The Nature of Diversity

Imagine an island that is suddenly populated with one hundred couples, each with a unique last name. In other words, no couple has the same last name. Further, they continue the tradition of the females taking the male’s last name upon marriage. As these couples reproduce, their children will be expected to marry one another. Couple A1 has a couple of boys and they marry the girls from Couple C2. This is not a controlled experiment, so nature can take its course and people are free to marry who they like.

Now, some couples will have all girls. Some couples will have no children. Given that the island is pretty boring and all of the couples are sexually normal, the infertile couple will not be the result of a lack of effort. On the other hand, infertility is not that common, so the number of childless couples will be quite small. At the same time, “Fertile Myrtle” is not an unusual phenomenon and some men have a near uncontrollable sex drive. That means there will be quite a few big families to counter the infertile and the strangely disinterested.

Now, if all couples have one male child and one female child, both of whom make it to sexually maturity and marry, then the population will remain stable. The number of last names will also remain constant, as each male heir will carry on the family name. Given this is a small island, a few extra children, or the “heir and spare” model will make sure that the family names live on and the population does not fall into decline. In this perfect scenario, we can come back in a dozen generations and things are about the same.

On the other hand, if each generation has 10% of the females unable to bear children, it will take about 20 generations before almost everyone has the same last name. The decline in last names happens fast initially, but the name singularity is at about 20 generations. Something similar happens if 10% of the couples have only female children that make it to adulthood. Throw in the fact that each generations may not have enough females for all the males and the decline of last names will progress toward one.

Obviously, lots of couples will have all boys or all girls. Since this island does not have video games or feminism, getting busy with the opposite sex will be the main form of entertainment. That means some couples will have lots of kids, but others will be more restrained and have one or two kids. The bigger the family, the lower the odds of having all girls or all boys, but it happens. If that is just ten percent of the result, the initial disappearance of last names is much quicker, but still takes about 20 generations.

Why would anyone care about this? Well, it is a good way to understand how a trait can flow through a population, resulting in a unique population. Instead of last names, let’s use a pronounced brow ridge, indicating high intelligence. If this is a trait passed through the male line of the A2 family, the whole population will have it, if in our experiment the A2 name is the one that comes out on top after 20 generations. If it is not just passed by males, but also results in high fertility, then it can spread quickly in our population.

Add in the fact that men with a prominent brow line will be highly desirable to the opposite sex, now you have a trait that increases the odds of producing children with it by some small percentage. On the other hand, let’s say the one guy in our 100 founding couples with the brow ridge drowns while out for a swim, before he had kids. That means this highly desirable trait, both from a biological as well as reproductive reason, is removed from the gene pool forever. Our island will be full of homely dumb people forever.

This is a simplified and rather crude way of illustrating how a desirable trait can flow through a population, but it is useful. In fact, this is pretty much how we have so many dog breeds. Humans short-circuited nature, by selecting the dogs that would breed, thus selecting for specific traits. After enough generations, one breeder ended up with Great Danes, while another ended up with dachshunds, so to speak. A famous example of this is the creation of a domesticated foxes by a Russian geneticist named Dmitry K. Belyaev.

Another way of understanding this is to imagine our island paradise flourishing with a high fertility rate over many generations. Then a resource scarcity sets off competition among the islanders and eventually a tyrant emerges to control the island. He correctly sees that the issue is the left-handed and has all of them killed. In future generations, anyone found to be left-handed is killed. It will not take long, in fact it could literally happen over night, for the population to lose the left-handed trait. Sometimes, Mother Nature is this cruel.

This is a good way to understand the natural diversity of people. When modern humans emerged from Africa, that is the most likely origin, we carried almost all of the traits present in humans today. As people spread out around the globe, nature found some traits much more useful in the new environment, so those traits eventually were selected for over each generation. Nature also found some traits deleterious and strongly selected against them, like our left-handedness example. Overtime, we got the diversity of man.

It is why anyone who uses the phrase “scientific racism” is rejecting the fundamentals of biology. Just as there is great diversity in the domestic dog, there is diversity in humans, diversity that is measurable and observable. Denying observable reality is a few clicks less reasonable than witchcraft or astrology. It also means multiculturalism is, in effect, a war on nature, as it is an effort to obliterate human diversity. Mixing everyone together into a gray slurry, is just a primitive minded war on nature and biological reality. It is immoral.

94 thoughts on “The Nature of Diversity

  1. only the useful idiots do not accept HBD. 2015 migrant crisis showed that people in charge know it intimately. it was pretty obvious that it was intentional and who was shafting whom

  2. it is interesting to go back in time and see how evolution works. Like what percent of the human population in 1850 has living descendants? This is especially interesting when it comes to women since they basically only have 20 years to have children.

