems ARE partly cultural. The blacks in Haiti had less exposure than other Caribbean blacks(and even some Africans) to European culture. They are more primitive than blacks in places like Jamaica and Guyana. The legacy of extreme egalitarianism from the Revolutionary period lingers and causes intra-racial tension among the black population. Repeatedly, the smarter and harder working blacks have risen to the top of society, only to be slaughtered, deposed or exiled by demogogues like Aristede. Those leftist revolutions and the rightist counter revolutions that follow are the cause of political instability in Haiti. William Pierce wrote about this some years ago.
I don’t see how focusing on evolutionary and IQ science has any practical value for advancing the interests of Whites. So Whites have the highest IQs so what? I don’t see what implications that has for politics. Whites would still have a right to exist even if we had the lowest IQs.
@Andrew
Whites would still have a right to exist even if we had the lowest IQs.
I came to White Advocacy through a path that many of us arrive at it, through a myopic focus on IQ. I read The Bell Curve when I was 16, which was the defining moment in falling off of the multicultural egalitarian bandwagon. For years, I was a Randroid Paultard. I’m embarrassed to admit it, but it took me a long time to arrive at the simple but natural and obvious conclusion that we would have the right to exist even if we had the lowest IQs.
Thank you, Kasimir for informing us about Richard Fuerle’s excellent book, ERECTUS WALKS AMONG US. And, thanks to Fred for posting the direct link to it. I was going to do the same, after I perused Fuerle’s book site to check it out. It is a free download, so read it now and save it. It’s hard to believe that a vital book like this has been out for a year and a half, and no one has mentioned it till now. Thank you again, Kasimir, we now know that Revilo Oliver’s rhetorical question: Is There Intelligent Life On Earth?…has now been answered by Richard Fuerle. The missing link walks among us, and Fuerle has researched it, and boldly stated it.
@Captain Chaos,
Please refrain from using the word “Nigger”, and instead use the more polite term “Negro” or “Negroid”, which Negroid individuals find considerably more palatable.
Revilo Oliver used the word nigger. If a man of such profound erudition used it there must be a purpose for it. After all, it comes from Latin, meaning black. Objectively it has no more greater weight than negro, black, or African, it has the same meaning. It’s just associated with slavery, and it’s a way for sub-Saharan Africans in America and abroad to control the discourse and intimidate others into submission, along with racism and other imaginary offenses.
If you seek not to use it out of free will, fine, but not out of fear. You know they’ve run a mind game on Whites when we censor ourselves and others even when in private or anonymous.
Sub-Saharan Negrids are less evolved than Europids. They have more primitive facial traits. They have smaller brains on average. Their maturation rate is faster, they are less neotenic. Not to mention the lack of culture and civilization.
The out-of-Africa theory, which is accepted as official, posits that modern man began to diverge 50-60,000 years ago. The multi-regional theory proposes that the modern races diverged much farther back, about 2 million years since erectus and all the races had their own convergent evolution or clinal variation to sapiens.
Then there’s this nonsense that says Whites only evolved 5500 years ago because of a change in diet. So there you have it, all we have to do is change the diet of third world non-white countries and they will miraculously turn into Nordic first world countries.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1210056/White-Europeans-evolved-5-500-years-ago-food-habits-changed.html
Mark: If blacks are “less evolved”, than can you tell me what we are evolving towards? Are whites the “final” stage of evolution or is there more to come? EVOLUTION IS NOT LINEAR!
Seriously, the way some racialists discuss and characterize their ideas gives credence to the notion that much of it is, in fact, psuedoscientific.
I give up.
The purpose of evolution is for things to evolve into White guys.
All the creatures of the forest, the fish in the sea, and the blades of grass in the field strove to become White men but failed, ending up less evolved than us. Beavers build their dams with a gnawing (pun!) sense of sorrow, knowing that they should really be building coliseums. Birds take pride in mastering flight, but recognize that their small brains and lack of opposable thumbs precludes their ability to master jet-fueled supersonic flight.
