Home About Archives Contact Forums Search Wiki

Book review of “Breeding between the Lines” by Alon Ziv

This is a book review of “Breeding between the lines: Why interracial people are healthier and more attractive,” by Alon Ziv, 184 pp., Barricade Books, 2006, ISBN: 1569803064. My preliminary impression that the book most likely doesn’t have decent data in it is confirmed.

The book is written for a lay readership, and with the main text occupying about 160 pages, it can be read within a few hours.

Sloppy work: errors and omissions

Alon Ziv appears to have been working on the main idea of the book for a couple of years, but his book is full of sloppiness and naïve arguments, which is curious given the apparent time he has spent perusing the literature and also that he appears to have an adequate background in the biological sciences. I will provide some illustrative examples.

Ziv provides a primer on evolution that includes statements such as:

  • Asexual people are like slow Cheetahs – they die out.
  • We have evolved to avoid incest; incestuous individuals had inferior offspring and died out.

Well, asexual people die out every generation, but nothing seems to prevent some from being born every generation. For instance, in a national probability British sample of over 18,000 people, roughly 1% of people assessed reported that they were asexual, i.e., had no sexual interest in either men or women[1].

Similarly, whereas most people abhor incest, let alone indulge in it, some people continue to harbor incestuous fantasies and engage in incestuous sex[2-4].

There are numerous examples of evolutionary maladaptive characteristics that persist in small numbers in the population, but Ziv ignores this.

Ziv argues that our bodies are designed to have bilateral symmetry, i.e., we are designed to be perfectly symmetrical. This is incorrect. There is both a random and a non-random component to bilateral asymmetry, and it is the random component that is not part of biological design. The magnitude and direction (left or right side greater) of the random component fluctuates between individuals and hence this component is designated as fluctuating asymmetry. Throughout the book, whenever Ziv cites the literature on symmetry and especially when he extols the virtue of greater bilateral symmetry as in corresponding to better health and greater attractiveness, he is actually referring to the literature on fluctuating asymmetry, and the correct statement is that a lower level of fluctuating asymmetry, rather than greater symmetry, is correlated with somewhat better health and greater attractiveness. For instance, fluctuating asymmetry rather than directional asymmetry is a correlate of attractiveness of faces[5].

Ziv claims that heterozygosity for sickle cell anemia makes the carrier resistant to malaria, but this is not true; what happens is that the severity of malarial infection is reduced in these individuals, which increases the probability of survival should an infection occur.

Ziv acknowledges that races exist, but then cites pathetic sources to support this assertion: the approval of the drug BiDil for blacks by the FDA and a comment on Cavalli-Sforza’s book by Steve Sailer! No serious scientist, aware of the nature of race denial, would cite such poor sources. One needs to cite molecular[6-8] and skeletal evidence[9, 10] in conjunction with standard phylogeographic criteria for race assignment in order to make the case for races among humans. Ziv even says that “since race is really a continuum, there is no ideal way to define or document it.” Well, there is clinal variation with respect to individual characteristics, even a group of neutral DNA markers, and a race denial argument specifically denies racial reality because of human clinal variation[11], but race is characterized by a cluster of variables, and the existence of racial clusters has been shown in spite of clinal variation of DNA markers[6].

Ziv reports that in spite of changing fashions, the optimal waist-to-hip ratio of 0.7 in women, according to the research of D. Singh, has not changed; it has remained in the 0.68-0.72 range for Miss Americas and Playboy centerfolds. Well, waist-to-hip ratio in Miss Americas and Playboy centerfolds has increased from the mid- to late-20th century[12]; these women have become more masculine. During the early years of Playboy, waist-to-hip ratios were less than 0.7, on average. Additionally, there is nothing universal about the 0.7 figure: men in some black[13] and Native American[14, 15] populations prefer women with higher front-on waist-to-hip ratios than white men.

Ziv claims that more lopsided individuals (less symmetrical) are more likely to respond aggressively when provoked, but it is not difficult to come up with some papers where more symmetrical people turned out to be more physically aggressive[16, 17]. The latter is merely one example of Ziv omitting the literature that does not support his case.

Ziv is so sold onto the notion of hybrid vigor that he tries to see some in even ill-fated interspecies crosses. For instance, Ziv writes that a mule (horse mother, donkey father) may display some hybrid vigor because it has more stamina and more load-carrying capacity than horses! Hybrid vigor is inferred when the offspring are overall better than their parents, but mules are sterile. Ziv also cites the example of attempts to breed sheep and goats, which are typically unsuccessful, but he describes an example of a success that may have displayed some hybrid vigor as it grew faster than regular sheep or goat offspring, and was so oversexed that it frequently attempted to mount both sheep and goats. The poor animal had to be castrated to reign in his amorous pursuits, but faster growth and the oversexed nature could easily be a manifestation of abnormal development rather than hybrid vigor.

Ziv mentions inbreeding depression and hybrid vigor but fails to mention outbreeding depression. For the uninitiated, depression here refers to the offspring being overall worse than the parents and vigor refers to the offspring being overall better than the parents. There are plenty of examples of race mixing leading to outbreeding depression in various species[18-31].

Several claims in the book are not cited. For instance, Ziv reports a study where underweight newborn babies were more likely to be homozygous (less genetically diverse), but does not cite the reference. Given the small size of the book, it would not have hurt Ziv to add twenty additional pages of references.

Ziv reports that studies show that whites are the least likely to accept intermarriage, which is far from true. Jews, Muslims, Hindus and many other groups are easily much less accepting of intermarriage than whites are. Ben Tillman has previously brought to my attention that the oft-quoted 50% outmarriage rate for American Jews is an exaggeration, and it has been pointed out that even if this figure were taken at face value, it indicates a notable resistance to outmarriage among Jews given their small numbers in the U.S.; see this comment for details. Additionally, when Jews outmarry, most of the time it is with whites rather than with blacks or East Asians. Israel does not allow marriage between Jews and non-Jews, just as Muslims are forbidden to marry non-Muslims. On a related note, Ziv cites anti-miscegenation laws in some U.S. states decades ago, but fails to mention, let alone condemn Israel’s existing laws prohibiting marriage between Jews and non-Jews. In multiracial societies with a significant white presence, whites tend to disproportionately occupy the upper classes, and whereas the appreciation of the physical appearance of a number of populations is mostly limited to within the respective populations, white looks are appreciated by a substantial number of people in most populations. In other words, being white is disproportionately associated with higher status. Therefore, one observes that among non-white groups that generally oppose intermarriage, when they accept intermarriage, it is usually if the spouse is white or a higher status race, but they display marked animosity if the spouse is an other-race non-white of lower racial status. On the other hand, when whites intermarry, they almost always marry someone coming from a lower-status race. Non-blacks generally perceive blacks to be the lowest status race in terms of both looks and socioeconomic status, i.e., the willingness of a large number of blacks to outmarry should not be surprising, and it is obvious that one cannot argue for a naturally high willingness to outmarry among blacks given that there are not a whole lot of non-black races of lower socioeconomic and looks status than blacks. When black women object to black men marrying non-blacks, it is has less to do with objection to outmarriage per se than with the fact that so many black men are in prison or jobless/criminal that their already-low partner prospects are reduced by outmarrying black men. In short, Ziv is grossly mistaken about whites being the least likely to accept intermarriage.

Other problems with Ziv’s book should be seen in light of his main thesis.

Main thesis

Ziv’s main thesis is simple. He argues that more symmetrical people are more attractive, healthier and more heterozygous (more genetically diverse). He then points out that since race mixing increases heterozygosity, it leads to more attractive and healthier people. Let us examine this argument.

Hybrid vigor

Ziv addresses an example of hybrid vigor involving mixing some races of corn, and notes that “the disadvantage of hybridization is that you have to re-create the hybrid seed every generation.” Why doesn’t Ziv elaborate on this? Here is why. Let there be a gene that exists in two versions, A and a; each individual has two copies of this gene. Therefore, an individual could be AA, aa or Aa. Let the beneficial genotype be Aa. If one crosses AA with aa, all first generation hybrids will be Aa. If the first generation hybrids breed among themselves at random, the ratio AA:Aa:aa = 1:2:1, i.e., the desired genotype is present among only half the second generation hybrids. It is for this reason that corn farmers would maintain the original parental stocks and cross them to obtain hybrid vigor, but not allow the hybrids to reproduce among themselves. Obviously, among humans this is not applicable. The example considered here is a single-gene case, but if hybrid vigor is applicable to interracial breeding among humans with respect to multiple genes, then it should be clear that it will be drastically reduced among second and subsequent generation hybrids.

Ziv offers the following examples of hybrid vigor among humans.

  • He cites the tale of mutineers on the HMS Bounty (1789) settling on Pitcairn Island and mating with the local women. The half British-half Tahitian children, according to Ziv, grew up to be 2.5 inches taller than the British and the Tahitians. It is difficult to determine the reliability of this report.
  • Ziv reports a study, where Khasi girls in northeast India (basically East Asian types) were shorter than girls born to Khasi women that had mated with immigrant Muslim men (less Asiatic)[32], as an example of hybrid vigor, but this study did not assess the height of the parents and reported that the neighboring Muslims were a taller people. Therefore, how can one be sure that this is an example of hybrid vigor? If Khasi women breed with taller men, they are bound to produce taller children.
  • Ziv cites an UCLA study by Jay Phelan that showed mixed-race individuals to be more symmetrical (less fluctuating asymmetry) than individuals that were classified into only one of the following groups: white, East Asian, black, Native American or Hispanic (total sample size was 99). This find is reportedly highly significant; the probability that it is a chance find being less than 0.007%. The 25 least symmetrical individuals were uniracial whereas 7 of the 8 most symmetrical individuals were multiracial/mixed race. The participants also apparently had their pictures taken and evaluated for physical attractiveness, and the mixed-race individuals were rated as better looking. Curiously, this study does not appear to have been published, though it was featured in a UCLA report dating to November 04, 2002. Ziv’s citation mentions personal communication. Four years is more than enough time for research to be published. Has this study not been published because of its poor quality? Jay Phelan is co-author of the book “Mean Genes,” and he also wrote the forward to Ziv’s book. Phelan harbors the same idea as Ziv as far as the supposed benefits of race mixing go.

