Charles Darwin stated:
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes . . . will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.
Sadly, if HBD is correct, I think there probably will be natural selection favoring higher IQ populations, in fact it’s already happening. In sub-Saharan Africa, we see the more primitive cultures like pygmies and Bushmen losing more and more territory and their populations declining.
In the United States, we see Hispanic gangs ethnically cleansing African Americans from urban regions.
In the Middle East we see Israel has very cleverly got America on their side, and thus are gaining more and more territory from the lower IQ Arabs, and neocon wars are causing many of the Arabs to leave the Middle East and move to Europe, and so HBD would predict that the average IQs of European countries will be dragged down to where they are no longer military powers who can defend themselves.
If HBD is correct, I think what ultimately will happen is that the highest IQ ethnic group in each of the three traditional races of anthropology (Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid) will replace the lower IQ ethnic groups in each of the those races, and so each macro-race will become ethnically homogeneous.
And then in the final stage, I think we will eventually get a war between three macro-races themselves. I predict this war will be horrible, with millions of people crying on the street.
And when it is all over, I predict the only survivors will be Northeast Asians and their kids will read in anthropology books about all the other races that used to exist. A few members of these races will be brought back to life through cloning, but they will be confined to zoos, where little East Asian children will safely point and laugh.
Hopefully my predictions are wrong, but if they’re not wrong, hopefully, they will unfold long after I’m dead. I’m in my 30s. If I’m lucky I’ll live until my 80s, but sadly, a lot can happen in half a century.
Pumpkin Person 
whites will not be able to sustain themselves in opposition to the High-IQ Northeast Asian. White supremacists talking points of “whites are more creative, and therefore better” (despite empirical evidence), is a joke. We are not going to get the Chinese hooked on opium again. It’s over. China will have a populist-leftist revolution, and basically take over the world (they will see the west as the enemy and come for us). Ironically, I think most of central Asia will survive (useless for the Chinese) and South Americans. Africa, Europe and North America, along with South East Asia, are screwed.
the ”smartest one” are destroying the world, good!!!
I can’t help but think despite our intellectual inferiority, European dominance was due to whites blatant immorality/brutality.
We’re living on borrowed time. pumpkinperson is mostly right.
I hope the Asians get Ann Coulter first.
I dunno. Whites had a good run but have been both a. destroying themselves on a scale never seen before (world war II), and have had what I like to call the “battle for the third world” an off shoot of the cold war, which has resulted in so called “demographical challenges”
Internal dysfunction + outside invaders, who take advantage of that + intellectual inferiority= Time’s up
I dunno. Whites did cause some damage but all in all had a pretty good run (they limped along, waited until the middle-easterners fell, then built western civilization).
Whites have been killing themselves, and have used people from the third world, and in essence have destroyed themselves. The people of the lower-ranks of white society are too stupid to see that, Asians don’t play that shit, and that’s why they’re going to win. They’re smarter. I am cautiously optomistic for the future, although Asians may be more cruel, at least they aren’t going to be as sanctimonious/delusional as whites were…lol
No race would destroy itself on purpose though they might be manipulated into doing so.
Well, the thing is, the concept of the broad three race theory, or even of the European ethnicity, is relatively new. There used to be perceived the French race, the Russian Race, the Italian Race, the Portuguese Race, etc., etc.
Asians are similar in strong ethnic bonds, as opposed to racial, but we have not seen mass destruction on the scale of the Napoleonic Wars, and the world wars (the European theatre in the second). ………….
But that’s just it, whites have identified by nationality, and ethnicity, it was perceived for a long time that there was the French Race, the Italian Race, the Portuguese race, etc., etc.
Jews were white. Yet Germans slaughtered them.
Other races have seen division, but not mass murder probably in the hundreds of millions, consistently, I’m a white man, but white men are the most thuggish group of all.
the whole of what is today the PRC has been conquered 3 fucking times. once by the mongols, another by the japs, and another by the Manchus…maybe there are more.
what the chinks don’t get is that if they ever threaten european supremacy, europeans will simply “kill” them.
look up berserker. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserker
jews are caucasian, they aren’t aryan.
aryan means a descendant of the indo-europeans…those HOMOGENEOUS people who spoke indo-european or proto-indo-european…
hebrew is a semitic language, NOT an indo-european language.
this is BASIC nazi theory.
the closest representative of indo-europeans to the ancient jews, so far as language is inherited, were the speakers of hittite.
I think this spatial verbal differentiation, and how those intellects respond to famine, as referenced on this blog, pretty much explain, European, Ashkenazim and Northeast Asian history.
When I was in 10th grade I wanted to do a science fair project on r-k selectivity, comparing birth rates of countries, by mortality rates and overall life expectancy. I thought I would horrify the judges and be dragged out in chains. I didn’t do it. What a missed opportunity…..
If whites massively immigrated to NE Asia, the Asians would hate us worse than the Mexicans.
you don’t even know what IQ means.
whites are superior to NE Asians in verbal IQ and their performance IQ has a greater stdev.
newton wasn’t a chinaman and never could have been.
all ne asians can do is copy.
they’re 1. ugly 2. pushy 3. striving 4. they can’t hold their liquor 5. have small cocks and no tits…
i mean come on mofo.
even ne asian fine art is SHIT compared to greek art starting in the 6th c bc.
who invented the very concept of IQ?
western europeans.
the technical and cultural accomplishments of ne asia have been inferior to that of the best of europe FOREVER…
stop fucking pretending.
what’s a shitty pagoda or the great wall compared to a cathedral?
who’s a chinese thinker equal to aristotle?
you’re just another example of a guy who needs to be fucked in the ass until he begs for more.
india was richer than china in the ancient world.
and just like the jewish creation of christianity conquered europe, the indian creation of buddhism conquered ne asia.
The Chinese invented gun powder, which was very crucial to the West. Chinese do not have as good of verbal IQs, and that explains less of culture. But overall, the fact is that they are smarter. Whites’ thugishness, and manipulation through verbal ability brought them to prominence.
and will assure their continued prominence.
This is an age of plenty, an age of creation, unlike the dark ages (when Europeans thrived), in times of famine verbal IQ is preserved, while spatial IQ takes a hit, according to studies referenced in this blog, so this is a fundemantal shift, in the way things are.
Also why Jews thrived in poverty striken Eastern-Europe….
Don’t be sad, that means Jews will hurt even more than Gentile whites!
in an age of plenty dominance is irrelevant.
in an age where everyone is a no-one towering geniuses are superfluous.
but i mean come on guy…
have you read supposedly great japanese literature or the “dream of the red chamber”…
they’re just porno.
paul theroux described the japanese as basically bowleged perverts who believed they were the herrenvolk.
i’m still waiting for the first non white male serial killer. at least killing lots of people shows some initiative and ambition. it’s a horrible example, but i think it makes my point. in a contest of who can be the most evil…white folk will always win.
*”i’m still waiting for the first non white male serial killer. at least killing lots of people shows some initiative and ambition. it’s a horrible example, but i think it makes my point. in a contest of who can be the most evil…white folk will always win.”*
I don’t know, a lot of black warlords take some initiative when it comes to murder. Samuel Doe trumps Norman Bates any day…….I can’t think of too many Asians in that category other than the Virginia Tech Shooter.
But do you get my point? Whites had environment that played to their better verbal IQs, and that’s how the rose, however, the environment is shifting to favor North East Asians, who are slightly smarter overall, not in verbal things, but especially spatially.
Jews: about +2.5 SDs from whites verbally, – about 0.25 spatially
Whites: +0, -0
NE Asians: – slight verbally +0.75 SDs spatially.
It explains everything, Jewish prominenve n poverty stricken eastern europe, the rise of Europe in general, and how they came roaring back AFTER the dark ages…..
the most “successful” serial killer in american history had an IQ a lot less than 100.
that’s gary ridgway.
he may have been borderline retarded afaik.
but boy he could kill.
find me the chinese version of this piece of shit.
Average Chinese verbal IQ is 97 as seen from a 30 year longitudinal study in China from 1982 to 2012.
race realist-
on white verbal IQ norms?
I said “slight negative” in terms of SDs, which your comment seems to agree with. I don’t know what studies Videla was talking about.
Middle Easterners, especially Persians, have surpassed East Asians in scientific inquiry and culture. Japanese Modernization was basically a copy cat movement of the West.
Slants are boring and insipid. The Mongols were ruthless warriors, but sterile, and their legacy vanquished quickly, simply because their Caucasian subjects were culturally superior.
China is still a third world center of the world!
JS-
I thought you are North East Asian?
Anyway, Rushton, who I like, answers the question here. It wasn’t he who invented the crazy, so-called “goldilocks” theory of race, it was none other than motherf*cking David Duke;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo090s1y9TE
God forbid these guys (Rushton excluded, of course, he tried to be objective) actually learn history. This is the problem, everything is censored, we can’t have a debate between David Duke and someone who is not a joke on CNN……
pumpkinperson said a long time ago she asked Rushton about the SDs of IQ distribution, from largest to smallest, being directly correlated with the age of the races, so Blacks have the biggest SD, Whites middle, and Asians the smallest. That would really probably not be a plausible explanation, because blacks should theoretically have brilliant elites known throughout history and have contributed much more, but the IQ gap between whites and blacks is smaller than that of whites and asians.