    Looking at the “female line” in my family its interesting how old the average age is (30.6).

    Great-Great-Great Grandmother (Irish immigrant) (1838-1898)

    Great-Great Grandmother (1861-1940)

    Great-Grandmother (1893-1984)

    Grandmother (1929-)

    Mother (1959-)

    Myself (1991-)

    my mom’s “female line” will be cut off since her only kids were me and my brother who are both male. Her sister, otoh, has four daughters and one son – and one granddaughter.

    • I don’t remember exactly who it was I saw that pointed this out – might have actually been a Jordan Peterson video where he was talking about the innate differences that exist between the motivations of men vs. women. But if I remember the numbers correctly he pointed that something like 85% of the women who ever lived have passed on their genes. But only like 40% of males have had the same opportunity.

      Here’s a Reddit post talking about the same sort of thing:
      https://www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/7xvqai/once_you_understand_that_throughout_history_only/

      Looking at the level of quality you see out of some women in the inner city or living in white trash trailer parks – and seeing how many kids they push out – should be evidence enough that this effect is still in play in the current day.

    • You have an X chromosome from your mother. Any female children you have will receive it. Half of your genetic complement is from your mother. About 1/4 of any offspring DNA you produce will be matrilineal.

  3. “Mixing everyone together into a gray slurry, is just a primitive minded war on nature and biological reality. It is immoral.”

    Endless variety and experimentation is Life itself, a reason we embodied are housed in transient forms.

    The Blob is immoral.
    As if making something IT IS NOT is an improvement.
    All to fight imagined hobgoblins of their own making.
    Global warming! Holocaust! Racism! Sexism! Inequality!
    It seems like a war on Nature.

    There are only two questions that matter-
    Pain, and Death. Yet the sages refuse to confront them, thinking them unsolvable.

    Fools. Such a waste. Such a terrible waste.
    All this effort simply to defend lies.
    Their ‘solutions’ are solutions to- nothing, nothing but fevered propaganda.

  4. Hey Z – this has become one of my favorite sites… entertaining, thought-provoking. I understand I’m in the minority, but not alone among readers. I appreciate you’re more about “academic arguments” as illustrated in this post – good stuff – but I’m among your readers that are probably a little more about “loading magazines” and gettin’ ready. Just sayin

  5. I like Derb’s “Weapon of Mass Immigration”.

    Really, most people are good, or trying to be.
    I cannot wish ill on anyone for their efforts.

    Think of two radios in a room, set on different stations. They clash. Seperate rooms, one might enjoy either programme.

    Peoples have different rhythms, cadences, and ways.
    But forcing them together, that push, push, push- that’s the problem. Signal clash.

    Especially when it’s some snotty zealot using it as their “F*ck You” proxy.

    Against H8 is the original BFYTW
    (Because F*ck You That’s Why)

  6. I like the “if you start with this population on an island” way of explaining things.

    I’ve used it before when going head to head with the homosexual advocates who used to like to run around and scream ” It’s just as natural as being a heterosexual!!”.

    I think I even used the 100 people number.

    Put 100 homosexual men on an island. Put 100 lesbian women on an island. Then put 100 heterosexual men/women on another island. You can even pick the ratio – 99 men/ 1 woman – 99 women / 1 man …. or something in between.

    Now leave them there for lets say 75 years. There can be NO contact with the outside world – and for the purposes of this experiment the island supplies the people with what they need to survive.

    Come back in 75 years and tell me what you find. I’m betting on gay man island you’ll find everybody dead and gone. On lesbian island you will also find everybody dead and gone – maybe even quicker than on gay man island because once their menstruals sync up – watch the hell out.

    Now to go hetero island. I’m betting there are at least *some* survivors. If we start off with 1 woman and 99 men – that woman is going to be kept busy and it’s likely quite a few of those 99 men probably killed each other off. If we start with 99 women and one man – the guy likely lived like a king and sired multiple children – who now are part of cult that sanctifies sex with siblings. A better mix of the male/female ratio gives you exactly what any society will usually give you: offspring. So one way or another – hetero island has survivors.

    Now tell me which is “normal”. Seeing as how lesbian island and homo island are both basically just waiting for death the minute they were dumped on the shore. In both cases we’re talking about a complete and total dead end. And in the context of your place in nature – your job is to reproduce. Since that is impossible on Lesbos Island or Homos Island – it cannot be considered “normal”.