Ziv provides supportive evidence by citing examples of hybrid vigor resulting from crossing inbred strains of animals such as mice, and also cites studies from Swiss[33] and Polish[34] villages where children born of parents from different villages were taller, heavier and larger-chested compared to children born of parents from the same village, though the Swiss study actually compared the Swiss sample with their relatives that had outmarried in California.

The Swiss and polish studies are not about hybrid vigor, but Ziv extrapolates from these studies that the outcome of race mixing will be even better, assuming that the higher the heterozygosity, the better it is, apparently because more diverse genes mean more diverse gene products, which should cover an individual over a broader range of the environment. The latter reasoning appears sound, but then why is outbreeding depression observed in a number of cases? Has Ziv never heard of co-adapted gene complexes, which are disrupted by hybridization? Has Ziv never heard of the concept of genetic architecture in cardiovascular disease, whereby it is not always an allele (one of several versions of a gene) per se that is associated with disease, but the allele in a given environmental and genetic background[35-37]? For instance, a haplotype that slightly increases the odds of a heart attack among American whites is found in smaller numbers among American blacks, who have gotten it from whites, but it confers a 3-fold larger risk in black Americans[38]. Similarly, an allele that confers protection against diabetes among whites does no such thing among south Asians[39].

The paper on the Khasi, which Ziv has presumably read given that he cited it, mentions an Israeli study that attempted to infer the effect of intermarriage, between Jewish groups that had immigrated to Israel from different parts of the world, on the longitudinal growth of children. Five mixed groups were analyzed: two of these were similar to a parental group, one showed some evidence for enhanced growth, and two groups showed some detrimental effects of mixing[40]. I suspect that the null and detrimental finds in this study prompted Ziv to not cite it.

It should be noted that rats and mice are commonly used lab animals, and it is necessary that the differences among the experimental and control groups be attributed to the experimental protocol rather than genetic variation between the groups. Therefore, rats/mice used in a typical experiment come from a highly inbred line, and it should not be surprising that crossing two highly inbred and closely related races results in reduced overall fluctuating asymmetry, but human races, especially those existing in large numbers, are nowhere as inbred as lab rats/mice are. In a study were wild mice were made to inbreed, the overall fluctuating asymmetry of the inbred mice was not greater than that of the outbred group, even though these two groups had different fitness under seminatural conditions[41], but Ziv has not mentioned this study at all. This study is merely one of several that have shown fluctuating asymmetry to be a poor indicator of developmental stability.

Some studies have shown little to no relationship between fluctuating asymmetry and heterozygoisty[42-44], whereas some have even shown fluctuating asymmetry to increase beyond a certain level of heterozygosity[45, 46], i.e., outbreeding depression. In a meta-analysis of 118 datasets published in 41 studies[47], the effect size correlation between fluctuating asymmetry and heterozygoisty was r = -0.09 (SE=0.03), a low effect size correlation, but the interesting data is in the following figure, namely a non-significant trend toward a weak positive effect size correlation in endotherms (animals that maintain a constant internal body temperature), i.e., a non-significant trend for greater heterozygosity in endotherms to correspond to somewhat less symmetrical individuals. To interpret effect size correlation (ES): small ES (less than 0.15), medium/moderate ES (0.15 < ES < 0.33), large ES (greater than 0.33).

Fluctuating asymmetry and heterozygosity in ectotherms and endotherms.

In this meta-analysis, heterozygoisty accounted for one percent of the variation in developmental stability assessed via how symmetrical the individuals were, and even for ectotherms the variance accounted for was only 2% (r=−0.23 ± 0.09)[47]. If Ziv did proper research, he could not possibly have missed this meta-analysis, but he apparently does not cite this because he wants to convey that more heterozygosity equals better symmetry, which translates to more attractiveness and better health, all of which mean that miscegenation for the purposes of increasing heterozygoisty can only be positive with respect to physical and mental development.

Mating preferences

Ziv notes that evolution should shape people to breed in ways that are the most beneficial, yet laments that people generally tend to breed within their races, which is apparently not the best strategy as far as the benefits of heterozygoisty go: more attractive and healthier people. One of the reasons for people mostly seeking partners within their race is that people seek partners in accordance with an internal blueprint, but the good news for Ziv is that this internal blue print can be altered with sufficient exposure to people of other races. He cites the example of snow geese: the white ones breed with whites and the blue ones breed with other blue geese. However, when white geese are raised by blue geese, they prefer blue geese and blue geese raised by white geese prefer white geese. Snow geese of any variety show no preference for white or blue geese if they are exposed to both since birth. Therefore, Ziv extrapolates that humans exposed to multiple races since birth, which will be a reality with mass immigration of multiple races into the West, will not show a specific preference for their own race. This is another non sequitur. More complex human brains are not as susceptible to imprinting as bid brains are. In multiracial societies, non-whites tend to have a preference for facial features closer to that of the white average, but it is uncommon for whites to prefer non-white facial features.

Health

Ziv offers no direct evidence for improved health among mixed-race individuals, and ignores evidence for an across-the-board increase in health problems among mixed-race individuals in a large, representative sample of U.S. adolescents[48]. I have previously addressed this study by J. Richard Udry; the most likely reason for the worsened health of the mixed-race individuals is increased odds of the disruption of the autonomic nervous system, resulting from race mixing.

A study involving undergraduate students at San Francisco State University and the University of Hawaii at Hilo revealed that mixed-race individuals (basically white-Asian mixes) had worse health than whites or Asians[49]; read the paper.

A newer study that assessed substance use and violent behaviors among 2,082 students in Seattle public middle schools has reported mixed-race individuals being worse on these counts, after controlling for differences in socioeconomic status[50]; read the paper. This study also assessed ethnic identity and perceived discrimination to evaluate the extent to which they were related to the problem behaviors. However, a positive ethnic identity was protective on some counts only, and was associated with an increased likelihood of the participants having ever threatened to beat someone up. Perceived discrimination was associated with increased likelihood of problem behaviors on some counts only, but it cannot be assumed that discriminatory experiences were responsible for the problem behaviors since problematic behaviors on the part of individuals would invite discrimination.

Clinical samples have shown higher rates of mental and behavioral problems among mixed-race individuals[51, 52]. There have been few studies showing mixed-race individuals to be comparable to single-race individuals: a study from Hawaii reported no differences with respect to personality variables[53] and another study reported no differences with respect to quality of parent and adolescent relationship[54]. A few years before Udry[48] published the health data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), Cooney and Radina[55] published some of this data, and reported multiracial individuals to be worse than uniracial individuals on less than half the school performance, behavioral and psychological dimensions assessed, but a more thorough analysis by Udry shows multiracial individuals to be worse on most measures, including health. Except for the Seattle middle schools study[50], which was likely published after Ziv submitted his final manuscript for publication, Ziv couldn’t possibly have failed to come across the others showing worse health among mixed-race individuals, but he pretends as if these studies don’t exist.

India is a cesspool of race mixing, but East Indians have some of the highest if not the highest prevalence of cardiovascular disease, the metabolic syndrome, diabetes, insulin resistance, hyperinsulinemia, central obesity, dyslipidemias such as lower high-density lipoprotein or increased low density lipoprotein or higher triglyceride levels, increased thrombotic tendency as in increased plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 and decreased tissue plasminogen activator levels, and low birth weights[56-63], in addition to a weak musculo-skeletal build[64-67]. It is remarkable how often I have seen slenderly built south Asian males with a tendency to pack on excess body fat, especially in the abdominal region. The prevalence of cardiovascular disease among mixed-race groups such as south Asians, blacks and Hispanics in the U.S. is 2- to 3-fold higher compared to that among whites[68]. Whereas a number of the papers cited within this paragraph have been published in 2006, they are documenting data that have been well-known for years. Why has Ziv not cited such data?

Athleticism/Sporting ability

Ziv cites a study about more heterozygous oysters being better able to utilize oxygen under stress, and then notes that the implications for human athletics are staggering! Talk about non sequiturs! In a human study, overall body symmetry was unrelated to lung capacity and maximal oxygen utilization[69], i.e., the more symmetrical individuals, which Ziv would describe as more heterozygous, were not better off with respect to the physiological capacities addressed. Another study reported that elite athletes were not more symmetrical than sub-elite athletes[70]. Now, there are studies showing skilled athletes being more symmetrical than non-athletes (see review in Tomkinson et al.[70]), but the relationship is weak, and by not citing negative finds, Ziv is trying to convey that the relationship is so strong that interracial mating to increase heterozygosity is highly recommended.

The only example of a mixed race great athlete that Ziv cites is Tiger Woods, but if I recall correctly, then Tiger Woods had severe myopia, which had to be surgically corrected. If my recollection is correct, then without modern technology, if Tiger Woods had to live as a hunter-gatherer, he would quickly become prey, and he would also be a pretty useless fighter.

In the 1970s, there were several American blacks playing the PGA tour, but in spite of an increase in the popularity of golf and the greater participation of American blacks, currently, Tiger Woods is the only part-black person playing the PGA tour; see more.

There have been some great mixed-race athletes, e.g., Jim Thorpe and Daley Thompson, but the Decathlon is mostly dominated by whites, just as most Olympic sports are. In addressing race, Ziv addresses whether some races are better at some things than others, and says that this is an issue that he doesn’t want to focus on, but he points the interested reader to Jon Entine’s book, “Taboo: Why black athletes dominate sports and why we are afraid to talk about it.” This book alleges the racial athletic superiority of blacks, but Entine is as clueless as Steve Sailer on this topic. Blacks only dominate a few sports. West African blacks do not dominate sports such as weightlifting, powerlifting, martial arts, strong man competitions or freestyle fighting, where their alleged superior speed and strength should give them an advantage. Presently, all four heavyweight boxing titles are held by whites. Castefootball.us also features plenty of evidence about anti-white discrimination in American team sports such as football and basketball, showing that the heavy black overrepresentation in these sports is not entirely merit-based. All-white teams from Europe have been learning the game of basketball, and in recent years have defeated all-black teams from the U.S. on several occasions. Things are bound to get more interesting.