No, but you seem to be very pro-East Asian with your comments, especially with their spatial-visual qualities.
The high spatial visual IQ of East Asians probably allows them to have faster reaction reflexes, and nothing more.
Europeans still dominate the arts, architecture and anything that is universally appealing, espoused by East Asians.
Yeah well the brilliant white race, is trying to get one of their own (me) deported.
“Cos Spanesh ain’t whaite”
I’m Iberian, (Basque, Portuguese, Spanish) on my dad’s side (along with some North African as well), and Anglo-Saxon on my mom’s side (with a little Irish and Norwegian).
“A house divided against itself can not stand”
-Abraham Lincoln
I blame Ann Coulter; that’s why I hate her.
That’s nice. Pretty much all groups have contributed something to technology/humanity. It is true that the whites destroyed it when they colonized. Now, we want to turn around and use that, as opposed to the IQ tests that WE created. Looks like we got beat at our own game.
why aren’t these ne asians more represented among the richest americans?
yet in hong kong there’s michael kadoori, a jew, but NOT an ashkenazi jew.
and there’s another jew in hong kong who runs a commodities trading company. i forget his name.
is it their “verbal IQ”?
NO. you’d have to have an IQ as low as peepee’s to think that.
henry ford, the greatest industrialist ever, and he didn’t even know that the american revolution started in 1776 among other lacunae. and this stupidity was demonstrated when he was sued…by a jew.
coding?
who’s better? the chinks or the curry munchers? and how good are the jews at coding?
visuo-spatial intelligence is useful for car mechanics, engineers, surgeons, organic chemists, etc. but unlike verbal IQ it has steeply diminishing returns. technology, medicine, high finance has become very academic. it’s something that must be studied…like the talmud. sitzfleisch and a high verbal IQ and a sufficient visuo-spatial IQ will beat the chinks and their rubic’s cube intelligence every time.
and chinese isn’t even really a language.
All the evidence of White Superiority is historical, and even that is highly, highly mixed. From the scientific standpoint one can not be a “race realist” if they believe whites a superior. Perhaps one day new scientific evidence will be found, I’m not sure. Since there is no scientific evidence claiming whites are superior, there is nothing for me to attempt to rebut. This is my last post on THIS subject.
To many dumb WNs, Spaniards are not White, because of the Semitic component. Yes, this is true. Yet Spain has significantly less problems with immigrants and non-Whites, than the more barbaric Northern Euro and the degenerate Anglo Prole-Sphere. It’s obvious, Spaniards will tell you that the lust for money corrupts a society, its people, its culture…etc. The Anglosphere is an out of control, money diseased entity that needs low IQ individuals for menial work, to enriched their masters. Spain learned this eons ago.
JS- sounds about right.
In the end all of end alls, it’s the “Anglo-Sphere”‘s own damn fault.
JS…been reading him for years.
he’s a spanish supremacist.
anglo-saxons and italians are below spaniards.
or beneath some spaniards.
both spain and germany were backwaters of the roman empire.
yet spain was the new rome for 150 years, and germany is CLEARLY the most successful post WW II country.
hbd is just another like professional wrestling or american politcs. stupid people, like peepee, think it’s real.
and before the world wars…
as the canuckistani norm macdonald has said…
“i’m not afraid of north korea. i’m afraid of germany…germany decides to go to war…against whom?…THE WORLD!…so you think that’ll be over in 5 seconds…NO! it was actually close!
germany has no oil and only 80 m people yet has the largest trade surplus of any country…in ABSOLUTE terms!
reminds me of Triumph des Willes.
JS:
What “semitic blood” are you talking about. It’s minute in Spain, as in all of Southern Europe. Spaniards are white European.
hbd is just another like professional wrestling or american politcs. stupid people, like peepee, think it’s real.
I believe HBD is right about the IQ differences between the macro-races, especially caucasoids vs negroids
I’m less certain HBD is right about micro-racial differences. These could be cultural because the evidence is less consistent & there’s been less time for deep differences to evolve
The Semitic component of Spaniards:
The Ancient Iberians were Phoenicians under Rome.
Spain had about 800 years of Muslim dominion and eons of Sephardic Jewish presence.
Genetic studies reveal Spaniards have minimal Middle Eastern genes. Spaniards believe otherwise. 800 years of celibacy, and no one believes this. Europe once called the Spanish, our Moors in disguise.
I was at an antique bookfair recently. Spanish booksellers were knowledgeable, friendly, engaging, and had the unfortunate experience to set their stand next to the Swedes, who are a lesser variant of the Anglo Prole. Frenchmen can be obnoxious, but are real. Anglo proles are both obnoxious and delusional.
Artistic talented Italians and Tech Oriented Germans, I generally have a neutral stance towards them. But Hollywood Anglo Proles, are without doubt, the modern day bastards of the Western world. This is what happens when you embrace the Ashkenazi Jew and his schizophrenia.
Well, Trump and his clinically retarded, High Testosterone, High Neanderthal ancestry Nordic descended Mobs are going to beat and gas any one who speaks “Spanesh” out of existence.
*”I was at an antique bookfair recently. Spanish booksellers were knowledgeable, friendly, engaging, and had the unfortunate experience to set their stand next to the Swedes, who are a lesser variant of the Anglo Prole. Frenchmen can be obnoxious, but are real. Anglo proles are both obnoxious and delusional.”*
I thought I was the only person to have these types of observations! Thank goodness I’m not!
I’m about half Anglo-Saxon, and even I can see it. It’s not that hard.
and another thing (despite europeans’ thugishness) is christianity.
i have always had the impression that despite their ethnocentrism ne asians in general don’t give a rat’s ass about their fellow ne asians.
i mean, japanese don’t give a shit about their fellow japanese let alone chinese or koreans (they hate them). koreans don’t give a shit about their fellow koreans. etc.
every european is a racist deep down, but at least he cares about his fellow european or fellow swede or fellow whatever.
Well, even with Nanking the Asians did not kill each other at anywhere near the rate of Europeans..
Asians: Big brain, small dick.
Whites: Medium brain, medium dick
Blacks: Small brain, big dick.
Okay…
Wait, I know, perhaps Brain size^dick size= master racieness
Asians: 3^1=3
Whites: 2^2=4
Blacks: 1^3=1
bullshit.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Racialism
i’d consider the dominance of blacks in american football on the defensive line a counterexample.
i assumed that fat white douche bags like richie incognito (an offensive lineman) would dominate the defensive line too. i’ve played american football. i know. defensive end and running back.
i mean the guy bullied some black guy into quitting and he loves trump. as cherubic as he might look, this guy is a thug par excellence.
http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/headshots/nfl/players/full/8495.png&w=350&h=254
speaking of that and of “mental illness” whatever the fuck that means.
i met a russian in the sauna…not a gay sauna…i got into a conversation with him…some black woman voiced her disapproval, saying “that was over the line!” to the russian.
the guy was older than me. he’d fought in afghanistan. so what’s the point of my story? he told me, “i die in the gulag. so what? i die for an IDEA.”
the only other russian i met there and spoke with were religious fanatics. by american standards they were crazy.
and that’s the point. anglo-saxon standards of “mental hygiene” are proximally and for the most part just intolerance, ideology, “inverted totalitarianism”…really!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Even the British widely regard their world-wide influence/dominance as a joke, it’s funny that the prole people they see on the streets are the best on earth. And they are still heads above the U.S. in proliness, yet we are so high and mighty. I don’t hate whites, I am white. It’s just White American sanctimoniousness that I don’t like.
testes testes 1, 2, 3…
America’s jews are the smartest. They are already playing the chinese. It will be china that chooses an open confrontation in that case, since under-the-covers games will favor America. At the same time, it’s a certainty that there will be a China in a hundred years, less certain that there will be an America anything like today.
Eugenics could change all that, especially if enhanced with DNA editing techniques. Somebody might decide to create a super-race that then takes one the world.
Lol please tell me : wtf does HBD stand for ? I looked for acronyms with Skynet help and i could’nt figure it out…
Human Biological Differences (HBD)
Oh. I always thought it was human biological diversity. However, I am pretty new to this “sphere”. Both are basically synonymous, however.
Damn it, i was not even close, thanks.
RACE WAR NOW 14/88
Putin has kicked ZOG out of Russia and will use nukes to destroy the gook and groid hordes. R1a master race will rule the world!
putin is shorter than my mother.
but you are correct sir…
a consequence of putin-ism has been de-juda-izing the russian oligarch class…demoting or removing the jews and promoting his gentile friends.
the only conspiracy theory i think has a >= 1% chance of being true is that the fall of the soviet union was just a feint.
as putin himself has said…
once a checkist always a checkist.
or if you wanna look it up…
once a chekist always a chekist.
the only conspiracy theory which might be true.
http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2014/03/19/what-if-an-ex-kgb-officer-predicted-that-the-ussr-would-fake-its-own-collapse-to-ultimately-defeat-the-west-and-no-one-listened/
Israel is trying to form an alliance with Putin. It remains to be seen if he will trust them.
If HBD is correct, I think what ultimately will happen is that the highest IQ ethnic group in each of the three traditional races of anthropology (Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid) will replace the lower IQ ethnic groups in each of the those races, and so each macro-race will become ethnically homogeneous.