    • I forget who suggested it — some HateThinker, no doubt — but “situational homosexuality” as an unconscious adaptation to Darwinian pressure makes a lot of sense to me. Consider sailing ships back in the day. I spent most of high school (and college, and grad school) with zero prospect of getting laid, and yet it never once occurred to me to go gay. And yet, sailing ships barely left port before the sailors were all shagging each other (“the only naval traditions are rum, sodomy, and the lash,” Winston Churchill is supposed to have said). There are simply too many men (100%) for the available population of females (0%), so nature takes its course — let the men fight it out for other men, and then if some women do show up, they’ll get the fittest.

      I assume something like that would work in reverse. On a deserted island, with no hope of ever getting off (heh heh), I bet even Harvey Fierstein-level gays would “experiment” a few times — enough to keep the race going, in any case. Nature finds a way.

      • Yes. I knew a totally camp queen long ago who took 365 partners a year,.and I asked him if he’d ever done a girl. He had, a friend in high school, one time. He found it especially disturbing because he liked it. Still, a population of 100 couples of that sort would have the shelf life of Mouse Utopia.

        • “He found it especially disturbing because he liked it.”

          If he liked it then why not keep doing it?

          • Maybe he liked being a camp queen more?

            I think that some people get into these lifestyles as a way of rebelling or giving the finger to the normies.

          • He was especially disturbed because it was like a perversion, he being really and truly queer. That’s enough of a reason to me, but he may also have been spooked to find that whatever he thinks he is doesn’t measure up to the real thing.

      • I’ve read the “rum, sodomy, and the lash” line, but I’ve never read anything which confirms (or refutes) the assertion. Masturbation would seem a more rational response to a lack of women in such a situation. Either option (homosexuality and masturbation) was socially frowned upon at the time, but I imagine that jerking off would be less likely to earn one as serious a punishment as homosexuality. And the latter requires a partner, while the former doesn’t.

        • I remember early teen years before hitting the weights, getting on the rugby team and getting some girl, not to be crude but you could end up with a forearm like popeye as your riddled with hormones. It depends on the context. The vast majority of lads would get a bit onanistic after being without woman for a while. But there’s always a degenerate https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PRnrbnW8zts

      • ‘I wish I could tell you that Andy fought the good fight and the Sailors let him be, I wish I could, but the Navy is no fairy tale……

      • Yes – I’m sure with no other hole to stick their junk into even Harvey Fierstein level gays would be shagging a woman or two just to get off. In fact I know a number of gay men – and that’s pretty much exactly what they do. They will hook up with a woman – have a couple of kids – and then suddenly “discover” they are gay somewhere in the mid to late 30’s after getting the procreation thing out of the way.

        That doesn’t change the facts of the argument though – gays like to run around yell about how “normal” it is. That’s why I say: Let’s run the experiment. You gays go live on this island by yourself and let’s see if you reproduce. The first time a butt baby is born please let us know because it will be a medical first.

        The other angle to this argument is a way of pointing out the insanity of the typical Christian argument against gays – which is to try and keep them absorbed into society and procreating with women. IF there is a “gay gene” – and you force gays to hook up with women – you are forcing the propogation of that gene. If on the other hand – you give the gays what they want – which is an “open”society where they are free to just be gay – that means gays will probably be spreading their seed on each other rather than sticking it into women.

        I would think that this would tend to diminish the spreading of said gay gene over time seeing as how they’d probably be less likely to birth children with said gene. I think there’s a nexus between the gay’s “it’s natural” argument – and the Christian “it’s an abomination” argument. If the gays want to say it’s natural – fine. Then you can’t have sex with women. We wouldn’t want you to do “unnatural” and “oppressive” things after all – would we? With the proper societal encouragement – what you’d end up with is gays self selecting themselves out of the genetic propagation game. I’m sure somewhere in that 20 generations timeline you’d end up with no gays any more – or at least such a small subset of the population that they’d just melt back into gen-pop and stop making such a nuisance of themselves.

        I think the typical Christian completely misses this point.

        • The story is that gay men married women in the hope that it would “cure” them. Plus, they wanted kids. Up until recently, that was the only socially acceptable way for a man to have kids. Now they either adopt or hire a surrogate mother to produce a child for them.

          • Teapartydoc – Yes, you are correct. In some circles, it was/is unacceptable to be gay. Obama?

          • Yup. That was the scam “Rev” Wright- a former imam with Nation of Islam- was running in the back room of his Trinity church.

            He hooked up black, gay social climbers with the unattractive daughters of prominent families as their “beards”.

            The other young men in O’s cohort strangely ended up mostly dead, with a couple in prison.

        • That’s what I don’t get.
          Once, hitchhiking East as a teen, I got a ride by a 40 y.o. musclebound Adonis in Salt Lake. Divorced. Four kids. Mormon. He had turned gay. How does that happen?

          (I’d been hit on like a thousand times by then, so of course the answer as always was no, but goshdam that was a scary moment.)