When it comes to thousands of years of race mixing between multiple races, it would be hard to beat India, yet East Indians are undoubtedly among the worst if not the worst athletes in the world.

Attractiveness

In a meta-analysis of correlates of facial beauty by Gillian Rhodes[71], the effect size correlations (ES) were: average facial features (0.52 ± 0.41; 95% CI = 0.42-0.61; weighted ES = 0.54), symmetry (0.25 ± 0.34; 95% CI = 0.16-0.33; weighted ES = 0.23) and femininity (0.64 ± 0.39; 95% CI = 0.51-0.74; weighted ES = 0.61). The data are reported as effect size correlation (ES) ± standard deviation; the interval that one would be 95% confident the actual ES lies in the general population; ES weighted by the number of faces examined.

Ziv’s argument that mixed-race individuals are more attractive is based on the assumption that greater heterozygosity equals more symmetry, which equals greater attractiveness, but there are at least two much more powerful correlates of facial beauty that Ziv ignores.

The only study that Ziv cites in favor of mixed-race individuals being more symmetrical is Jay Phelan’s study, which remains unpublished four years after its completion. We have already seen that the relationship between heterozygoisty and symmetry (thereby developmental stability) is very weak.

What about average facial features? As I mentioned previously, Ziv should read about craniofacial morphology in mixed-race individuals, white-Native American mixes to be more precise, and note that canonical variates analysis revealed a canonical root, explaining 36% of the variance, that made the mestizos deviate from shape variables in between whites and Native Americans[72].  52% of the 52 shape variables deviated from the mathematical average shape of the parent races, and here is the money shot[72]:

Finally, it is interesting that the distances that could not be assigned to a particular developmental pattern appeared to introduce ‘‘noise’’ and blur the effects of cranial integration.

The developmental patterns talked about above are mathematical averaging based upon the expectation from quantitative genetics, i.e., additive genetic variation, and morphological integration of different parts of the skull, whereby different parts of the skull effectively behave like a single unit, i.e., a change in one part corresponds to changes in other associated parts.  Note the term “interesting;” this term is an euphemism for some loss of morphological integration in the skull resulting from race mixing, i.e., some solid evidence that yes indeed, races exist among humans, and also that humans races—at least the two considered and by extrapolating from genetic distances and skull shape comparisons, any combination of races—are sufficiently distant so as to result in disruptions of co-adapted gene complexes and subsequent increased odds of anomalous outcomes in mixed offspring, which is confirmed by the health data addressed above.

Morphological integration is an important concept. Whereas one may not appreciate the facial features of another race, one will be able to pick out the better looking among another race, and these better looking people will have some kind of harmony between various parts of their face, but this harmony is more likely to be lost as a result of race mixing compared to same-race breeding. For instance, I previously commented on the malformed appearance of the deranged model Heidi Klum’s mulatto baby.

Deranged white model Heidi Klum with Negro Seal.

Deranged Heidi Klum with malformed mulatto baby; Henry Guenther Ademola Dashtu Samuel.

Deranged Heidi Klum with malformed mulatto baby; Henry Guenther Ademola Dashtu Samuel.

Some would point out that neonates are not exactly cute, but Henry Guenther Ademola Dashtu Samuel, the son of Heidi Klum and Seal, clearly looks like something is wrong with him. The malformed mulatto neonate has grown into a retarded-looking malformed toddler; contrast his features with the beauty of the white child Heidi Klum had previously. I have seen black babies that are a lot better looking.

Deranged Heidi Klum's children with Negro Seal.

Deranged Heidi Klum's children with Negro Seal.

Actual shape variables are important, too. From the perspective of whites, non-white admixture can only diminish the attractiveness of the descendents of whites: make noses broader, make the middle portion of the face flatter (absorption of East Asians, Native Americans, Eskimo-Siberians, khoi-San people, some central African populations), make faces broader (absorption of East Asians, most black African populations, Native Americans, Eskimo-Siberians), make jaws more protruding (especially if blacks, Melanesians and Australian aborigines are involved), make faces larger (absorption of most non-white populations), decrease height (absorption of many non-white populations, especially for northern Europeans), make limbs smaller relative to height (absorption of East Asians, Eskimo-Siberians, Native Americans), increase the frequency of hooked noses (absorption of Middle Eastern populations such as Jews), weaken musculo-skeletal build (absorption of non-whites in general except West Africans and Polynesians), etc.

In addition, non-whites possess more primitive facial features, and some of them disproportionately persist when they mate with whites. For instance, a study from Hawaii reported the persistence of the broad face/massive cheekbones of East Asians among Asian-white hybrids[73]. In addition, flared nostrils, broader noses and more protruding jaws also tend to persist.

What about femininity? No citations are needed for the less feminine physiques of East Asian and physically similar women. Black women, in spite of their larger breasts and more protrusive buttocks, are unable to look as feminine as white women as a result of their greater muscularity, higher front-on waist-to-hip ratios and facial features. White women look more feminine, and I would refer the reader to a previous, currently active, thread on Nordic beauty, where I have put up numerous comparisons; I still have to respond to several comments there, and my replies will feature more comparisons, but posting this review first is more important. Rhodes’ meta-analysis makes it clear that femininity is a much more powerful correlate of beauty in women compared to symmetry, yet Ziv ignores femininity.

I expected to see Ziv cite Gillian Rhodes’ study about the greater rated attractiveness and perceived health of Asian-white hybrids[74], but Ziv hasn’t cited it, and it may have come out too late for Ziv to cite it. I have previously critiqued this study. In short, the whites in this study were unattractive, and the assumption of the authors that race mixing will average the facial features of the parents is not true[72].

Intelligence

Ziv cites a study from Hawaii where white-Japanese hybrid children outperformed white or Japanese children on 13 of 15 cognitive tests (e.g., 0.30 S.D. on a version of the Raven’s progressive matrices and 0.22 S.D. on the PMA Vocabulary Test), in spite of no significant socioeconomic differences between the groups[75]. The confound here is assortative mating for IQ, i.e., it cannot be assumed that the whites and Japanese that bred together came from a random sample of their respective racial groups. Udry studied a large, random population of U.S. adolescents, but as the following table from his paper shows[48], the GPA (grade point average) and verbal IQ of the mixed-race individuals were in between those of the individuals belonging to their parental racial groups, i.e., no hybrid vigor was observed.

National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) data on GPA and verbal IQ of mixed race and single race individuals.

One possible example of hybrid vigor with respect to IQ, from the perspective of black Africans, suggested by Arthur Jensen, is that American blacks have an IQ of 85, 15 points or 1 S.D. higher than that of their black African counterparts, even though white admixture among them averages 10-20%. However, if we assume that the black African average IQ would be a few points higher if malnutrition/undernutrition were eliminated, then given that there is a positive correlation between health and IQ, it is reasonable to suppose that Africans bound for slavery in the U.S. were among the healthier ones, and given the harsh conditions of transport, healthier still individuals made it to the U.S. Therefore, the IQ potential of the arrivals could be around 80, and white admixture may only have raised IQ by 5 points or so instead of 15 points, which would not necessitate positing hybrid vigor from the perspective of black Africans, but the validity of this proposal is unclear, and in any case, at present, the 85 IQ of American blacks is not proof of hybrid vigor from the perspective of black Africans.

Ziv cites a paper by Mingroni[76], which proposes heterosis as possibly partially accounting for the Lynn-Flynn effect, i.e., the secular worldwide rise in IQ scores documented in the 20th century. Mingroni’s argument is reasonable. Throughout the period of this secular trend, the heritability of IQ has remained very high, which is not easy to account for if one assumes that environmental factors are involved, and Mingroni cites papers that have critiqued the implausibility of a model proposed by Dickens and Flynn that has argued for a large effect of the environment on IQ. However, the heterosis proposed by Mingroni postulates increased mixing of people from neighboring villages, which is not hybridization (mixing of different breeds), and it does not follow, as Ziv assumes, that the greater the outbreeding, the better it will be. In addition, data from Spain show that the bulk of the Lynn-Flynn effect over a 30-year period was accounted for by gains mostly in the lower half of the bell curve, with very little change in the 99th percentile and spectacular gains in the first percentile[77]; see the gain in raw scores. Therefore, improved nutrition is certainly accounting for a good deal of the Lynn-Flynn effect. Mingroni also cites secular increases in high-heritability factors such as height, head circumference, myopia, autism, asthma and possibly ADHD. If greater outbreeding, though still mostly within racial groups, is partly responsible for the Lynn-Flynn effect and also increases in abnormalities such as myopia and asthma, then general heterosis is not implicated.

The three highest IQ groups are: U.S./U.K. Ashkenazim diaspora (IQ = 110[78, 79]), northeast Asians (IQ = 105) and northern Europeans (IQ = 100). Northeast Asians and northern Europeans have very little other-race admixture. Jews are more heterogeneous, but the most plausible explanation for the Ashkenazim IQ advantage is that under selection pressures for higher IQ, a high level of inbreeding among them accumulated several deleterious alleles that have the side effect of increasing IQ[80]. Therefore, the brightest groups certainly didn’t get that way by large-scale outbreeding. In addition, notwithstanding the northeast Asian IQ advantage over northern Europeans, especially with respect to math ability, whites are heavily overrepresented, in spite of their smaller numbers, among Nobel Prize winners, Field Medalists, annual international ACM software coding college competitions and the most brilliant inventors/innovators. Therefore average IQ is only part of the story, and there is no reason to believe that a white-northeast Asian hybrid population will produce as many intellectually outstanding people per capita as present-day northern Europeans do.