Can you be a bit more precise and tell us what you think might happen ? The caucasoid race will be almost entirely composed of Ashkenazi Jews, the negroid race of US Blacks, and the mongoloid race of East Asians ?
In Africa, I suspect the pygmies and the Bushmen will be replaced by the West Africans and then much later, the West Africans will be replaced by the East Africans, especially those with Middle Eastern ancestry (Ethiopians).
With respect to Caucasoids, I think the trend-line is that Israel will just get geographically bigger and bigger and bigger as the rest of the Middle East, Europe and North America gets weaker and weaker and descends into total chaos.
With respect to Mongoloids, I think the lighter skinned Northeast Asians will push the darker skinned southeast Asians further and further South until flood and tsunamis caused by climate change causes them to go extinct,
What would happen to Australia, Russia and India in that scenario ?
I would guess that as Israel and/or East Asia expand their territories, Indians will sadly be pushed further and further South. Meanwhile climate change will cause the ocean to move further and further North.
Australia will probably be colonized, and the current population will sadly be pushed further and further towards the expanding ocean.
One of the greatest poems of all time;
http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/hatred-81/
Powerful video, with poem, here, too;
That’s some imaginative fan fiction. War is becoming less prevalent in the world. How often are East Asians in a war? Almost never, other than when they’re invaded or having disputes along their border and that’s usually with other East Asian countries.
Blacks, Hispanics, Middle Easterners, and South Asians have more children than Caucasians or East Asians. There are 5 or 6 billion of them. The US will continue to grow it’s Black and Hispanic population. There’s no sign their populations are shrinking, but whites and Asians are. It’s crazy to think that there will be some race war eliminating them. Those are isolated incidents of violence. A few thousand killings doesn’t mean anything when there’s tens of millions of people.
These predictions read a bit tenuously to me. How will Ashkenazi Jews replace rural whites when they bear only half as many children? Education and IQ are negatively correlated with fertility. I think it’s more likely that the higher IQ populations will shrink relative to the total than become numerically dominant.
I’m also highly skeptical that there will ever be a full-fledged race war. Ethnic ties are weaker than you suppose. I attend a 50-50 black-white school, and honestly, melanin count doesn’t mean shit between friends. Multiculturalism is far from perfect, granted, but it’s a dangerous stretch to say things will ever collapse so completely as you posit.
These predictions read a bit tenuously to me. How will Ashkenazi Jews replace rural whites when they bear only half as many children?
Because the grandchildren of those rural whites will mate with non-whites, while in Israel, immigrants will be kept out.
I’m also highly skeptical that there will ever be a full-fledged race war. Ethnic ties are weaker than you suppose. I attend a 50-50 black-white school, and honestly, melanin count doesn’t mean shit between friends.
I should hope not!
A full-fledged race war is the very final stage of my prediction and that part will not happen in our lifetime or even in our grandchildren’s lifetime.
It will hopefully not happen at all.
I was somewhat facetious about predicting race war in my comment below (although I am looking for land out west), given that, as you said, ethnic/race ties are actually fairly weak. Race issues are constantly in the media because of the political/cultural climate, but if you look at people’s actual daily behaviors, most individuals have little allegiance to their race. Because if they did, why does most violence happen within race (not only just blacks killing each other, but wars between various nations)?
Race issues are constantly in the media because of the political/cultural climate, but if you look at people’s actual daily behaviors, most individuals have little allegiance to their race. Because if they did, why does most violence happen within race (not only just blacks killing each other, but wars between various nations)?
It’s like saying people don’t have allegiance to their children since so much child abuse occurs within families. People abuse those who are spatially close since it’s hard to have conflicts with people you never see
But I believe humans have hiearichal loyalties holding all else constant. Self > family > ethnicity > race > species
But all else is never held constant. Because of bad history, some would choose a dog over their own sibling & bad history develops from proximity
But most wars are between different ethnic groups or between nations & religions which are quasi-ethnic groups
today the national socialist ideology is depicted as a one-off and just germany’s version of peronism, anti-intellectual or pseudo-intellectual.
nazism has its roots in historical linguistics and the bayreuth circle.
Love how the Nazis had to borrow the artwork of others.
it is interesting that peepee should diagnose me as both autistic and schizophrenic though no doctor ever has…
why?
my theory of mind is unusual though many have shared it…
1. there is really only ONE mind of which all those who think themselves individual minds “partake”.
2. this universal mind of which rupert brooke spoke does have a hierarchy of thoughts.
3. the existence of this universal mind is what is really referred to when people speak of “reason”/”rationality”/”truth”…
4. my own participation in this universal mind, my own thoughts, are superior to those of almost everyone i’ve ever met…who is concerned usually with the most mundane/quotidian/boring/self-seeking/self-involved/stupid thoughts.
rupert brooke died from septicemia in 1915 on a hospital ship iirc…not on the western front, but in greece…or greek waters…did he know mallory? i think he might have.
And think, this heart, all evil shed away,
A pulse in the eternal mind, no less
Gives somewhere back the thoughts by England given;
and this again proves the hierarchy of races, or rather that the indo-europeans really are SPECIAL.
why?
the identification of brahman and atman.
sanskrit is an indo-european language.
Comparing to Fisher, Darwin looked like idiot.
If cockroach can out-survive dinosaurs, ………….
”Whether you like it or not, a people who do shit all the time, you can spend smart, like a pathological liar,”
A pathological liar have higher white matter in their prefrontal cortex and tend to ”have” (score, 😉 ) higher verbal iqs. They tend to be very good to invent complex stories, a signal of higher intelligence.
But it’s a cognitive-biological aptitude that produce fake and potentially stupid results.
The same for psychopathy.
If you like of these problematic smarter ones ok, accept mass imigration, accept chaotic life, accept risk-lifes….
I’ve been bracing myself for a coming race war, particularly if Donald Trumps wins the presidency, as this will likely embolden all manner of white nationalists and other varied identity groups. With racial/identity group tensions at all time high, you just need a little spark to light the fire, and then…KABOOM!!!
So currently I’m far away from my home, in the Western United States, looking for some land, probably in the middle of nowhere, where I can protect my family if any shit goes down. I mean, if there’s actually a race war, I can’t honestly say I’d favor one group over the other, I just want me and my family left alone. I guess we’ll also have to arm ourselves, have sufficient supplies and so forth…
But speaking of macro-races, I don’t really like those divisions of white vs. black vs. yellow, because it kinda leaves out the race that will be most populous in 2050: South Asians.
Where do they fit? I mean, I know they’re Caucasoids, but they have little in common with Europeans culturally other than root languages and mythological system and a very deep genetic history. And will whites (who are, what, 1 billion strong?) be able to unify and beat the browns (South Asians, are what, 2.5 billion currently?) to dominate the Caucasoid race category? I’m not so sure.
Actually, South Asians are only about 2 billion…I think
If i had to guess i would say both white and non-white caucasoids will be replaced by Ashkenazem.
And then it will be a war between Ashkenazem and Northeast Asians for Eurasia
peepee is so fucking retarded.
american jews marry gentiles > 50% of the time. the jews are doing to themsleves what hitler didn’t succeed in doing.
alan douche-owitz wrote a book about it. The Vanishing American Jew.
in israel do the ashkenazim marry other kinds of jews? idk. but again religious jews are a minority in israel.
a famous example of half ashkenazic half sephardic is seinfeld. kasparov is a half jew. are his kids? is julia louis dreyfus jewish? no more than 1/4. is nikki oppenheimer jewish? no more than 1/4, and neither is jewish religiously. john palulson is half jewish. bernard goetz is half jewish. etc.
AND peepee-tard ashkenazi jews are already a mixed people. half their genes are italian. blue eyes are much more common among jews than among lebanese or palestinians.
Ortodoxh jews marry quasi o% out of ”chosen tards” tribe.
They have much more children than secular.
What’s matter in pure demographic terms is the purity of ”marriages” in the ethno-nucleous.
Who you calling retarded you gullible gay goy?
Dershowitz is playing you like a violin just like Marx & Chomsky do too.
Jews are absolutely brilliant when it comes to social IQ, a talent they evolved as money lenders and nomadic people always entering new cultures.
No wonder your WISC-R scores were so much lower than your GREs. You probably flunked the social cognition subtests (comprehension & picture arangement)
Now I’m thinking you’re autistic instead of schizophrenic
Jews don’t need to have Jewish kids they practically have their own ethnostate you moron.
It doesn’t matter who has the most kids. What matters is who has the most TERRITORY. That’s who wins in the long run.
What about replacement birth rates?
What about the elderly safety net? China has no SSI.
200 million Chinese men will not reproduce from scarcity of female births (one child policy favors female abortions).
What about domestic consumerism / liberties?
One third of Japanese women will not reproduce.
China will follow the same pattern, education lowers birth rate.
America will design robots that leave out manufacturing cross pacific trade deals. Domestic manufacturing by robots reduces cost benefits. Imports and exports loose profits. It will cost more to ship products that robot labor lowers marginal costs. To survive China needs to ban robots accept for elderly care. Rural and urban conflicts arise in voting patterns. Economic reform utilizes commercial brands (McDonald’s). Healthcare and safety nets and clean water are demanded from the populous. The breakdown of governance will happen if needs are not met. As living conditions improve more liberties are expected. War will lead to fragmentation. The one party system must govern more than one billion people. Domestic well being eliminates fear.