  7. I appreciate this and also the first part of Z’s Friday podcast as a way of rationally explaining human biodiversity to otherwise intelligent normies who prefer to believe “we’re all the same.” It’s an uphill battle to get nice, decent people to discard their magical beliefs. They don’t want to be in the Hate Club. Even if you get them to acknowledge race realism, then you have to deal with “it’s something we can’t talk about, because of where it can lead……”

  8. Before I retired, I used dog breeds to explain “scientific racism” to students. We all know that there are different breeds of dog, and what happens when you put two different breeds together. “Is a chihuahua-poodle combination better than a German shepherd-labrador combination?” I’d ask. The dumb ones would take this to mean that all races are equal, and get that smug smirk that is the Millennial generation’s default expression. The smarter ones would ask “better at what?” and this would spur a discussion of how “society” uses, or doesn’t, various traits (while acknowledging, tacitly but obviously, that genes and behavior are correlated). The incipient shitlords would give me a searching look… and I’d give them a little wink…. and every now and again, one of them would show up in office hours for a little chat. Those were the best days in my whole career.

    • I would like to see a primer on sly subversive strategies to undermine the narrative. Maybe we could get a secret handshake as well- that would be cool! In any case, stay cagey.

    • Recently my daughter reported to me that her college professor gave the class the race-doesn’t-exist-we’re-all-one-race-the-human-race lecture. She wanted to argue, but instead sat quietly with a smirk on her face, since she wants a good grade in the class. The free exchange of ideas probably wasn’t allowed.

      • She did the right thing. Never argue — you’ll fail, at the very least, and quite possibly get show-trialed. College profs have all gone full retard for Social Justice. (Which is why I try to cut Millennials I meet in daily life a *little* slack — they’ve been taught that “success” (i.e. good grades) is the only thing in life, yet the only thing you need to do to “succeed” is parrot what the authorities tell you. It worked like a charm for 22 years; the real world comes as quite a shock).

        • My oldest daughter would make a game of it. She’d earn A’s in non-STEM classes by manipulating her leftist professors in entirely predictable ways. She’d write papers that were virtually parodies of leftist appeals to emotion and political correctness, laughing at them behind their backs the whole while. She ended up the valedictorian and speaker for her graduating college class.

          She’s now pretty much a bigger Dissident Right shitlord than me. You should see the looks she gets when she starts explaining to people why women shouldn’t have the vote.

          • I’ve a couple of very young kids. If you could give some tips on red pilling it would be much appreciated

          • I do it with kids the way I do it with the idiot liberals who have body-snatched half my wife’s family.

            ” How did you get here?”
            “We drove”

            “What in?”
            “A car silly”

            “Who invented cars?”

            “I dunno”

            Take it away, folks:
            https://www.thoughtco.com/who-invented-the-car-4059932

            ” guess what they’ve all got in common”?

            “What”?

            All the inventors were white men from Europe or America.

            Pause for beating down the whinging libs.

            Then do tires- Dunlop, Goodyear etc, steel, safety glass, etc.- even Tarmac, thanks to Mr Macadam.

            Planes, trains, computers, TV’s, Und So Weiter.

            And you’ve just started.

            vary the dosage.

    • I was around a Sheltie for a time. It was probably not the smartest breed I’ve seen, but it could do one very complicated thing astoundingly well without a spot of training. And if you went to play fetch with it you definitely got the wrong dog.

      • That’s not typical for Shelties (not being smart) unless they’re terribly overbred. They’re one of the smarter breeds, probably in the top 10 percent. What was the complicated thing it did well? Herding? They’re known for their herding abilities. They fall behind border collies because they’re just not big enough for anything but the little sheep herds on the Shetland Islands.

        ETA: This link ranks them as sixth smartest breed.

        http://petrix.com/dogint/intelligence.html

        • She herded a fair mob of kids in from the backyard on command. No one got away. But dumb or smart, that dog was not going to go fetch. That’s breeding.
          Someone recently remarked that in all the years he spent in Africa, he never saw a single African with a hobby. A hobby is something for someone who is bred for work and has time left over from work to work a hobby. Some races are not bred to work. The plains Indian is one example. I’m trying to think of another.

    • The idea of breeding for certain traits and coming up with a race horse rather than a plow horse used to be used by the leftists to justify belief in evolution. Look at all the diversity they would say.

      Now they say there is no difference at all in the races. They even say that human races don’t exist. How do people get that stupid?

      But if there are NO races, why do we have affirmative action, racial quotas, and racial set-asides?

      • “But if there are NO races, why do we have affirmative action, racial quotas, and racial set-asides?”

        Systemic racism! (Seriously, that’s all they’ve got.)