Ziv hilariously writes, “Once true interracial marriage becomes commonplace, I think we will see an even bigger boost in the physical and mental development of future generations.” Really? If the U.S./U.K. Ashkenazim diaspora, northeast Asians and northern Europeans were to mass-absorb the likes of Bushmen (IQ = 54), Australian aborigines (IQ = 62), black Africans in general (IQ = 67) or south Asians (IQ = 82) (see Lynn[81]), would one expect a boost in mental development from the perspective of the high IQ groups?

Another useful consideration is as follows. Assume that there are no deleterious effects of race mixing. From a strictly IQ perspective, if a white man with an IQ of 100 had to choose between a white woman and a Bangladeshi woman, both with an IQ of 130, which would be the better choice? If additive genetics accounted for all the variation in IQ between individuals, one would expect the offspring of the union in consideration to have an IQ around 115, but about 40% of the IQ variation between individuals is accounted for by additive genetics, i.e., the white man can expect an IQ boost that is 40% of 15 points, i.e., 6 points. Therefore, the offspring will have a range of IQ centering around 106. Now, given white and Bangladeshi average IQs of 100 and low 80s, respectively, a 130-IQ Bangladeshi is much more of an outlier for her race than a 130-IQ white is. In other words, the contribution of additive genetics from the Bangladeshi woman would result in a probable IQ of the hybrid offspring leaning toward the lower range of the distribution centering around 106 compared to the white woman. As noted above, deleterious alleles are implicated in the Ashkenazim IQ advantage[80], and it has been documented that people with very high IQs tend to have an above average incidence of myopia and atopic disorders (related to autonomic nervous system disruption) such as asthma and allergies[82]. Therefore, the odds that abnormal genetics/developmental events are implicated in the 130-IQ of the Bangladeshi woman are greater. In other words, the better choice is clearly the white woman. Hence, even if one assumes no harm resulting from race mixing, from a strictly IQ perspective, a white person is better off breeding with a white than a member of the dark races with the same IQ as a prospective white partner. If deleterious alleles are mostly responsible for the Ashkenazim IQ advantage, then it is not worth it for whites to breed with the Ashkenazim. Additionally, northeast Asians are know to have lower verbal IQs than whites, and from an IQ perspective, no racial benefits from absorbing them are apparent given that notwithstanding their math advantage, when it comes to manifesting math prowess at the highest levels (e.g., work deserving of the Field Medal), northeast Asians, in spite of their much greater numbers, are far behind whites.

Conclusions

Ziv makes a very weak case, and has undoubtedly omitted inconvenient data. Giving the process of manuscript submission to final publication about an year’s time, Ziv should easily have come across the citations in this review that were published/put online prior to mid-2005. The evidence that he has ignored makes the opposite case. None of the heavily mixed populations --mestizos/mulattos in south America, Middle Eastern/North African people, south Asians, southeast Asians or central Asians -- are known for great health, vigor, attractiveness or high intelligence. I will speculate on Ziv’s motives below, but the implications of his work should be briefly addressed. From the perspectives of kinship and ethnic genetic interests (EGI), both of which Ziv ignores, Ziv’s ideas are horrible; see comments by “On Holliday” here and a fuller discussion of EGI here. In the biological sciences, there is consensus that living organisms be preserved at the level of kinds, i.e. races and higher order levels of taxonomy, unless one is looking at a virus/microorganism that is deadly for humans. Only if conservation efforts are threatened by inbreeding depression will there be a recommendation to mix races or species (in plants) to preserve broad taxonomical groups, and Ziv’s message will normally be treated with contempt in a non-human context. The concept of ethnic genetic interests basically argues that one’s race is worth preserving because it is one’s own, not because there is any special value to it. However, it is also worthwhile to consider the value of things to determine what is and what isn’t worthy of preservation, and white physical appearance and the ability of northern Europeans to produce the highest number of intellectually outstanding people per capita in the absence of having accumulated deleterious alleles, like the Ashkenazim have, is of sufficient value to be at least preserved if not enhanced, and speaking of enhancement, this will come about by evolution within whites; absorbing non-whites will result in devolution. Ziv’s recommendations will be especially disastrous for whites from an aesthetics and intelligence standpoint if many white people are persuaded by his arguments.

What has motivated Alon Ziv?

Attempting to critique an argument by questioning the motives of the author is bad practice, and is specifically known as deconstruction, but I have provided plenty of criticism, and do not intend this section to be a form of criticism. Rather, given the destructive nature of Ziv’s thesis, it is of some interest to question what could have prompted a man with an apparently adequate background in the biological sciences, and one who appears to have spent years reading relevant studies, to present very selective evidence in favor of his arguments and ignore a large body of evidence making the opposite case.

Ziv tells us that his book is not an instruction manual, i.e., he is not telling us to pick a spouse based on racial criteria. He also notes that he doesn’t need to instruct people to seek interracial unions because they are inevitable. He tells the reader to “get ready for a mixed race explosion.” He writes that “interracial marriage is the future, not because it should be, but simply because it is.” And, as to why it is going to be this way, it is because of continued immigration of people of various races into the U.S. as well as other Western nations, and people’s altered mating preferences in accordance with the snow geese example.

Well then, why write a book extolling the virtues of race mixing if it is going to happen on a large scale no matter what Ziv or other people say? The answer is surely not that Ziv merely decided to document what is going to happen in the future, as should be obvious from the tone of the book and Ziv’s very selective citations. The answer is easy to figure out. Ziv laments that although Gary, Indiana (U.S.A.) has 430,000 whites and 120,000 blacks, blacks and whites are highly segregated in this city; he even calls this depressing! It appears that race mixing in the U.S. is not occurring on a scale that would please Ziv, and he has decided to help accelerate it. Ziv writes, “For the modern world, it would be far better to seek out the most genetically distinct mate possible.” He tells us that “the higher one’s heterozygosity is, the better it is,” and then tells us that the combination that would yield the highest heterozygosity would be the combination of a black African with a non-African, a Bantu-Eskimo mating yielding the highest heterozygosity of all interracial matings, according to the research of Cavalli-Sforza. Ziv is quick to add that he is not advocating a race of Bantu-Eskimo supermen, but greater heterozygoisty has its benefits.

One factor that could have motivated Ziv to write this book is that he genuinely subscribes to his thesis and is so enthusiastic about the virtues of race mixing that he has skipped evidence to the contrary, believing that the weight of the evidence in the long run will eventually vindicate him. Another possibility is that Ziv is motivated by malice, a feeling that I cannot shake off.

It would be interesting to learn about the racial background(s) of the women that Ziv has dated and who he ultimately has children with; if she turns out to be non-Jewish and non-white, I can see myself giving Ziv the benefit of the doubt and believe that his book reflects his genuine conviction about the benefits of race mixing, but if this woman is Jewish or white, then my suspicion that Ziv is motivated by malice would be strengthened. Ziv lives in Los Angeles and should have no problems finding a willing black, Asian or Hispanic woman. However, if I had to bet, I would wager that Ziv would prefer a Nordic white for a breeding partner. Ziv doesn’t tell us about the kind of women he likes, but he describes his first love, a classmate, Leslie, in seventh grade. The only thing he tells us about her physical appearance is that she had honey blonde hair, and his description makes it obvious that he was enamored by her blondeness. Of course, if Ziv mated with Leslie, his offspring would not have honey blond hair anymore than if she mated with any non-white, but Ziv does not address this kind of loss resulting from race mixing.