America will colonize the moon first and then China will also. (robots are key to solar system colonization).
”Who you calling retarded you gullible gay goy?
Dershowitz is playing you like a violin just like Marx & Chomsky do too.
Jews are absolutely brilliant when it comes to social IQ, a talent they evolved as money lenders and nomadic people always entering new cultures.
No wonder your WISC-R scores were so much lower than your GREs. You probably flunked the social cognition subtests (comprehension & picture arangement)
Now I’m thinking you’re autistic instead of schizophrenic
Jews don’t need to have Jewish kids they practically have their own ethnostate you moron.
It doesn’t matter who has the most kids. What matters is who has the most TERRITORY. That’s who wins in the long run.”
A Oprah-fan call me gay, ok.
You’re worst than i imagine, very stupid.
Someone tell for you that you are very stupid***
Already*
Jews are a psychopathic race, their ”brilliancy” for you.
exactly like prevalent groups of blacks and gypsies.
brlliant&psychopaths, no, thank you!!!
You’re totally morally retarded, totally.
cinical, moronic and repulsive about real bad guys.
Your posts are the same, all the time,
boring,
tacky (iq of the stupid celebrities, please!!!!),
prole,
extremely summarized, denoting lower reasoning capacity.
”your” theories are not yours, sorry.
Gullible***
Goy***
You call me what you are, specially the ”goy”.
you’re slave, not bite me dog, ok, your masters are master ones!!!! calm down pampslave.
Someone who commit the same mistakes, lies all the time and promote very insane and stupid wars are…
brilliant***
You’re part of these crescent mass of IQ-TARDS…
stupid people who understand nothing about intelligence, behavior and morally, but think that understand very ”well”.
you’re lunatic, a mattoid, a lot of fake-intelligent people are like that.
a liar who say vague things about your person, purposely,
liar, idiot, narcisistic, please!!!!
a mental sick here is you, i’m not have autism or schizophrenia, but i’m not nasty enough as you to ”offend” this people using this terms, a lot of autistic and schizophrenic people are very good and anyone is guilty to born with this excesses.
Hitchens was too smart to be a real gullible ”socialist”, i know very well, but this quote is very appropriated for you and other idiotic hbabies.
huahuahuahuahuahua,
gosh, this RETARDED is very angry with me, i don’t know why,
lack of interpretation skills, sorry, pampdumb.
despicable, you know that **
Most people who comment here or is it to criticize her poor work or just to comment on any shit.
People who consider you as intelligent are not deeply analytical.
And I’m not saying just because I’m angry with your comment, but because it is true and at times like this that we tell each other what we really think of them.
Your blog is the weakest in all hbd-sphere, it’s fun because it’s a clown who takes a lot of trolls in this pigsty.
Whether you like it or not, Oprah is a nobody ever done anything substantially useful for American society, only to itself, and who is a fan of it, is completely retarded, is a natural slave, has to regret that such people there because they are the first to defend their masters.
Whether you like it or not, a people who do shit all the time, you can spend smart, like a pathological liar, but imbecile from the root, hitler was an incompetent who did all wrong, another white trash.
A people that has 800 genetic diseases and has never done anything to improve is insanely sick.
A people that one of the rituals is the rabbi suck the penis of a baby, can not be considered truly intelligent in any deeper aspect.
”Dershowitz is playing you like a violin just like Marx & Chomsky do too.”
Jesus Christ, stupid as a door!!!!!
My comment wasn’t directed at you santoculto.
What’s the problem to put a name***********
wait
”Who you calling retarded you gullible gay goy?”
”Ortodoxh jews marry quasi o% out of ”chosen tards” tribe.”
Sorry,
i will coppy it when you call names about me
((((well, i read ”””gay”””))) 😦
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRGcNZDumRL-Lu7H97S-fSE3YDO9WC33fPEupiN8C_O1-Z0nGeT
so peepeetard’s theory is that israel will rule the world filled with mixed race people?
you’re both autistic and retarded and schizo peepeetard.
jews have their own ethno-state peepeetard, but ashkenazi jews do NOT.
if they mix with other jews then what happens?
answer: the ashkenazim cease to exist even in israel.
stop licking your girlfriend’s butthole and jump on my dick.
hear! hear! santa claus. peepee is:
1. mentally ill
2. a compulsive liar
3. mentally retarded
4. Most people who comment here or is it to criticize her poor work or just to comment on any shit.
5. And I’m not saying just because I’m angry with your comment, but because it is true and at times like this that we tell each other what we really think of them.
6. Your blog is the weakest in all hbd-sphere, it’s fun because it’s a clown who takes a lot of trolls in this pigsty.
Whether you like it or not, Oprah is a nobody ever done anything substantially useful for American society, only to itself, and who is a fan of it, is completely retarded, is a natural slave, has to regret that such people there because they are the first to defend their masters.
jews have their own ethno-state peepeetard, but ashkenazi jews do NOT.
if they mix with other jews then what happens?
answer: the ashkenazim cease to exist even in israel.
You’re a little slow aren’t you.
That was a rhetorical question.
The darker skinned Jews are just political props much like the token Ethiopian Jews Israel took in.
When they are no longer needed for PR reasons, I suspect they’ll be relocated.
peepee is also transgendered, so she believes that she’s actually a heterosxual man…just sans penis and balls.
douche-owitz’s own son is married to an irish catholic.
must be part of the plan.
paranoia isn’t just a river in egypt peepeetard.
douche-owitz’s own son is married to an irish catholic.
Sometimes kids don’t turn out the way their parents want. You’re a perfect example.
Delete my comment if you want.
That’s okay. It’s a good example of IQ and hysteria:
https://pumpkinperson.com/2014/12/21/iq-and-hysteria/
🙂
Well,
those honey jews tend to be very histerical when they want, 😉
But otherwise, I think this is a very interesting scenario, PP. Hasn’t anyone written some science-fiction along these lines?
Speaking of which, I just found my copy of Clash of Civilizations I’ve been looking for for some time! Good for me…
you’re both retarded and mentally ill.
No I’m not.
I have drunk two liters of vodka over the past week, proud of me?
you lie!
you are pierre bernard.
Yep, I’m familiar with him, funny guy!
Billy Roeper has. I haven’t read them myself though.
The Turner Diaries.
i wonder why peepee doesn’t write more posts on trangender issues.
Mugabe
http://www.cerebrals.org/jcti/index.html
Post a screenshot of your score
And don’t run away like last time
pumpkin.
do you plan to have kids? i wrestle with this question. as weird as it sounds, i think it’s immoral to have children, because they had no say in if they were born or not, and as a parent I think I am condemning them to a lifetime of suffering. What do you think about this?
I sort of don’t want to have kids in America because I am part Arab and a little worried about regression to the mean.
But you just blew everyone’s mind 🙂 very, very interesting perspective!
I don’t have kids but I see no reason not to. They didn’t ask to be born but they also didnt ask not to be. I think society would treat my kids well
PP — HBD emphasizes more on behavioral/personality differences between the races than IQ.
pz meyers has written two articles recently ridiculing professor shoe.
Just 3 days after I wrote this post
https://pumpkinperson.com/2016/04/02/genetically-engineering-super-smart-humans/
Meyers wrote this post
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/04/05/superbrains-will-not-come-out-of-a-test-tube/
I wonder if Meyers is reading this blog. No one else was talking about Hsu’s IQ 1000 theory recently until I resurrected the idea
I reread PP’s comments about East Asians as the last standing race. East Asians have inferiority complexes, especially when comparing to their White worship subjects. Similar to blacks, the most successful of their lot, intermarry with Whites, and their losers intermarry with non-Whites, or don’t breed at all.
I’m an ignoramus, so correct me if I’m wrong…
But could pre-1950s (or so) China hold a candle to ancient Greece, ancient and Renaissance Rome, the “Golden Age” Middle East, Georgian and Victorian England, or Post-reformation Germany??
China was and is still less evolved than any of the European High Ages. It can even hold a candle, scientifically and culturally speaking, to the Golden Age of Islam, when a few Muslim intellectuals, who were mostly Persian, made breakthroughs in STEM and philosophy, building on the foundations of the Greeks. Don’t forget Persians and Islamic culture, have had an influence in China, and today’s East Asians engage only in vocational oriented, scientific work, and not interesting discoveries.
The Qur’anic commentaries during this same time period, came as across as more socially progressive, than anything you find in Confucianism, which seems repressive and inequitable. East Asians are less socially progressive than the West, and even Islam and the past civilizations of South Asia. And when do East Asians critique? They don’t, because their societies are built upon a collective, serving the interests of a superior, and not the individual or the community.
JS,
Thanks for the additional info. Yes, Pumpkin is, I think, overemphasizing the importance of I.Q. If pure “mental horsepower” is the thing, then why hasn’t China contributed more to the arts and sciences? Is this a conspiracy? Did they let everyone else do the “hard work”, and then swoop in to reap the rewards?
This probably has to do with Spearman’s Law, which Chartreuse has mentioned in the past. An ethnicity leaning too far V/too far M mightn’t be able to found a truly amazing culture.