    • Imagine dogs are as intelligent as human beings. What kind of society would Pitbulls create and what kind of society would Pomeranians? It is acknowledged these two breeds of dogs that can readily interbreed with one another have different innate personalities.

      Cats have been selectively bred since the late 19th Century and then only for appearance, unlike dogs. All cat breeds share some similar personality traits, but there are temperamental differences between, say, a Siamese and a Persian. Both are natural breeds and no one bred them for different personalities. They just evolved that way.

      It is claimed that even different colored cats within the same breed have different personalities – orange vs. black vs. tortoishell cats. They just evolved that way.

  9. Face it. Change is coming and there’s no stopping it. The Age of White Euro-America is over; just like Babylon, Egypt and Rome, they all came crashing down as the barbarians took over. Like a melting ice berg, the bottom is rolling upwards, and we’re all clinging to the tip, screaming in panic as the icy waters approach.

    One only need to dial the clock back a few hundred years to re-envision the most recent cultural shift in your own country. It started en mass after Europeans realized they could leave the horrors and abuse from hundreds of years of bloody religious and political wars. They could leave the misery and poverty of their own country and go to a place where things were better. They risked everything and spent upwards of 2-months crossing the Atlantic, often with just the clothes on their backs.

    And what did they do when they arrived? Did they assimilate the values, cultures and religions of the locals? Did they embrace the local language? Wear the local fashions? Follow the local customs? No, They did not.

    Newly arriving Europeans did what every en mass group of immigrants has always done when they arrive – they obliterated the locals and imposed their own values, culture and religion on anyone left standing. They waved a flag, demanded loyalty, enforced their religion and woe to anyone to failed to accept the newly established order.

    Sound familiar?

    So why should we expect these newly arriving people, who are as different to us as Europeans were to Native American peoples, to act any differently? Yes, of course America and Europe are far superior to these shit-hole country people. Anyone can see that! Just look around next time you’re shopping at a Walmart in Owsley County, Kentucky. These old worn out Europeans now live in rusting trailers, with no health care, and have more children than teeth.

    Yes my friends, America and Europe are done. Finished. Kaput! The great Euro-American Age is over. Your own country is almost as fragmented as it was before your own Civil War 150-years ago. And the grand EU experiment, where Germany continues to try and dominate all of Europe, is collapsing in grand fashion as Europe itself begins to fragment back into the feudal countries they once were.

    But what’s significantly different this time is, unlike the great civilizations before us, we are financially, morally, ethically and religiously exhausted and we have no where else to go.

    • You apparently don’t know the history of the US very well.

      The earlier colonists got along with the “natives” relatively well. New England is chock full of places that retain their “native” names. The southern states that were part of the original 13 colonies are the same. Hunters and trappers and people on the frontier – absolutely did wear the local fashions. And the natives adopted clothing from the English and French. If anybody was a problem at the time – it was the religious nuts of the day – same as we’re having problems with the religious nuts (leftists) in this day and age.

      The “dirt people” of the time during the colonial days – got along with the natives far better than the leftist media would have you believe in the current day. The land grabs that occurred in the western US – happened when the country had birthed it’s own cloud class – which then did what the cloud class often does – and grasped for empire. And they did it with the help of a whole new batch of European immigrants – who did not come from the countries that originally made up the sources of the original colonies.

      Much of the Midwest of the US is populated with people of German or Scandinavian heritage. States like Minnesota, Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin – are chock full of progressive leftist retardation. There definitely seems to be a correlation here.

      Seems to me that the history of the US would have been drastically different if the ORIGINAL settlers had been able to keep the immigrants out – both from Europe – and from darker regions.

      • The point is people came to America, because it was worse where they were when the left. Exactly like what’s happening today with people leaving Africa and the Middle East. When European settlers got to America they quickly displaced the locals, rather than assimilating. It’s exactly what we’re seeing right now.

        To your point of “harmonious” existence between natives and Europeans; the Europeans only got along with them because starving to death and trade were better in the long run. As to wearing local garb, it was simply a matter of available resources, not because French trappers thought wearing dear skins was “le derniere crie”. And I don’t recall the Colonists casting aside their home-spun for loin cloths or eating human flesh like the Mohawks or Iroquois they “lived with” as you put it.

        As with trappers and mountain men, cultural appropriation still remains the rule of the day in America with names like Apache helicopters and Tomahawk cruise missiles.

        We have plenty of Roman named cities here too such as (Köln) Cologne and (Londinium) London. Literally hundreds of old Roman Latin-named cities have since been renamed to the native tongue. But you won’t find any Romans there any more than you’ll find Native Americans in cities like Takoma and Tallahassee.