Citations

  1. Bogaert AF. Asexuality: prevalence and associated factors in a national probability sample. J Sex Res. Aug 2004;41(3):279-287.
  2. Alikasifoglu M, Erginoz E, Ercan O, Albayrak-Kaymak D, Uysal O, Ilter O. Sexual abuse among female high school students in Istanbul, Turkey. Child Abuse Negl. Mar 2006;30(3):247-255.
  3. Crowley MS, Seery BL. Exploring the multiplicity of childhood sexual abuse with a focus on polyincestuous contexts of abuse. J Child Sex Abus. 2001;10(4):91-110.
  4. Kim HS, Kim HS. Incestuous experience among Korean adolescents: prevalence, family problems, perceived family dynamics, and psychological characteristics. Public Health Nurs. Nov-Dec 2005;22(6):472-482.
  5. Simmons LW, Rhodes G, Peters M, Koehler N. Are human preferences for facial symmetry focused on signals of developmental instability? Behav Ecol. 2004;15(5):864-871.
  6. Rosenberg NA, Mahajan S, Ramachandran S, Zhao C, Pritchard JK, Feldman MW. Clines, clusters, and the effect of study design on the inference of human population structure. PLoS Genet. Dec 2005;1(6):e70.
  7. Rosenberg NA, Pritchard JK, Weber JL, et al. Genetic structure of human populations. Science. Dec 20 2002;298(5602):2381-2385.
  8. Nei M, Roychoudhury AK. Evolutionary relationships of human populations on a global scale. Mol Biol Evol. Sep 1993;10(5):927-943.
  9. Hennessy RJ, Stringer CB. Geometric morphometric study of the regional variation of modern human craniofacial form. Am J Phys Anthropol. Jan 2002;117(1):37-48.
  10. Li YY, Brace CL, Gao QA, Tracer DP. Dimensions of face in Asia in the perspective of geography and prehistory. Am J Phys Anthropol. Jul 1991;85(3):269-279.
  11. Serre D, Paabo S. Evidence for gradients of human genetic diversity within and among continents. Genome Res. Sep 2004;14(9):1679-1685.
  12. Freese J, Meland S. Seven tenths incorrect: heterogeneity and change in the waist-to-hip ratios of Playboy centerfold models and Miss America pageant winners. J Sex Res. May 2002;39(2):133-138.
  13. Marlowe FW, Wetsman A. Preferred waist-to-hip ratio and ecology. Personal Individ Diff. 2001;30(3):481-489.
  14. Sugiyama L. Is beauty in the context-sensitive adaptations of the beholder? Shiwiar use of waist-to-hip ratio in assessments of female mate value. Evol Hum Behav. 2004;25(1):51-62.
  15. Yu DW, Shepard GH, Jr. Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Nature. Nov 26 1998;396(6709):321-322.
  16. Furlow B, Gangestad SW, Armijo-Prewitt T. Developmental stability and human violence. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. Jan 7 1998;265(1390):1-6.
  17. Manning JT, Wood D. Fluctuating asymmetry and aggression in boys. Hum Nature. 1998;9:53-65.
  18. Aspi J. Inbreeding and outbreeding depression in male courtship song characters in Drosophila montana. Heredity. Mar 2000;84 ( Pt 3):273-282.
  19. Galloway LF, Etterson JR. Population differentiation and hybrid success in Campanula americana: geography and genome size. J Evol Biol. Jan 2005;18(1):81-89.
  20. Heiser DA, Shaw RG. The fitness effects of outcrossing in Calylophus serrulatus, a permanent translocation heterozygote. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Jan 2006;60(1):64-76.
  21. Henry PY, Pradel R, Jarne P. Environment-dependent inbreeding depression in a hermaphroditic freshwater snail. J Evol Biol. Nov 2003;16(6):1211-1222.
  22. LeBas NR. Mate choice, genetic incompatibility, and outbreeding in the ornate dragon lizard, Ctenophorus ornatus. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Feb 2002;56(2):371-377.
  23. Miller LM, Close T, Kapuscinski AR. Lower fitness of hatchery and hybrid rainbow trout compared to naturalized populations in Lake Superior tributaries. Mol Ecol. Nov 2004;13(11):3379-3388.
  24. Montalvo AM, Ellstrand NC. Nonlocal transplantation and outbreeding depression in the subshrub Lotus scoparius (Fabaceae). Am J Bot. Feb 2001;88(2):258-269.
  25. Neff BD. Stabilizing selection on genomic divergence in a wild fish population. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Feb 24 2004;101(8):2381-2385.
  26. Parisod C, Trippi C, Galland N. Genetic variability and founder effect in the pitcher plant Sarracenia purpurea (Sarraceniaceae) in populations introduced into Switzerland: from inbreeding to invasion. Ann Bot (Lond). Jan 2005;95(2):277-286.
  27. Peer K, Taborsky M. Outbreeding depression, but no inbreeding depression in haplodiploid Ambrosia beetles with regular sibling mating. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Feb 2005;59(2):317-323.
  28. Quilichini A, Debussche M, Thompson JD. Evidence for local outbreeding depression in the Mediterranean island endemic Anchusa crispa Viv. (Boraginaceae). Heredity. Aug 2001;87(Pt 2):190-197.
  29. Shpak M. The role of deleterious mutations in allopatric speciation. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Jul 2005;59(7):1389-1399.
  30. Waser NM, Price MV, Shaw RG. Outbreeding depression varies among cohorts of Ipomopsis aggregata planted in nature. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Apr 2000;54(2):485-491.
  31. Willi Y, Van Buskirk J. Genomic compatibility occurs over a wide range of parental genetic similarity in an outcrossing plant. Proc Biol Sci. Jul 7 2005;272(1570):1333-1338.
  32. Khongsdier R, Mukherjee N. Effects of heterosis on growth in height and its segments: a cross-sectional study of the Khasi girls in Northeast India. Ann Hum Biol. Sep-Oct 2003;30(5):605-621.
  33. Hulse FS. Exogamy and heterosis. Year Phys Anthropol. 1957;9:240-257.
  34. Wolanski N, Jarosz E, Pyzuk M. Heterosis in man: growth in offspring and distance between parents' birthplaces. Soc Biol. Mar 1970;17(1):1-16.
  35. Hegele RA. Genetic prediction of atherosclerosis: lessons from studies in native Canadian populations. Clin Chim Acta. Aug 1999;286(1-2):47-61.
  36. Hegele RA, Ban MR, Carrington CV, Ramdath DD. Allele frequencies for candidate genes in atherosclerosis and diabetes among Trinidadian neonates. Hum Biol. Aug 2001;73(4):525-531.
  37. North KE, MacCluer JW, Williams JT, et al. Evidence for distinct genetic effects on obesity and lipid-related CVD risk factors in diabetic compared to nondiabetic American Indians: the Strong Heart Family Study. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. Mar-Apr 2003;19(2):140-147.
  38. Helgadottir A, Manolescu A, Helgason A, et al. A variant of the gene encoding leukotriene A4 hydrolase confers ethnicity-specific risk of myocardial infarction. Nat Genet. Jan 2006;38(1):68-74.
  39. Radha V, Vimaleswaran KS, Babu HN, et al. Role of genetic polymorphism peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma2 Pro12Ala on ethnic susceptibility to diabetes in South-Asian and Caucasian subjects: Evidence for heterogeneity. Diabetes Care. May 2006;29(5):1046-1051.
  40. Livshits G, Otremski I, Kobyliansky E. Longitudinal growth of infants in families of "mixed" and "non-mixed" ethnic origin in Israel. Hum Biol. Dec 1987;59(6):933-949.
  41. Leamy LJ, Meagher S, Taylor S, Carroll L, Potts WK. Size and fluctuating asymmetry of morphometric characters in mice: their associations with inbreeding and t-haplotype. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Nov 11 2001;55(11):2333-2341.
  42. Beacham TD. Developmental stability, heterozygosity, and genetic analysis of morphological variation in pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha). Can J Zool. 1991;69(2):274-278.
  43. Clarke GM, Oldroyd BP. The genetic basis of developmental stability in Apis mellifera. II. Relationships between character size, asymmetry and single-locus heterozygosity Genetica. 1996;97(2):211-224.
  44. Vollestad LA, Hindar K. Developmental stability and environmental stress in Salmo salar (Atlantic salmon). Heredity. Feb 1997;78 ( Pt 2):215-222.
  45. Thornhill R, Moller AP. Developmental stability, disease and medicine. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. Nov 1997;72(4):497-548.
  46. Livshits G, Kobyliansky E. Lerner's concept of developmental homeostasis and the problem of heterozygosity level in natural populations. Heredity. Dec 1985;55 ( Pt 3):341-353.
  47. Vollestad LA, Hindar K, Moller AP. A meta-analysis of fluctuating asymmetry in relation to heterozygosity. Heredity. Aug 1999;83 ( Pt 2):206-218.
  48. Udry JR, Li RM, Hendrickson-Smith J. Health and behavior risks of adolescents with mixed-race identity. Am J Public Health. Nov 2003;93(11):1865-1870.
  49. Vandervoort DJ, Divers PP, Aojido C. Psychosocial correlates of health status among Asians, Caucasians, and multiracial subjects. Current Psychology: Developmental, Learning, Personality, Social. 2000;19(2):120-128.
  50. Choi Y, Harachi TW, Gillmore MR, Catalano RF. Are multiracial adolescents at greater risk? Comparisons of rates, patterns, and correlates of substance use and violence between monoracial and multiracial adolescents. Am J Orthopsychiatry. Jan 2006;76(1):86-97.
  51. Gibbs JT. Identity and marginality: issues in the treatment of biracial adolescents. Am J Orthopsychiatry. Apr 1987;57(2):265-278.
  52. Gibbs JT, Moskowitz-Sweet G. Clinical and cultural issues in the treatment of biracial and bicultural adolescents. Families in Society. 1991;72:479-591.
  53. Johnson R, Nagoshi C. The adjustment of offspring of withingroup and interracial/intercultural marriages: A comparison of personality factor scores. J Marriage Family. 1986;48:279-284.
  54. Radina ME, Cooney TM. Relationship quality between multiracial adolescents and their biological parents. Am J Orthopsychiatry. Oct 2000;70(4):445-454.
  55. Cooney TM, Radina ME. Adjustment problems in adolescence: are multiracial children at risk? Am J Orthopsychiatry. Oct 2000;70(4):433-444.
  56. Barnett AH, Dixon AN, Bellary S, et al. Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risk in the UK south Asian community. Diabetologia. Oct 2006;49(10):2234-2246.
  57. Forouhi NG, Sattar N, Tillin T, McKeigue PM, Chaturvedi N. Do known risk factors explain the higher coronary heart disease mortality in South Asian compared with European men? Prospective follow-up of the Southall and Brent studies, UK. Diabetologia. Sep 14 2006.
  58. Gupta M, Brister S. Is South Asian ethnicity an independent cardiovascular risk factor? Can J Cardiol. Mar 1 2006;22(3):193-197.
  59. Smith J, Cianflone K, Al-Amri M, Sniderman A. Body composition and the apoB/apoA-I ratio in migrant Asian Indians and white Caucasians in Canada. Clin Sci (Lond). Sep 2006;111(3):201-207.
  60. Bedi US, Singh S, Syed A, Aryafar H, Arora R. Coronary artery disease in South Asians: an emerging risk group. Cardiol Rev. Mar-Apr 2006;14(2):74-80.
  61. Tewari S, Kumar S, Kapoor A, et al. Premature coronary artery disease in North India: an angiography study of 1971 patients. Indian Heart J. Jul-Aug 2005;57(4):311-318.
  62. Davey G, Ramachandran A, Snehalatha C, Hitman GA, McKeigue PM. Familial aggregation of central obesity in Southern Indians. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. Nov 2000;24(11):1523-1527.
  63. Potts J, Simmons D. Sex and ethnic group differences in fat distribution in young United Kingdom South Asians and Europids. J Clin Epidemiol. Aug 1994;47(8):837-841.
  64. Dudeja V, Misra A, Pandey RM, Devina G, Kumar G, Vikram NK. BMI does not accurately predict overweight in Asian Indians in northern India. Br J Nutr. Jul 2001;86(1):105-112.
  65. Misra A, Pandey RM, Sinha S, Guleria R, Sridhar V, Dudeja V. Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis of body fat & body mass index in dyslipidaemic Asian Indians. Indian J Med Res. Apr 2003;117:170-179.
  66. Vikram NK, Misra A, Pandey RM, et al. Anthropometry and body composition in northern Asian Indian patients with type 2 diabetes: receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis of body mass index with percentage body fat as standard. Diabetes Nutr Metab. Feb 2003;16(1):32-40.
  67. Nanan DJ. The obesity pandemic--implications for Pakistan. J Pak Med Assoc. Aug 2002;52(8):342-346.
  68. Singh V, Deedwania P. Dyslipidemia in special populations: Asian Indians, African Americans, and Hispanics. Curr Atheroscler Rep. Jan 2006;8(1):32-40.
  69. Tomkinson GR, Olds TS. Physiological correlates of bilateral symmetry in humans. Int J Sports Med. Nov 2000;21(8):545-550.
  70. Tomkinson GR, Popovic N, Martin M. Bilateral symmetry and the competitive standard attained in elite and sub-elite sport. J Sports Sci. Mar 2003;21(3):201-211.
  71. Rhodes G. The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annu Rev Psychol. 2006;57:199-226.
  72. Martinez-Abadias N, Gonzalez-Jose R, Gonzalez-Martin A, et al. Phenotypic evolution of human craniofacial morphology after admixture: a geometric morphometrics approach. Am J Phys Anthropol. Mar 2006;129(3):387-398.
  73. Chung CS, Runck DW, Bilben SE, Kau MC. Effects of interracial crosses on cephalometric measurements. Am J Phys Anthropol. Apr 1986;69(4):465-472.
  74. Rhodes G, Lee K, Palermo R, et al. Attractiveness of own-race, other-race, and mixed-race faces. Perception. 2005;34(3):319-340.
  75. Nagoshi CT, Johnson RC. The ubiquity of g. Personal Individ Diff. 1986;7(2):201-207.
  76. Mingroni MA. The secular rise in IQ: giving heterosis a closer look. Intelligence. 2004;32(1):65-83.
  77. Colom R, Lluis-Font JM, Andres-Pueyo A. The generational intelligence gains are caused by decreasing variance in the lower half of the distribution: Supporting evidence for the nutrition hypothesis. Intelligence. 2005;33:83-91.
  78. Lynn R. The intelligence of American Jews. Personal Individ Diff. 2004;36(1):201-207.
  79. Lynn R, Longley D. On the high intelligence and cognitive achievements of Jews in Britain. Intelligence. 2006;Epub (ahead of print).
  80. Cochran G, Hardy J, Harpending H. Natural history of Ashkenazi intelligence. J Biosoc Sci. Sep 2006;38(5):659-693.
  81. Lynn R. Race differences in intelligence : an evolutionary analysis. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers; 2006.
  82. Benbow CP. Physiological correlates of extreme intellectual precocity. Neuropsychologia. 1986;24(5):719-725.