Just remember East Asians make boring elites, while blacks make pleasure inducing elites — since these 2 groups are at the opposite spectrums of human evolution.
“Just remember East Asians make boring elites, while blacks make pleasure inducing elites — since these 2 groups are at the opposite spectrums of human evolution.’
I’ve never lived under either, so I can’t comment. I live in a sterile NYC-area suburb.
Actually, I take that back. Believe it or not, blacks still living in Africa are, on average, more introverted than many Europeans. Source: Susan Cain’s “Quiet”.
I think China has developed so fast that he had no time to rethink new societies while the West has been in a constant state of war that leads to innovation.
The ‘end of history’ ‘fukuyama-esque came very early in China.
Another potentially wrong opinion.
China = he
ok, ok
thank you google trans-late.
Here you go pp. Try reading some of Darwins books before writing about what he may have meant.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/02/12/happy-darwin-day-heathens/
RR, you flunked the SAT so did it ever occur to you that you don’t understand what you read?
Cute ad hominem attack buddy.
I’m actually an outstanding reader, for your information. I’ve actually read Darwins books in his own words and didn’t take to a Creationist account of what he meant.
You would need to read Descent of Man to understand what he meant, I’m the context of that quote to be honest. You do not have the whole context.
Nice job pushing a Creationist agenda though!!
I’d like you to address my writing. Logical fallacies aren’t cool in discussions.
The creationists are right about Darwin. Even a broke clock is right twice a day. Even Gould implied that Darwin was a racialist
Scientis deny it because they’re too autistic to grasp his mindset & because they don’t want evolution associated with racialism
But evolution was built on racialism. Darwin believed humans evolved in Africa long before there was fossil let alone genetic evidence
Denying Darwin’s racialism is a transparent attempt at revisionist history
“Even Gould implied that Darwin was a racialist”
Do you have a quote from Gould where he implied this? I’ve read Full House, like I keep telling you to do. I’ve no doubt he was a racialist, except he didn’t imply what you (and others who attack the theory of evolution, for instance anti-Nazis). It’s very, very simple to take something out or context without the whole story. Re:
The great break in the organic chain between man and his nearest allies, which cannot be bridged over by any extinct or living species, has often been advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is descended from some lower form; but this objection will not appear of much weight to those who, convinced by general reasons, believe in the general principle of evolution. Breaks incessantly occur in all parts of the series, some being wide, sharp and defined, others less so in various degrees; as between the orang and its nearest allies—between the Tarsius and the other Lemuridae—between the elephant and in a more striking manner between the Ornithorhynchus or Echidna, and other mammals.
But all these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms which have become extinct. At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.
With respect to the absence of fossil remains, serving to connect man with his ape-like progenitors, no one will lay much stress on this fact who reads Sir C. Lyell’s discussion, where he shows that in all the vertebrate classes the discovery of fossil remains has been a very slow and fortuitous process. Nor should it be forgotten that those regions which are the most likely to afford remains connecting man with some extinct ape-like creature, have not as yet been searched by geologists.
This is page 132 to 133 in my Barnes n Noble edition of Descent of Man. Now, seeing the whole quote in its complete context, what are your thoughts? The bold is what the Creationists quote-mine. Notice how Darwins citation of Professor Schaaffhausen is omitted? Hmmm… I won’t spoil it for you, search for that citation on your own to see what he meant.
“Scientis deny it because they’re too autistic to grasp his mindset”
People who deny it actually have an understanding of Darwins thoughts.
“because they don’t want evolution associated with racialism”
I deny it because that’s not what he meant at all.
“Darwin believed humans evolved in Africa long before there was fossil let alone genetic evidence”
If you were to read the full passage in its entirety and not a Creationist quote-mine, you’d see that’s exactly what he was arguing to his detractors on his theory of evolution!!
“The attempt to deny Darwin’s racialism is a transparent attempt at revisionist history”
There is no doubt in my mind that Darwin was a racialist. However the quotation is mined and taken completely out of context. You do know how Creationists quote-mine to ‘prove’ Creationism through the words of evolutionists right? They love mining Goulds arguments to make it seem like he said something that he didn’t. Gould and Darwin are the two most often misquoted evolutionists. Because Creationists can mine their quotes to make it say something they never said. And you fell for it.
I’ve no doubt he was a racialist, except he didn’t imply what you (and others who attack the theory of evolution, for instance anti-Nazis).
RR, that wasn’t a sentence. What did I imply he said that he didn’t say? Do you even know what you’re arguing?
Yes I do. Excuse me for not completing my sentence. Am on my phone.
He didn’t imply what you think he did. Seeing the whole quote in its entirety, what do you think of it now?
OMG RR. You wrote a whole post arguing that he didn’t imply what I think he did and you can’t even tell me what I think he implied. LOL! And seeing the full context changes nothing. Claiming one has been taken out of context is the oldest excuse in the book and you fell for it. And I didn’t get that quote from creationists btw, but from Gould’s book The Mismeasure of Man.
And provide the quotation from Gould that backs your assertion.
See page 36 of The Mismeasure of Man. He cites Darwin to show that even progressive scientists had racialist views, and you don’t deny Darwin was a racialist so what exactly are we disagreeing about? You still don’t know.
“You wrote a whole post arguing that he didn’t imply what I think he did and you can’t even tell me what I think he implied”
I want you to tell me what you think Darwin’s words meant, in the whole context.
” And seeing the full context changes nothing.”
It doesn’t change anything?
“Claiming one has been taken out of context is the oldest excuse in the book and you fell for it”
Tee hee.
So why, then, is the whole entire quote omitted? Why, then, is the citation of Professor Schaaffhausen is omitted?
For a look at the citation of Schaaffhausen, re:
https://books.google.com/books?id=9Gk_QcXBNWUC&pg=PA76&lpg=PA76&dq=Anthropological+Review,%E2%80%99+April+1867,+p.+236&source=bl&ots=cQuG81HTR-&sig=khCl7yZsKm-uYXnigyPi0q1f6vI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjHpbO8hY7SAhVpiVQKHRYNCCgQ6AEILjAF#v=onepage&q=Anthropological%20Review%2C%E2%80%99%20April%201867%2C%20p.%20236&f=false
I believe this is the original source as well.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3025153?seq=6#page_scan_tab_contents
Do you enjoy checking sources for further research? I don’t know about you, but I love it.
“See page 36 of The Mismeasure of Man. He cites Darwin to show that even progressive scientists had racialist views”
You talking about this?
But just as Darwinism can provide as good an argument against future episodes of creationism as against the antievolutionists of Darwin’ s own day, I trust that a cogent refutation of a bankrupt theory will hold, with all its merit intact, if someone tries
to float a dead issue with no new support at some future moment. Time, by itself, holds no alchemy to improve a case.
Maybe my IQ is too low and my brain is so small, I don’t see what you mean?
Please provide the correct quotation if I am in error, thanks.
“so what exactly are we disagreeing about? You still don’t know.”
I do know. I’m arguing against your interpretation of the Creationist quote-mining. He didn’t mean what you think he meant.
RR, we all you know you were born with RR, & such people are prone to hysteria but please calm down.
You still can’t explain what you disagree with and in a desperate attempt to hide your disability, you’re lashing out hysterically
Regarding the issue here, while RR is right, more context is needed to understand what Darwin actually meant regarding the replacement of Civilized races.
You refer mainly to competition in resources through IQ, when Darwin was more complex on the matters of Civilized versus savages races in terms of “replacement”.
On page 156, he references a Mr. Sproat who describes the strife of savages races to be due to changes in their conditions of life due to diffusion, not by violently replacement, using Eastern European “Barbarians” as an example as to distinguish it from resource competition. A Dr. Story on page 157 describes a major one being their lifestyle itself being the catalyst of the fertility, saying otherwise their population wouldn’t be so small to the point of extinction.
Furthermore he ascribes one of the reasons why civilized, that is “domesticated”, people an animals survive in more areas than others is due to mixing, giving example of such with a half caste in Tahiti.
On page 164 he also describes the sterility to also be a side effect of becoming a civilized race as well, alluding it to domestication of wild animals. Thus the qaulity was not a strict racial trait, but rather a survival mechanism.
So when talking about the extermination an replacement of races, he was talking about the resilience of domestication as a means to survival itself itself and how civilizations leads to aboriginals’ sterility, not resource acquisition through IQ.
This could basically be summed up as the overall advantage of R selection in Humans. Though it’s worth Noting that most of his examples of replacement were with Oceanic populations who likely share the trait of lower fitness that other non-africans do.
Phil i think it’s pretty obvious what darwin meant. By exterminate he meant what happened to the Tasmanian aboriginals, & the neanderhals & what’s happening now to the bushmen, the pygmies & the chimpanzees (who darwin included in his prediction)
He meant straight up survival of the fittest. Had he meant anything more nuanced he would not have included the great apes. People are just trying to make excuses for him because they don’t want to believe he was a racialist
You refer mainly to competition in resources through IQ, when Darwin was more complex on the matters of Civilized versus savages races in terms of “replacement”.