To the extent that Negroes more closely resemble our last common ancestor (which they do, anotomically and genetically), they can be said to be less evolved.
anatomically
“I believe Rushton and Jensen and Murray all admit that environmental factors likely explain half of the intelligence differential, genetics the other half. Correct? So, yes, “a complex web of progress-resistant cultural influences” would seem to be in there somewhere.”
Actually both think it’s likely that 0.80 is due to genetics and 0.20 to environment (whatever that is).
“One problem with genetic determinism, from the white nationalist POV, is that to the extent it is accepted, it is more likely to lead to conclusion that what these “lesser” races need is more miscegenation and more colonialism, rather than the recognition that all we can reasonably do is let them rot.”
There’s nothing to gain for Whites, Ashkenazi Jews, or East Asians from mixing with Bantus. Additionally, progressives should be at the forefront of any movement against race-mixing since all that they cherish is only produce by high I.Q. peoples. It’s impossible to produce a functioning welfare state when the population is composed of semi-morons like the diseased ape-like creatures of Haiti. Ditto for all inventions to make our lives easier and happier. They all come from Whites, Ashkenazis, and East Asians. Should the Negro race completely disappear, the entire world would make a collective sigh of relief. They are by definition useless eaters who only produce problems for the rest of mankind. As Alex Linder once noted: Niggers are more useless than tree stumps. I’d add a rejoinder that at least one can get fire out of tree stumps. Niggers, in turn, only give us mayhem, health, and social problems. As Voltaire remarked: Niggers are dumber and more vicious than the average chimpanzee.
I actually like Chimpanzees so putting them in the sentence with Niggers is offence to me.
“I believe Rushton and Jensen and Murray all admit that environmental factors likely explain half of the intelligence differential, genetics the other half.”
This sounds more impressive than it is. They suggest that half of the variability is explained by the environment (and I think they exaggerated this to reduce the criticsim they were going to get). Halving the variability will not halve the difference in standard deviations. For example, let’s assume a 15 point SD, that is a variability of 225. If you halve the variability, the SD is still 10.6.
Chimps have smaller genitals. Whites have smaller genitals.
Chimps have big ears. Whites have big ears.
Chimps typically have pale skin. Whites have pale skin.
Chimps have straight hair. Whites have straight hair.
My point here is not that Whites are more like Chimps. All of the human races are as closely related to monkeys as the others.
Both Michelle Obama and G.W. Bush remind me of monkeys.
The whole thing is just silly, and as Donald suggests, pseudoscientific. We have enough real, solid, peer-reviewed science to more than make our case without making the nonsensical claim that other races are more like monkeys.
Wikitopian, if you examine SNPs, the dominant allele for Negroes is more often that of apes and monkeys. This is something beyond an arbitrary selection of phenotypes. It’s not ‘pseudoscience.’
“Both Michelle Obama and G.W. Bush remind me of monkeys.”
But one’s taboo to mention and the other’s not. There’s a good reason for this.
Dasein,
That’s interesting. Can you direct me to that research?
Fuerle talks about this in Chapter 16 of his book (http://erectuswalksamongst.us/Chap16.html), and refers to results from the chimpanzee genome sequence (he links to a file from the supplementary materials from the Nature paper). I’ll probably look into this myself at some point in the coming months and publish something at MR. I can let you know when it’s up, if you’re interested.
Chimps have smaller genitals. Whites have smaller genitals.
n/a on this assertion.
http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/07/rushton-and-genital-size-one-more-time.html
Andrew is correct to upbraid me for my uncouth, lack of bourgeois ‘respectability’ in labeling the genetically disadvantaged as “niggers” when the more humane and scientifically correct term ‘Nigroid’ can be applied free of stigma and dehumanization.
It doesn’t matter what you call African-Americans. They’ve assimilated, with great ease, the Jewish ability to get pissy and indignant about being identified. Jews, well aware that identification is the precondition of containment made ‘just noticin’ criminal. Simply acknowledging the presence of the Jew or black frightens him and stirs within him the fight mechanism.