Posted by J Richards on Saturday, October 14, 2006 at 04:06 AM in Anthropology,  Books,  Ethnicity and Ethnic Genetic Interests,  Genetics & Human Bio-Diversity,  IQ and Heredity,  Psychology,  Race realism,  That Question Again
Comments (268) | Tell a friend

Comments:

Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 >

Posted by J Richards on October 14, 2006, 05:21 AM | #

Request

Please avoid anti-Semitic comments since I want Alon Ziv to respond.

By the way, here is the last passage from Ziv’s book:

Human variation is real, and it’s foolish to ignore it or sweep it under the rug.  It’s not something to be ashamed of or to avoid for fear of conflict.  Clearly there are differences between us, but instead of making us incompatible they make us more compatible.  Our diversity is a gift, and to keep ourselves separated and compartmentalized would be to waste that gift.

Posted by James Bowery on October 14, 2006, 05:57 AM | #

It is no more inevitable that preservation of ancient lineages will occur than it is inevitable that universal anti-racist supremacy will continue to violate the most fundamental of all human rights:

Freedom of association.

It is easy to see why freedom of association is the most fundamental of all human rights:

All other conceptions of human rights can be realized by the simple expedient of those subscribing to those conceptions forming societies that enforce them on others of like mind, excluding others.

Essentially, Ziv is an apologist for the current supremacist religious belief system pervading the west and some of the east.

Posted by Alon Ziv on October 14, 2006, 09:19 AM | #

Hello J Richards,

I received an anonymous email (possibly from you) letting me know that this review was here. 

I appreciate you cautioning your friends against anti-Semitic comments, though the fact that such a warning is necessary speaks volumes about this forum.

I also appreciate you reading Breeding Between the Lines.  Though I disagree with almost every point in your review, it’s clear that you did read the book.  Since you are a member of a website that advocates the preservation of a single race I’m not surprised that you don’t agree with my thesis.  I hope you read the book with an open mind.  I wonder if I could have written anything that would convince you.  Is there any amount of evidence that would have changed your mind? 

Your review was long, (and yet you forgot to mention how readable and interesting the book is) but I will address a few things.  Your points seem to fall into a few categories and I’ll give an example of each:

1. Nitpicking.  You said a lot of things that while technically true don’t really affect my argument. 

Example:  I refer to the advantages of highly symmetrical individuals and you point out that the literature on this topic is that of “fluctuating asymmetry.” You are completely correct, but so what?  As you mentioned, my book is for lay readership.  If I wrote that some people have “a lower level of fluctuating asymmetry” the meaning would be the same except that my book would be boring and harder to understand.

2. Misrepresentation.  Your research and writing make it clear that you are a smart guy who’s interested in facts, but in several places you blatantly distort what I wrote.

Example:  The discussion on mules.  I use the mule as a *counter* example for hybrid vigor.  I do point out that mules have great stamina, but the only reason I mention them is to show that their sterility is a dealbreaker.  That’s a fundamental flaw so they clearly don’t have hybrid vigor.  Of course, this is because horses and donkeys are two different species with a different number of chromosomes.  Since the different human races are members of the same species they don’t have this genetic incompatibility.

3. Glossing over.  You gloss over several studies that have inconvenient results for your argument.  You don’t like the Gillian Rhodes study because they used computer generated faces to measure attractiveness.  I agree that’s a flaw.  Which is why I cited the UCLA study which used real multiracial and single-race participants and found that the multiracial group was significantly more symmetrical and more attractive.  You dismiss this study because it hasn’t been published yet.  I’m eager for it to be published as well.  You may want to contact Dr. Phelan and encourage him to hurry up!  However, I’ve read the study and it’s well-designed and executed.

I’m familiar with the J. Richard Udry study, but don’t find it convincing.  Is it meaningful that mixed-race adolescents are more likely to wake up tired?  Plus, I find it funny that this study lists “ever had sex” in the category of health problems.  In Breeding Between the Lines I draw the opposite conclusion!  More symmetrical people (and thus interracial people) lose their virginity at a younger age because of their increased attractiveness.  I see that as a sign of good health.  And it may explain why they are waking up tired.

In your review of the Udry study you wrote “all values in Table 2 that are clearly greater than 1.00 but not statistically significant can be considered as genuinely reflecting increased likelihood of health/behavior problems among mixed-race adolescents.” For generations the scientific community has promoted the standard of statistical significance, but you seem so willing to overlook it when it helps your argument.

Also, many of the behaviors studied by Udry are heavily influenced by social factors which are extremely difficult to control for (e.g. smoking).  This is why I focus on more biological factors in my book.  I know of no better measure for overall genetic quality than symmetry.  There is a large body of work showing the power of symmetry to predict health, attractiveness, fertility, and athleticism. The greater genetic diversity of interracial people gives them greater symmetry and all the good stuff that goes along with it.

Finally you question my motivation for writing the book which is a little odd.  Especially since I’ve been quite clear about this in the book and in interviews.  I’ll reiterate.  I wrote Breeding Between the Lines because (in no particular order):

1.  The thesis is true.
2.  The thesis is interesting.  And a lot of the scientific evidence is interesting.
3.  We are on the cusp of a mixed-race explosion yet we are still afraid to talk about race in a real way.  I hope to encourage dialog on this topic.

Thanks again for reading the book.  I hope others on this site will also read it and make up their own minds.

Alon Ziv

Posted by JJR Apologist on October 14, 2006, 09:58 AM | #

Since you are a member of a website that advocates the preservation of a single race I’m not surprised[bolding added] that you don’t agree with my thesis.

Why is Ziv *not* surprised? Because he understands miscegenation weakens/destroys existing ethnic groups and races through EGI decrease. Didn’t read any of that in the remainder of his response, so chalk the omission to duplicity.

Posted by Guessedworker on October 14, 2006, 10:27 AM | #

Alon Ziv: We are on the cusp of a mixed-race explosion

Who is the “we” here, Alon.  Are your people resident, say, in Israel about to explode into sexual relations with Falashas or, indeed, Bantus?  No?  Well, are you agitating for the repeal of anti-miscegenation laws in Israel so all those good things you write about can get established in Jewish populations?  No?  Then, how on earth can you possibly be acting in good faith towards us?

You must know that your efforts to “talk about race in a real way” look just a tad like malice, as JR rather diplomatically puts it.  And, indeed, an effort to impell Europeans a little further towards racial extinction would not be a nice trick to play, would it?

So I think you should do us the honour of clarifying your position on this issue.  Should Caucasian Jews in Israel and elsewhere, as a matter of principle, pursue greater “vigour” by going the Bantu route?  Even if that “vigour” gravely damaged mean Jewish IQ, destroyed the whole basis of Jewishness as an inherited, not cultural, phenomenon and impoverished the Jewish people to black African levels?

A nice direct answer, please.

JJR Apologist: good spot.  I missed that.

Posted by Furius on October 14, 2006, 11:38 AM | #

Considering that Israel is the only western nation that still has laws prohibiting race-mixing, one would have thought that Ziv would have devoted quite a bit of space to that in his book. I mean in the US and Europe, there are no legal barriers to race-mixing any more. But in Israel, there are LAWS against it.

So if Ziv never broaches the subject, it appears he is another member of his tribe advancing the interests of his tribe against whites. And that should not come as a surprise to anyone. Ziv is a small fry. The Jewish owned MTV and much of the US media (mostly Jewish owned) promote that stuff constantly, and have been doing for a very long time.

Ziv is therefore a boring character - a stereotypical Jewish nationalist (with some hatred for whites) masquaraeding as a a universalist humanitarian.