On page 156, he references a Mr. Sproat who describes the strife of savages races to be due to changes in their conditions of life due to diffusion, not by violently replacement, using Eastern European “Barbarians” as an example as to distinguish it from resource competition. A Dr. Story on page 157 describes a major one being their lifestyle itself being the catalyst of the fertility, saying otherwise their population wouldn’t be so small to the point of extinction.
It’s still competition for resources in the sense that civilized races monopolize the planet, creating environments where they can thrive and more primitive tribes can’t compete.
Furthermore he ascribes one of the reasons why civilized, that is “domesticated”, people an animals survive in more areas than others is due to mixing, giving example of such with a half caste in Tahiti.
Primitive people mix too
On page 164 he also describes the sterility to also be a side effect of becoming a civilized race as well, alluding it to domestication of wild animals. Thus the qaulity was not a strict racial trait, but rather a survival mechanism.
yeah, if you take someone’s land and monopolize their resources, that’s not good for their fertility
So when talking about the extermination an replacement of races, he was talking about the resilience of domestication as a means to survival itself itself and how civilizations leads to aboriginals’ sterility, not resource acquisition through IQ.
But why are civilized races able to impose their life rules on aboriginals and not the other way around? Because they take control over the resources so the only way for aboriginals to survive is to play by civilized rules: a game they’re destined to lose because it’s not what they’ve evolved to do, genetically or culturally.
This could basically be summed up as the overall advantage of R selection in Humans.
No it can be summed up by the advantage of high technology in forcing others to play by your rules.
“RR, we all you know you were born with RR,”
What?
“please calm down.”
…. I am calm. Nothing in my previous comment indicates I’m anxious.
“You still can’t explain what you disagree with”
I did in my previous comment. Yoy believe he was talking about civilized races exterminating inferior races. I showed he didn’t say that. … How do you not grasp that?
” in a desperate attempt to hide your disability”
Care to tell me my disability, armchair psychologist/wannabe psychometrician?
“you’re lashing out hysterically”
Not at all. Are we reading the same comments?
Your previous reply was not a reply. Try again. Keep your childish attacks out of it. I’m sure we can debate like men without sophomoric attacks. According to you, I can’t cite Berkeley on this prestigious blog. So why are you throwing character attacks and ad hominem, not addressing my post? I guess that’s good enough for this prestigious blog.
“Phil i think it’s pretty obvious what darwin meant. By exterminate he meant what happened to the Tasmanian aboriginals, & the neanderhals & what’s happening now to the bushmen, the pygmies & the chimpanzees (who darwin included in his prediction).”
Except I’ve actually referred to what he actually meant by “extermination” in regards to race’s extinction in contact with civilization, a specific section of his book.
Funny you talk about Tasmanians, because he uses them as an example in that section. They weren’t deliberately “killed off”, they were moved from Island to Island by Europeans trying to sustain them but due to changes in lifestyle still unchecked the died.
Again, read here and follow the pages I mentioned.
https://books.google.com/books?id=_X79kDtFCGcC&pg=PA134&lpg=PA134&dq=professor+Schaaffhausen+apes+extinction&source=bl&ots=ViY6HWoUJY&sig=pAzGXwrEf6UdHxB8JARYnyXZVSM&hl=en&sa=X#v=onepage&q=professor%20Schaaffhausen%20apes%20extinction&f=false
“He meant straight up survival of the fittest. Had he meant anything more nuanced he would not have included the great apes.”
How does him predicting that apes would be extinct have any effect on his extending elaboration on Civilized versus savage races?
Here is what he was referring to with the allusion to apes,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3025130?seq=2#page_scan_tab_contents
This source simply said that the apes were growing more and more rare, likely from hunting at the time *along* with the lowest of human races.
That’s not saying they are clumped in the same process of extinction, which Darwin actually explained why.
“People are just trying to make excuses for him because they don’t want to believe he was a racialist.”
Define racialist in this sense. Do you mean a believer in racial taxonomy and respective differences or someone who is politically an enthusiastic social darwinist?
Read 163 of that link about how he called the effects of changing conditions “evil consequences” if you think the latter.
“It’s still competition for resources in the sense that civilized races monopolize the planet, creating environments where they can thrive and more primitive tribes can’t compete.”
No, taking their resources wasn’t what caused the infertility, it was directly changing their lifestyle such as missionary conversion.
“Primitive people mix too.”
You missed the point, that was supposed to be a specific point on how domestication helps in environmental versatility, one of them being mixing with local specimens.
“yeah, if you take someone’s land and monopolize their resources, that’s not good for their fertility.”
Again, not resource monopilization, mode of life in general. For example, they could still stick with aspects like their original diet for example (one of the major reasons there health declined) and stay clear from alcohol and still have a decent population, it’s just that they would’ve been a underclass. What changed was Colonizers not being aware of this when acculturation them.
“But why are civilized races able to impose their life rules on aboriginals and not the other way around? Because they take control over the resources so the only way for aboriginals to survive is to play by civilized rules: a game they’re destined to lose because it’s not what they’ve evolved to do, genetically or culturally.”
Yet you miss the point on domestication plays and what savage versus civilized actually means.
That is, domestication is a diffused straight that can make or break a population, sterility, for better or worst, being the result.
Again, I made note that it would even occur in order for them to be civilized, indicating that the trend of civilized behavior could be passed on a pressured onto like a new selection force in animal domestication.
There for it’s not just simply the extermination of a people, but of a “lifestyle”.
Furthermore no, it was not potentially the “only way” they could survive, it was just what European potentially thought was best for them but actually wasn’t.
What Darwin was talking about was has less to do with competition and more to do with evolutionary mismatch.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/01/15/agriculture-and-diseases-of-civilization/
“No it can be summed up by the advantage of high technology in forcing others to play by your rules.”
Except I was referring again to the traits that distinguish the civilized people, independent of their clashes with savages.
That is, the process of R selection in human shows similar features (reduced Robusticity and such) and personality to the process of domestication hence heavier emphasis on survival strategies.
So PP, to basically summarize my point, it wasn’t being deprived of resources in competition that caused them death, but it was change in resources in cultural diffusion.
Phil, I don’t know what makes people like you always look for strange explanations when the obvious one is looking you in the face. Consider the reason the Bushmen are going extinct. Yes, the factors you mention are relevant, but the primary cause is losing resources to competitors in the Darwinian struggle for survival:
Unless they are able to live on their ancestral lands, their unique societies and way of life will be destroyed, and many of them will die.
Although the Bushmen won the right in court to go back to their lands in 2006, the government has done everything it can to make their return impossible, including cementing over their only water borehole; without it, the Bushmen struggled to find enough water to survive on their lands
http://www.survivalinternational.org/tribes/bushmen
Furthermore, Darwin also supplied one or two examples of Oceanic people going under intense diffusion and adapting to knew customs but still had their fertility at potential risk. One reason they on one hand prospered relatively was likely his note of the poorer classes still eating mostly their old diet, yet imported alcohol posed a threat.
You’re still dancing around everything Phil is saying. You’ve not fully addressed anything he’s said. And you’ve not addressed my post yet. Hell, you weren’t even giving me a coherent reply.
Well RR, it sounds like you and Phil are making very similar arguments
To PP,
You are confused. I’m not talking about why the Bushman are currently being exterminated, I’m talking about Darwin’s Take on Savage versus Civilized and how that transmission work.
For the Most part, he ascribes the decadence of “savage races” to the most part not to resource competition because Europeans in the examples he gave didn’t just take their lsnd and continue to compete with them.
They took land and *gave* resources to native population with intention to preserve them, but due to the effects that Civilization’s presence alone yielded to their homoestasis their Fertility was threatened.
I’ve already explained this was more to do with evolutionary mismatch than resource competition as by that point they weren’t actually trying to outcompete them.
I’m not inferring anything from speculation, I’m talking about what Darwin brought up particularly in racial extinction from his book.
You are confused. I’m not talking about why the Bushman are currently being exterminated, I’m talking about Darwin’s Take on Savage versus Civilized and how that transmission work.
I understand that Phil but if you noticed, my article claimed only that Darwin’s extermination prediction would largely come true, i did not claim the extermination would happen exactly as you say darwin claimed, but rather as Darwin’s theory itself predicted.
And if Darwin thought the Europeans were saints who only wanted to help the natives and not take their resources then he was too blinded by his own racial pride (EGI) to even apply his own theories accurately
“I understand that Phil but if you noticed, my article claimed only that Darwin’s extermination prediction would largely come true, i did not claim the extermination would happen exactly as you say darwin claimed, but rather as Darwin’s theory itself predicted.”
For the sake of Closure I’ll agree on this.
“And if Darwin thought the Europeans were saints who only wanted to help the natives and not take their resources then he was too blinded by his own racial pride (EGI) to even apply his own theories accurately.”
Okay, now you are just putting a square peg into a round hole. First of all the fact that he was an abolitionist and legitimately thought Civilization’s attempts to “help” really wasn’t helping the native compared to their own way of bias, how is that consistent EGI bias? If he was biased in that regard he would’ve taken the conventional stance of ingratitude being their downfall.
Second, I wasn’t talking about what he believed were the exclusive motivations of the British Empire. I brought up the resources and assistance that natives in his examples got from Europeans because, guess what, they did and that rules out mere resource deprivation being their downfall.