        Land grabing by Europeans was well known. The pre-existing ownership rights of the Native Americans were dismissed out right. The English stated that they owned the land through “right of discovery” and “right of conquest.” Treaties they negotiated with different tribes in the 1600’s and 1700’s were only to extinguish Native American claims. Land was seized rather than purchased from the original inhabitants.

        It’s interesting how American history classes in elementary and high school grades make a point of hiding the truth about human rights abuse and genocide towards Native Americans not only by individuals, but by it’s own government. When in fact your history books and historical documents are full of such facts. Whether you chose to believe it is another thing. At least here in Germany, we face up to our past (e.g. the Holocaust) and teach our children the truth of our past no matter how uncomfortable it might be.

        Since you know of German settlers, then you must know about the Gnaddenhutten Massacre that took place in 1782, where a group of Moravian Protestants in Ohio killed 96 Christianized Delaware Indians? Somehow I doubt your children have been to the site of the Bear River Massacre, let alone know anything about it. My children have been to both Dachau and Buchenwald Concentration Camps.

        Americans all live in the myth that America is ordained by God to exist forever. You might want to see how that’s worked out for others before you who thought the same thing. And by the way, you’re not the youngest country in the world either as much as you like to think so.

        • So you’re a good little cuck to your Jewish masters, is that the gist of your diatribe?

        • “The point is people came to America, because it was worse where they were when the left. Exactly like what’s happening today with people leaving Africa and the Middle East.” Exactly! The Indians gave the settlers cash, food, shelter, and muddle headed middle aged squaws to gush over them. Exactly the same.

        • Holocaustianity. Irish potato famine wasn’t pretty, dwarved by holdomor, Islamic conquests, Islamic invasion of India. Great leap forward, Bolshevik collectivization, Year Zero infinitly worse. Then you’re on to Mongol conquests, Aztec ritual mass murder. Every Civilization has expanded itself at the expense of others corpses at some time in it’s history. In comparison to most others the West may have opened up the World but it wasn’t by any means as blood thirsty. The Holocaust tm, is heavily overplayed due to large scale Jewish involvement in the media industry. Human history is an absolute blood bath. However, this ostentatious self loathing on your part is a bit fuckin pathetic. My own opinion if you want to make the World a better place, The great European colonial powers need to stop apologising for Imperialism, The U.S needs to stop apologizing for the slave trade and highlight the islamic one, and Germany needs to get over the fuckin self abegnation, put the Holocaust and Third Reich in context. Over a thousand years of great contributions to humanity erased because of the six bazillion? Bollocks

        • American history books are chock full of noble savage mythology.

          Many natives lacked the technology to slaughter settlers and other tribes, but not the will. Insufficient genocidal capabilities is not some great moral standing.

          • Samuel Clemens wrote an essay on Indians that is itself savage. He’ll have to be banned by the librarians next. Indians were as noble as the average Aztec priest. And according to French fur traders the women could top the men in savagery.

        • The net effect of the immigration from Europe to North America definitely was to displace the locals. But they did that thru sheer numbers, superior weaponry – and introduced disease. Not by the willing subservience of said locals. Again – you must not know much of the colonial era history. From the earliest days the colonists were often at war with one tribe or Indian nation or another – and were also often allied in those wars with other tribes or nations. And it was not a quick displacement. It took at least 150 years on the Eastern seaboard to get to the point where the colonists were predominant.

          One of the reasons for the wars between colonists – and Indian tribes – was exactly BECAUSE people “integrated”. Indentured servants and poorer people often ran away to live with the Indians. The living conditions between the natives and the colonists were not so much different that one couldn’t improve one’s lot in life by going to live with the natives. Since you couldn’t have your slaves and indentured servants running away to a better life with the native tribes – that often was used as the reasoning behind stirring up wars with said tribes.

          There is a vastly different perception of what happened in the colonies between cloud people accounts (“official” literature) – and the stuff you will read from “dirt” people literature. When you read accounts of survivors of native attacks – obviously they were godless savages. When you read accounts of dealings between colonists and relatively friendly Indian tribes – you get an entirely different story.

          You don’t put up statues, keep names of places – and keep the games played by a genocided people if you truly intended on consigning them to the dustbin of history. At least around New England – there are numerous statues of natives of the region, the place is chock full of mountains, towns, rivers and all sorts of other geographic features with names coming from the local tribes – and one of the most popular sports in the region is lacrosse – which is a game directly descended from the native tribes.

          Before the lefties went nutso – many local sports teams named themselves after local tribes – or just called themselves “Indians”. Paratroopers don’t jump out of airplanes and yell “Geronimo!” as a sign of disgust. They do it out of respect for a great warrior.

          Sorry – but the truth about the relationship between the Europeans who came to North America and the native tribes is a little bit more nuanced and complicated than the picture portrayed by the leftist mainstream media and it’s constant need to gin up a new class of victims.