Posted by Steve Edwards on October 14, 2006, 01:49 PM | #

Good point, GW, and there can be no dissembling on Alon Ziv’s part. Either he answers your question directly in a single comment, or he simply doesn’t believe his own thesis, and we will naturally draw our own conclusions as to his motivations. So it’s either one or the other.

One comment, maybe one or two paragraphs max should do it, Alon. That’ll be enough. It’s not like you’ll have to make any uncomfortable admissions to us, because we’ll all understand immediately.

Posted by Andy on October 14, 2006, 01:59 PM | #

I’m familiar with the J. Richard Udry study, but don’t find it convincing.  Is it meaningful that mixed-race adolescents are more likely to wake up tired?  Plus, I find it funny that this study lists “ever had sex” in the category of health problems.  In Breeding Between the Lines I draw the opposite conclusion!  More symmetrical people (and thus interracial people) lose their virginity at a younger age because of their increased attractiveness.  I see that as a sign of good health.  And it may explain why they are waking up tired.

This is laughable. Blacks tend to lose their virginity earlier than whites and asians. Is this because they are more attractive? Or could it possibly be because of a higher sex drive and earlier onset of puberty? If this is emblematic of the sort of “logic” you display in your book, I feel sorry for anyone who spent 10 bucks to purchase your masterwork. 

I also appreciate you reading Breeding Between the Lines.  Though I disagree with almost every point in your review, it’s clear that you did read the book.  Since you are a member of a website that advocates the preservation of a single race I’m not surprised that you don’t agree with my thesis.  I hope you read the book with an open mind.  I wonder if I could have written anything that would convince you.  Is there any amount of evidence that would have changed your mind?

I hope you approached this book review with an open mind. As you are a member of a race that has long argued against the legitimacy of white genetic preservation, it is not surprising in the least that you wrote a book with the thesis of “Breeding Between the Lines”. I am also awaiting your reply to Guessedworker’s inquiry. Will your book tour take you to Tel Aviv? It would be a shame if it didn’t.  I do believe you have stumbled onto a novel solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They can interbreed their problems away! 

(and yet you forgot to mention how readable and interesting the book is)

LOL.  Perhaps it’s not as interesting as you think it is. 

I hope others on this site will also read it and make up their own minds.

You are certainly not raising my opinion of your intellect with your responses to J Richard’s review.  You have yet to even address the most significant criticism of your book: The argument by On Holliday (linked to by J Richards in the main entry), and echoed by Steve Sailer there is no additional hybrid vigor to be gained by marrying interracially.

Posted by Guessedworker on October 14, 2006, 04:40 PM | #

Well I hope I haven’t put Alon off too much with that little question, because I’ve been looking at Svi’s original thread where a whole host of unaddressed issues abound ... unaddressed by Alon that is.  I’m going to spend a bit of time bringing those up again.  But for now, here’s a couple of questions to both Alon and JR.

Does Alon’s book mention EGI?  If so, is any effort made to do it justice?

Posted by Rnl on October 14, 2006, 06:08 PM | #

[Alon Ziv] cites the tale of mutineers on the HMS Bounty (1789) settling on Pitcairn Island and mating with the local women. The half British-half Tahitian children, according to Ziv, grew up to be 2.5 inches taller than the British and the Tahitians. It is difficult to determine the reliability of this report.

I doubt anyone would call the _modern_ Pitcairn Islanders an advertisement for miscegenation, and their culture is now severely dysfunctional, marked by rampant child abuse, among other social problems. But when the descendants of the mutineers were discovered by the British in 1814, their good looks and deportment were apparently impressive, so Alon Ziv is right, from his perspective, to cite Pitcairn Island as evidence for his thesis. The following is from Sir John Barrow’s _Eventful History of the Mutiny and Piratical Seizure of H.M.S. Bounty_ (1831):

****

Presently they observed a few natives coming down a steep descent with their canoes on their shoulders; and in a few minutes perceived one of those little vessels darting through a heavy surf, and paddling off towards the ships; but their astonishment was extreme when, on coming alongside, they were hailed in the English language with ‘Won’t you heave us a rope now?’

The first young man that sprang, with extraordinary alacrity, up the side, and stood before them on the deck, said, in reply to the question, ‘Who are you?’--that his name was Thursday October Christian, son of the late Fletcher Christian, by an Otaheitan mother; that he was the first born on the island, and that he was so called because he was brought into the world on a Thursday in October. Singularly strange as all this was to Sir Thomas Staines and Captain Pipon, this youth soon satisfied them that he was no other than the person he represented himself to be, and that he was fully acquainted with the whole history of the _Bounty_; and, in short, that the island before them was the retreat of the mutineers of that ship. Young Christian was, at this time, about twenty-four years of age, a fine tall youth, full six feet high, with dark, almost black, hair, and a countenance open and extremely interesting. As he wore no clothes except a piece of cloth round his loins, and a straw hat, ornamented with black cocks’-feathers, his fine figure and well-shaped muscular limbs were displayed to great advantage, and attracted general admiration. His body was much tanned by exposure to the weather, and his countenance had a brownish cast, unmixed however with that tinge of red so common among the natives of the Pacific islands.

‘Added to a great share of good humour, we were glad to trace,’ says Captain Pipon, ‘in his benevolent countenance, all the features of an honest English face.’ He told them he was married to a woman much older than himself, one of those that accompanied his father from Otaheite [i.e. Tahiti]. The ingenuous manner in which he answered all questions put to him, and his whole deportment, created a lively interest among the officers of the ship, who, while they admired, could not but regard him with feelings of tenderness and compassion; his manner, too, of speaking English was exceedingly pleasing, and correct both in grammar and pronunciation. His companion was a fine handsome youth of seventeen or eighteen years of age, of the name of George Young, son of Young the midshipman.

If the astonishment of the two captains was great on making, as they thought, this first and extraordinary discovery of a people who had been so long forgotten, and in hearing the offspring of these offenders speaking their language correctly, their surprise and interest were still more highly excited when, on Sir Thomas Staines taking the two youths below, and setting before them something to eat, they both rose up, and one of them, placing his hands together in a posture of devotion, pronounced, distinctly and with emphasis, in a pleasing tone of voice, the words, ‘For what we are going to receive the Lord make us truly thankful.’

The youths were themselves greatly surprised at the sight of so many novel objects--the size of the ship--of the guns, and everything around them. Observing a cow, they were at first somewhat alarmed, and expressed a doubt whether it was a huge goat or a horned hog, these being the only two species of quadrupeds they had ever seen. A little dog amused them much. ‘Oh! what a pretty little thing it is!’ exclaimed Young, ‘I know it is a dog, for I have heard of such an animal.’

These young men informed the two captains of many singular events that had taken place among the first settlers, but referred them for further particulars to an old man on shore, whose name, they said, was John Adams, the only surviving Englishman that came away in the _Bounty_, at which time he was called Alexander Smith.

[...]

Adams ... pretended that he had no great share in the mutiny: said that he was sick in bed when it broke out, and was afterwards compelled to take a musket in his hand; and expressed his readiness to go in one of the ships to England, and seemed rather desirous to do so. On this being made known to the members of the little society, a scene of considerable distress was witnessed; his daughter, a fine young woman, threw her arms about his neck, entreating him not to think of leaving them and all his little children to perish. All the women burst into tears, and the young men stood motionless and absorbed in grief; but on their being assured that he should, on no account, be molested, ‘it is impossible,’ says Captain Pipon, ‘to describe the universal joy that these poor people manifested, and the gratitude they expressed for the kindness and consideration shown to them.’

[...]

This interesting little colony was now found to contain about forty-six persons, mostly grown-up young people, with a few infants. The young men all born on the island were finely formed, athletic and handsome--their countenances open and pleasing, indicating much benevolence and goodness of heart, but the young women particularly were objects of attraction, being tall, robust, and beautifully formed, their faces beaming with smiles, and indicating unruffled good humour; while their manners and demeanour exhibited a degree of modesty and bashfulness, that would have done honour to the most virtuous and enlightened people on earth. Their teeth are described as beautifully white, like the finest ivory, and perfectly regular, without a single exception; and all of them, both male and female, had the marked expression of English features, though not exactly the clear red and white, that distinguish English skins, theirs being the colour of what we call brunette. Captain Pipon thinks that from such a race of people, consisting of fine young men and handsome well-formed women, there may be expected to arise hereafter, in this little colony, a race of people possessing in a high degree the physical qualifications of great strength, united with symmetry of form and regularity of feature.

But their personal qualifications, attractive as they were, excited less admiration than the account which Adams gave of their virtuous conduct. He assured his visitors that not one instance of debauchery or immoral conduct had occurred among these young people, since their settlement on the island; nor did he ever hear, or believe, that any one instance had occurred of a young woman having suffered indecent liberties to be taken with her. Their native modesty, assisted by the precepts of religion and morality, instilled into their young minds by John Adams, had hitherto preserved these interesting people from every kind of debauchery. The young women told Captain Pipon, with great simplicity, that they were not married, and that their father, as they called Adams, had told them it was right they should wait with patience till they had acquired sufficient property to bring up a young family, before they thought of marrying; and that they always followed his advice because they knew it to be good.

[...]

The younger part of the females are obliged to attend, with old Adams and their brothers, to the culture of the land, and Captain Pipon thinks this may be one reason why this old director of the work does not countenance too early marriages, for, as he very properly observed, when once they become mothers, they are less capable of hard labour, being obliged to attend to their children; and, judging from appearance, ‘one may conclude,’ says the Captain, ‘they would be prolific’; that ‘he did not see how it could be otherwise, considering the regularity of their lives, their simple and excellent though abstemious mode of living, their meals consisting chiefly of a vegetable diet, with now and then good pork and occasionally fish.’