I’m not sure what History lesson you got in Canada, but if you want to be consistent with HBD you would know that White Altruism isn’t a spontaneous modern phenomenon (hint, think what Outbreeding versus Inbreeding does to EGI who does each the most).
During the Slave Trade for example when Coastal nstives were shipping others to Europeans, they got goods in Return. Both pre-colonially and colonially they had missionaries providing such resources that the Oceanic people had in order to “develop”.
It was the basic Christian Belief among them that the “pagans” were “children” and They, whites, were Patrons to help them. Ever heard of the “White Man’s Burden”?
I understand that Phil but if you noticed, my article claimed only that Darwin’s extermination prediction would largely come true, i did not claim the extermination would happen exactly as you say darwin claimed, but rather as Darwin’s theory itself predicted.”
For the sake of Closure I’ll agree on this.
Apology accepted.
“And if Darwin thought the Europeans were saints who only wanted to help the natives and not take their resources then he was too blinded by his own racial pride (EGI) to even apply his own theories accurately.”
Okay, now you are just putting a square peg into a round hole. First of all the fact that he was an abolitionist and legitimately thought Civilization’s attempts to “help” really wasn’t helping the native compared to their own way of bias, how is that consistent EGI bias?
Because he was basically a good person and knew slavery and colonial behavior was wrong, but at the same time, it was too painful to admit his people were being bad, so he rationalized it as good intentions gone awry, much like you’re doing.
Second, I wasn’t talking about what he believed were the exclusive motivations of the British Empire. I brought up the resources and assistance that natives in his examples got from Europeans because, guess what, they did and that rules out mere resource deprivation being their downfall.
So slave masters were just trying to help blacks, not get cheap labour? Europeans took over the Americas and killed many Native Americans for sport because they were just trying to help the Natives, not because they wanted the land? Apartheid in South Africa was just an attempt to help Africans? And Nazi Germany was just an attempt to help the Jews? Because we all know whites are so completely Christ-like and altruistic that whites never do anything for selfish purposes. Are you really that self-deluded by your own EGI or are you just incredibly naïve and gullible?
I’m not sure what History lesson you got in Canada, but if you want to be consistent with HBD you would know that White Altruism isn’t a spontaneous modern phenomenon (hint, think what Outbreeding versus Inbreeding does to EGI who does each the most).
LOL! You think colonialism was because whites were feeling so generous to other races because their ancestors had less cousin marriage in medieval times? Are you serious?
Tsk tsk pp. Even after being shown the omission of the citation by Schaaffhausen and why Darwin cited him you’re still going on about it.
I’ll reply later.
Furthermore pp, look at current events. Does it look like the prediction will come to pass? Well discuss your race ear fantasy if ashkenazi jews and easy Asians later, but observing current events (as you do, self-proclaimed evolution observer), what does it look like will happen in, say, 200 years?
RR, the prediction may not come to pass exactly as I described, but it does look like the high IQ races in general are replacing the low IQ races. Bushmen and Pygmies are going extinct for example.
“Bushmen and Pygmies are going extinct for example.”
Source?
You say that is occurring “in general”, yet, look at fertility rates for Eurasians and non-whites. What do you see? Further, your race war fantasy of East Asians vs. Jews is ridiculous because Ashkenazi jews are breeding themselves out of existence by intermarrying with goyim. So that is a fantasy. East Asian birth rates are extremely low, like Japan for instance.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/09/17/japans-population-decline-and-rk-selection-theory/
So how would this come to pass, ‘in general’? Africa’s population is currently exploding. Europeans aren’t breeding. Hmmm… What do you think the world will look like by 2100? High iq races beginning to exterminate the lower IQ races or high IQ races dwindling because they don’t breed?
Civilization causes low birth rates. Re: my reply to your ‘muscular people are genetically inferior’ article.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/02/12/female-mate-preference-and-body-type/
Take a look at some of my references.
So wouldn’t you say that the populations that don’t have a modern lifestyle will, more likely, survive and out breed higher IQ peoples? The way trends are going now, low IQ populations will replace high IQ ones and it doesn’t look like it will change anytime soon.
RR, civilization does lower birth rates but I think natural selection for intelligence is operating on the group level, not the individual level. For example, even though within each country, high IQ people and high IQ races have fewer kids, they seem to be monopolizing more and more of the World. For example, whites not only dominate Europe, but North America and Australia too. That’s three whole continents! Meanwhile in the middle east, Israel keeps taking more and more territory, and in Africa, the farmers keep taking more and more land from the lower IQ hunter/gatherers.
In the short run, the people who have the most kids win, but in the long run, the people who have the most territory win. Evolution is a marathon, not a sprint.
The referred quote from Schaufessen.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3025130?seq=2#page_scan_tab_contents
“Transitional forms will, no doubt, be
found still reposing in the bosom of the earth which covers palaionto-
logical creation. Without entering into pretended developments, I
shall confine myself to a single point.
In the present state of things, the distance between man and the
animal increases under our own eye. Not merely the human races
standing lowest in the scale, and presenting in their organisation many
resemblances to animal forms, are gradually becoming extinct, but the
superior apes approaching nearest to man become more rare from cen-
tury to century; and will, perhaps, in a few centuries have entirely.”
Basically, he cites Schauffessen on the prediction itself being based on the evolutionary phenomenon on widen gaps between relatively in evolution, hence why he included apes.
If he was just going on “survival of the fittest” as you said, rather than transitional forms themselves, how is it that Baboon-like creatures are in his analogy simultaneous with the higher “humans” rather than the higher apes replacing the inferior primates?
Therefore, regarding human races and extinctions, my notes from the Book would be closer to Darwin’s actual thoughts which he himself viewed as “complex”.
“Because he was basically a good person and knew slavery and colonial behavior was wrong, but at the same time, it was too painful to admit his people were being bad, so he rationalized it as good intentions gone awry, much like you’re doing.”
Okay, you seem to be confusing why I even brought up the specifics on Tasmanian Demise.
Unless you have a legit source on their extinction, not some generalize archetype of your perception of history, the empirical observation was that lack of resources was not their actual downfall based on the action of Europeans trying to sustain them due to the remaining ones allying with the british government.
You are talking about the morals behind the actions, not the actions themselves.
BTW, you still make no sense. You’re telling me that he would scold the British Empire for details like given resources that were specifically adequate conditions but not for blatant physical displacement harming them?
Or do you think his take is that they weren’t using the land’s resources’ his rationalization for displacing them?
Okay, you can’t make an article taking about verifying the idea of higher IQ people in competition with lower IQ people and taking their resource, use that as a basis for superiority, and then turn around and call that “evil” and rationalized by EGI while ignoring how supplying the remaining resources is consistent with a EGI trait of Europeans, being higher level of Altruism.
“So slave masters were just trying to help blacks, not get cheap labour? Europeans took over the Americas and killed many Native Americans for sport because they were just trying to help the Natives, not because they wanted the land? Apartheid in South Africa was just an attempt to help Africans? And Nazi Germany was just an attempt to help the Jews? Because we all know whites are so completely Christ-like and altruistic that whites never do anything for selfish purposes. Are you really that self-deluded by your own EGI or are you just incredibly naïve and gullible?”
….Okay first of all I’m Black, nice assumption on “EGI”
https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2016/07/30/in-black-and-white-by-phil/
Second of all, think about the compensation that were amended by whites for these atrocities like slavery of instance and give me an example of any other race doing the same. In Africa, Blacks profited from the slave trade and built empires from that profit. Do you think they would’ve advocated for Abolition?
Do you see Bantus having guilt for their hand in Bushman and Pygmy decimation?
I have no comment to the rest of your examples because all that you’ve written completely missed my point on why I brought up people like Missionaries as Darwin mentioned was that to rule out resource scarcity as a factor, not to make a point on European Morality which was only brought up because when I said how they gave them resources after taking the land, you read “saints”.
BTW, I find it funny how Jayman, a black HBD’r, has no problem believing it compared to you.
https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2015/06/27/the-rise-of-universalism/
“LOL! You think colonialism was because whites were feeling so generous to other races because their ancestors had less cousin marriage in medieval times? Are you serious?”
Damn, I must’ve really hit dead on a nerve in your pumpkin sized head if that’s what you got from my point of bringing up resources.
I’ve already talked about Darwin NOT talking about the exclusive interests of the Empire, clarifying that he wasn’t implying it only wanted to help the natives and of course I think they wanted the resources. They just sent people like Missionaries, a different entity from the militaristic faction, to assimilate them likely because of executive policy with dealing with potential converters which Christianity at that time would likely support.
Read any pro-slavery books or material on black inferiority and you will see it held as a opponent contention that conversion will hold them to a higher standing in the place that Nuture is held today. Hmmm….I wonder what group would advocate such?
BTW I’m quite familiar on the topic of missionary intentions, behavior, and misguidance in their aid, so quiz away.
https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2016/10/26/the-negro-problem-re-evaluated-by-phil/
“I think natural selection for intelligence is operating on the group level, not the individual level.”
You don’t take to group selection?
” For example, even though within each country, high IQ people and high IQ races have fewer kids, they seem to be monopolizing more and more of the World. For example, whites not only dominate Europe, but North America and Australia too. That’s three whole continents!”