          There’s been a number of native American activists who have seen no problem whatsoever with the naming of sports teams and military units after “Indians” or the using of specific native terms. They correctly see it as sign of respect – and a way to keep the legacy of those tribes alive in the public conscience.

        • “Americans all live in the myth that America is ordained by God to exist forever.”

          I agree with part 2 of this statement: That America is ordained by God to exist forever. However, it is untrue that all Americans believe this, or that is a myth.

          So you are 1/3 right. But you are German, so you can’t possibly understand things here as well as I do. But take heart; if I were to toss off a silly and emotional comment about a large country like Germany and still be 1/3 right, I’d be proud of myself.

        • Karl, I’m glad to see your name again as I always enjoy your comments! I have a question for you about German teaching of the holocaust. Along with shaming the Germans for what they did, is anything taught about what Jews did to make Germans so angry leading up to the holocaust? About prior expulsions of Jews throughout history and what caused them? Or are the Jews portrayed as innocents who white Europeans like to pick on and hate, as it’s taught here in the U.S. with nothing about their history of expulsions? I’m sincerely asking.

      • Calsdad, if the *original* settlers had kept out all the later immigrants, I imagine the Latinos would have swallowed up our country that much sooner. But it doesn’t matter since it didn’t happen that way…

        • Hey, that’s true! Cortez rampaged through New Mexico, and the Spanish Empire had already claimed California and Florida.
          They would’ve kept coming.
          Some nice alternative history there.

    • At least those old worn out Europeans in Owsley County, KY have descendants, so they’re still in the game.

    • Germany must really be falling apart. At least we in America have a LEADER (gee, I forget the German word for this) who gives a fuck.

  10. I will really miss the redheaded women. I’m in East Tennessee and we have a bunch of gingers here. Wish i could build a moat around it.

  11. It’s an ant farm they want. Insect hive, workers and soldiers and nursery workers and, of course, the Queen.
    I guess real life isn’t all that much different, but at least we can survive outside the hive.

    • Yes, that’s the goal. Compliant, docile worker bees. White people, who are the most independent, rugged individuals on the planet, are too pesky for their plan.

  12. Even though our anointed leaders try to suppress scientific knowledge or even deny it, I believe they still proceed with plans utilizing the information. A Gattica type world is in our future.

  13. Yes, there are powerful and comprehensive forces at work that are trying mightily to induce homogenization into our species. The endgame is a three-tiered social order comprised of bottom level workers, intermediate level bureaucrats & enforcers, and a small upper level cadre of elites. Those promoting this insect model of species evolution are certain that they will become the elites in this new world order.

      • My son is talking about this a lot lately, even dug out my copy of the book this week.

      • Brave New World was written as fiction. What is playing out now is reality. That is not a trivial distinction.

        • We live in a dystopian union of Brave New World and 1984.

          With a little bit of “Cold Comfort Farm ” thrown in for light relief.

    • However – rest assured – at the highest levels… at the Bilderburg elite levels… the children are being taken aside and told, “All this diversity BS we’re pushing to the masses… it doesn’t apply to you. You’re the elite and elites aren’t diverse… you’re exempt from worker-class/useful-idiot doctrines”.

      • This I don’t believe. People, even smart, ruthless ruling class people, are able to believe utter nonsense, while living by the rules of biological reality.

        • Hm… maybe that’s a topic for another article… I can see it both ways… yes, the elites can convince themselves of some stupid stuff… but on many levels they don’t really, really buy the bs. If they did, then why would the warmists keep buying ocean-front property? Why do the elites keep encouraging open borders while building their private compound fences higher? I don’t know, Z, I think the elites are keeping some “out clauses” for the bs intended for the masses.

          • Human beings have endless capacity for self-delusion and self-justification, especially when it serves their interests, or, at least requires no personal sacrifice.

        • The upper class, to the extent it is endogamous, does select for cynics. Progress cult has selected against true believers for several generations now. This doesn’t necessarily imply a vast conspiracies, but it would suggest the incoming elite prog generation (4th or 5th) would be majority cynic. And ultimately the future of such an endogamous class (assuming no guillotines from the lumpenprole hoard they have summoned) would be almost entirly cynical.

          • That comment rang my bells. One thing though. There is an observable pressure to join an elite class of this sort and it’s growth is sure to create incapacity. Hasn’t it already? Only so many people can pass the secret wink. And on the other side of it, insularity creates the madness of ideas, and of the mind itself. Maybe the Jews have figured this one out and are on to Part Deux.