…..K? And what is occurring in these continents in regards to the TFR? Are Europeans breeding more or are the non-white immigrants breeding more? Yes, contro of three continents. But look at the larger demographic trends that occur on these continents and your ‘analysis’ is bunk.
“Meanwhile in the middle east, Israel keeps taking more and more territory”
Ha! Israel would be blown off of the face of the earth without our help. They would get pincered and then destroyed by the Arabs.
Re:
http://www.unz.com/article/war-is-realizing-the-israelizing-of-the-world/
This is only possible with our intervention in the ME to drive the MEers out of the ME to Europe so it’s easier for them to expand for Greater Israel. Just Israel alone would not be able to do what they are currently doing; Israel needs Daddy ‘Murica to oversee the transition to Greater Israel and without ***US*** this would not be able to occur and I know you know that is a fact.
“the farmers keep taking more and more land from the lower IQ hunter/gatherers”
So due to this, this points in to your assertion that eventually there will be one ethny per race and then it is Jews vs. East Asians as the final showdown for rulers of earth? Damn man, you should write some dystopic fiction. It’d be great and I’d def read it. It’d have way more impact as a work of fiction; it doesn’t have any impact as any sort of dystopian future earth, because demographic trends are not in favor of your theory.
And yea high IQ people are ‘monopolizing the world’, yet are hardly breeding. Who will ‘rule the world’ when there are few high IQ people as the world IQ drops each decade? I’d love to hear this explanation.
“In the short run, the people who have the most kids win, but in the long run, the people who have the most territory win. Evolution is a marathon, not a sprint.”
This implies K- versus r-selected people when this is actually high IQ versus low IQ people. The difference matters. For example, blacks are more K-selected than Pygmies who live in small bands and not dense populations like blacks, naturally being farmers. Civilization does initially boost large numbers actually due to survival advantages, but then that declines of course due to diseases and r-selection. So prior to this new trend of replacement, fitness still mattered but by survival rather than quantity per litter.
In the long run, those who breed more will win. Remember the quote from van den Bergh about the measure of human success being reproduction and not production? High IQ peoples are production; low IQ peoples are reproduction. Who is more ‘succesfull’, evolutionarily speaking?
Further, all of your examples are of past trends. Potential to monopolize is declining, with nerds not breeding (see how the nerdy races aren’t breeding? hmmmm…). So how long would this last with non-whites outbreeding whites?
“I think natural selection for intelligence is operating on the group level, not the individual level.”
You don’t take to group selection?
I’m describing a form of group selection
” For example, even though within each country, high IQ people and high IQ races have fewer kids, they seem to be monopolizing more and more of the World. For example, whites not only dominate Europe, but North America and Australia too. That’s three whole continents!”
…..K? And what is occurring in these continents in regards to the TFR? Are Europeans breeding more or are the non-white immigrants breeding more? Yes, contro of three continents. But look at the larger demographic trends that occur on these continents and your ‘analysis’ is bunk.
You’re looking at very short-term demographic trends that can be reversed in a heartbeat. Whichever race controls the most territory will ultimately prosper genetically not the one that overcrowds what little space they have which is a recipe for catastrophe.
“Meanwhile in the middle east, Israel keeps taking more and more territory”
Ha! Israel would be blown off of the face of the earth without our help. They would get pincered and then destroyed by the Arabs.
But that’s how Jews are beating Arabs. By being smart enough to use America to their genetic advantage. Something Arabs can’t do. It’s a proxy war of ideas that occurs in the U.S. media but has evolutionary implication in the middle east.
“the farmers keep taking more and more land from the lower IQ hunter/gatherers”
So due to this, this points in to your assertion that eventually there will be one ethny per race and then it is Jews vs. East Asians as the final showdown for rulers of earth?
I don’t know exactly how it will play out, but the trend seems to be that lower IQ races are losing more and more territory until they’re finally at risk for extinction.
And yea high IQ people are ‘monopolizing the world’, yet are hardly breeding. Who will ‘rule the world’ when there are few high IQ people as the world IQ drops each decade? I’d love to hear this explanation.
Within each race, low IQ people will replace high IQ people, but at the same time, high IQ races will replace lower IQ races. In other words, selection is dysgenic at the individual level, but eugenic at the group level, and the group level is trumping the individual level, causing worldwide IQ to increase.
This implies K- versus r-selected people when this is actually high IQ versus low IQ people. The difference matters. For example, blacks are more K-selected than Pygmies who live in small bands and not dense populations like blacks, naturally being farmers. Civilization does initially boost large numbers actually due to survival advantages, but then that declines of course due to diseases and r-selection. So prior to this new trend of replacement, fitness still mattered but by survival rather than quantity per litter.
Pygmies are black (there’s no height requirement). And yes they’re very r selected:
Pygmies around the world are short in life expectancy as well as height, with the average adult dying at 16-24 years of age. Only 30-50% of children survive to the age of 15 and less than a third of women live to see menopause at 37. Taller African groups like the Ache or Turkana have lower adult mortality and twice the average lifespan, and compared to them, the pygmies’ pattern is closer to that of chimps.
Migliano argues that their early deaths are the driving force behind both their small size and their shorter growth spurts. It pays pygmies to divert resources away from growth and towards having children as early as possible, to compensate for their limited years. Indeed, Migliano found that they reach a peak of fertility earlier than taller groups.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/05/05/short-lives-short-size-why-are-pygmies-small/#.WKTap2fL1es
“Pygmies are black (there’s no height requirement). And yes they’re very r selected:”
Actually no, they belong in a different racial cluster from Negroids, the “HG cluster”.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v517/n7534/full/nature13997.html
Also while they fit the criteria in terms of mortality and development, in terms of actual population structure by density (the the fitness factor of K selected people) due to their lifestyle as hunter gatherers they are less so as a breeding strategy.
Hell, a hunter gatherer lifestyle alone is going to drive high mortality which would be compensated by faster development.
Furthermore, like most R selected people, due to their monogamous lifestyle they put a greater emphasis on group cooperation. So in certain respects they are more K than Negroids.
Meant to say, “like most K selected people”.
“I’m describing a form of group selection”
Sorry, I noticed my error after I submitted it.
You know I take to group selection (see the rebuttal to JayMan on EGIs).
Selection occurs on the individual level, first and foremost. Re: The Selfish Gene by Dawkins (which Rushton uses as his basis for GST).
“You’re looking at very short-term demographic trends that can be reversed in a heartbeat. Whichever race controls the most territory will ultimately prosper genetically not the one that overcrowds what little space they have which is a recipe for catastrophe.”
Good point. But humans aren’t stationary organisms; we migrate to new lands.
Will these trends reverse in a heartbeat? Once a certain threshold is reached there will be no going back. By 2042 white Americans will be a minority. Once that occurs, that’s it. Whites will dwindle in America and lose more and more power to non-whites.
The cause is pathological altruism.
“But that’s how Jews are beating Arabs. By being smart enough to use America to their genetic advantage. Something Arabs can’t do. It’s a proxy war of ideas that occurs in the U.S. media but has evolutionary implication in the middle east.”
Good points.
If you look at the events in the ME and Levant through a MacDonald-esque lens, that’s pretty much what it is.
Point is, Jews are physically weak. I can literally use one hand to count the amount of Jews I’ve seen do manual labor. Jews would get decimated alone; they’re surrounded by countries that hate them wth a passion. When America becomes an isolationist country again, they’ll have to deal with it on their own. They’ll probably use the ‘oh-shit-we’re-gonna-lost-so-pull-out-the-last-trump-card Samson Option.
America will become isolationist again, hopefully before I die. I’m sick of my country being the World’s Police. It pisses me off that Americans die for bullshit that literally has nothing to do with us.
“I don’t know exactly how it will play out, but the trend seems to be that lower IQ races are losing more and more territory until they’re finally at risk for extinction.”
As the world IQ drops, and lower IQ people outbreed higher IQ people…… …..
…….
“Within each race, low IQ people will replace high IQ people, but at the same time, high IQ races will replace lower IQ races. In other words, selection is dysgenic at the individual level, but eugenic at the group level, and the group level is trumping the individual level, causing worldwide IQ to increase.”
Where is this happening? In first-world societies the movie Idiocracy is coming to pass. Society as a whole is dysgenic. Obesogenic environments decrease fertility and genetic quality. People with higher IQs breed less than people with lower IQs. What fantasy world do you live in?
Phil covered it on Pygmies. The Khoisan would be another group like that.
Pingback: Happy Darwin Day, Heathens « NotPoliticallyCorrect
From France, this prediction seems strage. Because 50 years ago, there were 0.1% babies with exclusively muslim (no Abraham, no Fatima, only Mohammed and Zouaia) name an it’s 18% now. 38% of children are tested for Sickle-cell desease wich means they have black or mestizo origine (it goes from 6% in brittany to 73% in Paris area).
800 000 people are born each year. You’ve got 100 000 people that emigrate (and don’t come back, 250 000 goes to a foreign country each year and 150 000 come back). 100 000 people gain french nationality. And 250 000 foreigners (mostly from Africa) come into France each year.
So today, the USA is more white than France (23% latino child. 12% black child. 6% Asian. 59% white).And in 10 years, we will be far less white than Turkey or Egypt. So if there is a war, it would be a civil war here … Hope it isn’t coming.