        • Elitists ooze “I’m better than you”, “I make the rules for you – but not me”, “Armed protection or me, not for thee”. How about growing elitist doomsday estates in New Zealand? Private schools? DNC emails referring to “ignorant Negros” and “needy Hispanics”? (was that exactly it?) And…. when was the last time you saw photos of a Bilderburg meeting? Pretty Lilly White – no? So where’s the “diversity” at the highest elitist levels? Sure – they’re thrilled their daughters screwing the Nigerian for kicks… but is he really taking over the Family Crest?

        • I agree with this view point. Smart people can believe all sorts of BS.Cults are full of them.

          I think it’s clear that the elites of today aren’t like the old school types like Rockefeller, Carnegie and Ford. These guys actually built something and still had old world values. They had zero use for miscegenation and importing untold numbers of savages. Today their descendants are mushy headed softies and trust fund degenerates. They were subjected to the same brainwashing in the Ivies that many other college students got. Hell Post-Modernism which forms one of the two ideological pillars of leftist thought was brought in via Yale who welcomed Derrida and his insanity to the U.S.

    • That’s the whole point of open borders, to recreate communism: elites, bureaucrats, proletariat. California is there already.

      • Russia buying some ads is apparently casus belli for WW3. But the PRC funding of the Clinton and Obama campaigns is just water under the bridge. Chinese capital is flooding into our bicoastal real estate, into British Columbia and Australia. Russian (Jewish) capital flooded into London in the 2000s. Indian capital is coming soon.

  14. This is really just another way of saying that all of our self assured materialists out there don’t really believe in materialism and its direct corollary, evolution.

    Nothing can happen without their help.

    I have a neighbor who taught college biology and is a botanist who creates his own strains of flowers. I got a note from him asking me to kill some invasive grass he noticed growing in my yard with a warning that it could overtake our woods. I’m not a botanist, and the only things I grow are attractants for deer in hunting season, but I spend a heck of a lot more time in the woods than he does. This grass is literally everywhere. The cat is out of the bag. He might as well ask me to go kill all the kudzu in the South.

    I’ve considered telling him that this all has me very confused. I thought we were supposed to celebrate change, not be deathly afraid of it. More diversity, not less, etc. Open borders should be good for grasses, too.

    You know what? He would just think I was the one being ignorant.

    • I love it when I see back to nature and progressive types start bitching about “materialism”. It’s like the pay no attention whatsoever. “Nature” is materialist. My cats have their favorite toys – and will get mad when another cat plays with it. They also have their favorite sleeping spots. They will take food from each other – even though they’re both more than adequately fed. Friend’s dogs very clearly recognize the concept of possession and will defend territory. My cats recognize territory and will defend their yard against interlopers.

      When you put a huge pile of bananas in front of chimpanzees – they grab as many as they can carry and run off with them. Birds steal things and line their nests with trinkets to impress potential mates.

      Nature is materialist by nature. Anybody who doesn’t understand this is simply not paying attention.

      • Nature is capitalist, too.
        Try taking away that bulldog’s bone, and see if he doesn’t believe in proprty rights- or the Second Amendment.

  15. Although appreciating the thought experiment… the results you described wouldn’t be realized today. Today, the women would say something like, “Men are too masculine and intelligent… I want a feminized man!” Then, when the “intelligent” men feminized themselves to please the women, the women would chose the brute men because their original comment was a lie born of typical female feminist self-deception.

      • Sperg or not – at least you have the luxury of feedback. A community of readers can elevate a comment/blog with wildly entertaining thoughts. It can’t happen every time, but when it does, …Well 😉
        Taki gutted the soul of the site and writers by killing off what was a fine group of regulars who could take a subject into heights on many occasions, and even police the occasional pill who spoiled the show.
        A Sorrowful decision IMO. Keep Going I Say!

        Best
        E

        • Truly, that is an incredible bonus. I’m grateful for the Z blog AND the commenters. This is my school.
          I trust you guy’s all had babies, right?

    • Yep. Typical lie that women state. Women are natural status seekers and seek out the most dominant male they can find. They do not want agreeable Beta Males. They do not want men who earn less than them. They do not want doormats. They despise agreeable men. That doesn’t mean they won’t use and dump them – they will.

      Women are hardwired to pursue the bad boy and thug. You start seeing that in high school where the largish malcontent with no redeeming features or the jock with the letterman jacket always gets the girl. While the AV club nerds just get scorn from the girls.

      • A popular notion, but you are wildly mistaken. A whole other class of women who are not “Letter Bound” or drawn to instant popularity in childhood, are in your parameter. They will not respond to some badge or trend. They are also much more in demand than the ones you describe. They take much more time to acquire or get to know.
        If you are lucky, you might meet one in a lifetime. You will not solve all the problems with knowing them, but if you are lucky enough to spend time with one, you’ll feel gifted and you will know it.

Comments are closed.