The young girls, although they have only the example of the Otaheitan mothers to follow in their dress, are modestly clothed, having generally a piece of cloth of their own manufacture, reaching from the waist to the knees, and a mantle, or something of that nature, thrown loosely over the shoulders, and hanging sometimes as low as the ankles: this mantle, however, is frequently thrown aside, being used rather as a shelter for their bodies from the heat of the sun, or the severity of the weather, than for the sake of attaching any idea of modesty to the upper part of the person being uncovered; and it is not possible, he says, to behold finer forms than are exhibited by this partial exposure. Captain Pipon observes, ‘it was pleasing to see the good taste and quickness with which they form little shades or parasols of green leaves, to place over the head, or bonnets, to keep the sun from their eyes. A young girl made one of these in my presence, with such neatness and alacrity, as to satisfy me that a fashionable dressmaker of London would be delighted with the simplicity and elegant taste of these untaught females.’ The same young girl, he says, accompanied them to the boat, carrying on her shoulders, as a present, a large basket of yams, ‘over such roads and down such precipices, as were scarcely passable by any creatures except goats, and over which we could scarcely scramble with the help of our hands. Yet with this load on her shoulders, she skipped from rock to rock like a young roe.’

‘But,’ says Captain Pipon, ‘what delighted us most, was the conviction which John Adams had impressed on the minds of these young people, of the propriety and necessity of returning thanks to the Almighty for the many blessings they enjoy. They never omit saying grace before and after meals, and never think of touching food without asking a blessing from Him who gave it. The Lord’s Prayer and the Creed they repeat morning and evening.’

[...]

The men are stated to be from five feet eight inches to six feet high, of great muscular strength and excellent figures. ‘We did not see,’ says Captain Waldegrave, ‘one cripple or defective person, except one boy, whom, in the most good-humoured way, and laughing heartily, they brought to me, observing, “You ought to be brothers, you have each lost the right eye.” I acknowledged the connexion, and no doubt for the future he will be called the Captain.’

Captain Beechey [who visited the island in 1825] has given a more detailed account of the physical qualities of the Pitcairn Islanders. He says they are tall, robust, and healthy; their average height five feet ten inches; the tallest man measured six feet and one quarter of an inch, and the shortest of the adults five feet nine inches and one-eighth; their limbs well proportioned, round and straight; their feet turning a little inwards. A boy of eight years measured four feet and one inch; another of nine years, four feet three inches. Their simple food and early habits of exercise give them a muscular power and activity not often surpassed. It is recorded on the island that George Young and Edward Quintal have each carried, at one time, a kedge anchor, two sledge hammers, and an armourer’s anvil, weighing together upwards of six hundred pounds; and that Quintal once carried a boat twenty-eight feet in length. In the water they are almost as much at home as on land, and can remain almost a whole day in the sea. They frequently swim round their little island, the circuit of which is at the least seven miles; and the women are nearly as expert swimmers as the men.

The female descendants of the Otaheite women are almost as muscular as the males, and taller than the generality of the sex. Polly Young, who is not the tallest on the island, measured five feet nine inches and a half. The features of both men and women are regular and well-formed; eyes bright and generally hazel, though in a few instances blue; the eyebrows thin and rarely meeting; the nose a little flattened, and being rather extended at the nostrils, partakes of the Otaheitan character, as do the lips, which are broad and strongly sulcated; their ears moderately large, and the lobes are invariably united with the cheek; they are generally perforated, when young, for the reception of flowers, a very common custom among the natives of the South Sea Islands; hair black, sometimes curling, sometimes straight; teeth regular and white. On the whole they are a well-looking people.

[...]

As a proof how very much simple diet and constant exercise tend to the healthful state of the body, the skin of these people, though in such robust health, compared with that of the Europeans, always felt cold, and their pulses always considerably lower. The doctor examined several of them: in the forenoon he found George Young’s only sixty; three others, in the afternoon, after dinner, were sixty-eight, seventy-two, and seventy-six, while those of the officers who stood the heat of the climate best were above eighty.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14424/14424.txt

Posted by Mark Richardson on October 14, 2006, 11:09 PM | #

Hybrid vigour? There is a vast territory of the earth with mixed race populations (much of central Asia). Are these really the places noted for civilisational advance? Think Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan etc.

Even in the animal kingdom attempts at interbreeding often fail to produce vigour. One example is the Indian zoo which tried to bolster the number of Asian lions by interbreeding them with African lions. The offspring are barely able to move to get to their food, being partly lame.

See here

Posted by Al Ross on October 14, 2006, 11:22 PM | #

Maybe if Iceland added some Jew-recommended hybrid vigour it could get its per capita GDP down from 31900 dollars to much-miscegenated Brazil’s 5000 dollars.

Posted by James Bowery on October 14, 2006, 11:40 PM | #

Al, you realize that when you say the word “Jew” you realize, of course, that this automatically disqualifies your opinions unless of course, you are Jewish.

Posted by Al Ross on October 14, 2006, 11:42 PM | #

Unfortunate, but true, James.

Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on October 15, 2006, 02:09 AM | #

One comment, maybe one or two paragraphs max should do it, Alon. That’ll be enough. It’s not like you’ll have to make any uncomfortable admissions to us, because we’ll all understand immediately.

The question in question is best asked rhetorically.  The status quo allows Ziv to dissemble and score a rhetorical point free of charge.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 15, 2006, 04:56 AM | #

This book, which I certainly don’t plan on reading, is merely the lastest offensive in a long campaign of Jewish attacks on the collective Euro-Christian ethno-nationality using race as the weapon.  Should I read it, given that time for reading (or for doing anything else) is limited and precious and I already know the strategy the book is intended to advance?  I don’t think so.  I’ll skip it. 

Jewish genocidal attacks on Euros, such as this book, have been mounted repeatedly for more than a century, the Jewish goal being to get Euros race-replaced.  Jewish pursuit of that goal through the astonishingly brazen tactic of academic race-denial is no longer viable, the growth of genetic knowledge having turned race-denial (which Jews invented and disproportionately pushed) into a laughing stock.  So this other tactic, this “Yes, OK, there are races ... and whites are far better off mixing with non-whites,” is now being trotted out, the underlying goal being transparently the same:  not scientific truth but race-replacement of Euros.

If this tactic fails the Jews will simply trot out another tactic, then another, and another — always aiming at the same goal, namely:  (see above).

Posted by J Richards on October 15, 2006, 05:01 AM | #

Alon Ziv,

I am glad you responded.  Yes, I sent you an email about this review because it is only fair to let someone being critiqued have an opportunity to defend himself.

My request to commentators regarding avoiding anti-Semitism does not speak volumes about this site like you have inferred, but since we allow unregistered individuals to leave anonymous comments, we risk attracting outrageous comments, that could very well be from an agent provocateur, and I don’t want to deal with such comments in an academic discussion.

You could have convinced me about your thesis if you had decent data to back it up, discussed evidence to the contrary that I have pointed out and showed how counter-evidence does not undermine your thesis.

You mention me nitpicking your arguments.  Toward the beginning of my review, I do address miscellaneous points by you, but the major part of my review is concerned with your main thesis, which I have addressed extensively.

I can understand you substituting symmetry for fluctuating symmetry given your targeted readership, but it is inexcusable for you to talk about perfect symmetry being the goal of design given well-documented examples of directional asymmetry and antisymmetry.  You could have introduced the reader to fluctuating asymmetry and said that henceforth whenever I talk about greater symmetry, I am specifically referring to reduced fluctuating asymmetry.  This way your book would not be littered with the phrase “fluctuating asymmetry.”

I have not misrepresented your argument about mules.  You have clearly stated that a mule may display some hybrid vigor, in the form of stamina and load-bearing capacity; I have not implied that you have argued that mules display hybrid vigor; my pointer is that if there are some pluses of hybridization and also some minuses, especially major ones such as infertility, then the phrase “some hybrid vigor” is not justified at all. 

I have not glossed over Gillian Rhodes’ study about the allegedly greater rated attractiveness of Eurasians.  I have pointed out its serious shortcomings: the use of unattractive whites, which is self-evident from the composite images; the assumption of averaging facial features between Europeans and East Asians, which anecdotal experience should caution one against, which in turn is confirmed by Martinez-Abadias et al.’s (Ref. #72) paper on multiple deviations from the average of parental races in mixed offspring; and flawed methodology such as averaging faces after equalizing the distance between the eyes, which does not do justice to both shape and size differences between Europeans and East Asians.  In addition, although Gillian Rhodes et al. did construct hypothetical Eurasian averages, their study was divided into a series of experiments, and one of these generated a Eurasian composite using actual Eurasian people.

I have not dismissed Jay Phelan’s study, but have expressed surprise that four years after its completion it still remains unpublished, and I also find the striking differences in fluctuating asymmetry difficult to believe.  When this study is published, I will review it at this site.

Regarding the Udry study, there are several points that I would like to make.  Whereas you may find it unconvincing, it is a given in scholarship that one is supposed to cite the literature that bears on the topic that one is addressing regardless of whether it supports one’s argument.  If the literature in question does not support one’s viewpoint, then one needs to show how it does not undermine one’s thesis, but you make no mention of the study, and neither do you cite previously published relevant papers such as reference numbers 49, 51 and 52.

The answer to your question, “Is it meaningful that mixed-race adolescents are more likely to wake up tired?” in reference to Udry’s paper is yes, this question is meaningful as far as health goes.  Udry’s study assessed several other variables that directly pertain to health issues.  This study was not specifically geared toward studying the health of mixed-race adolescents and collected a wide variety of data, including that on sexual experiences.  There is nothing inappropriate about Udry reporting the data on sexual experiences.  In fact, precocious sexuality is associated with problematic behaviors, and therefore the sexuality data is aptly reported.

Regarding the issue of statistical significance in reference to my comment on Table 2 of Udry’ study, my comment is in agreement with what Udry wrote.  Setting alpha at the 0.05 level is a common compromise to guard against both Type I and Type II errors, but sometimes one sees a non-significant trend that would be significant if the sample size were larger, and given the general picture in Udry’s data, and the random and representative sampling, if the listed odds ratio is much larger than 1.00 but not significant (e.g., from the table: 1.50, 1.57, 1.75), then the inference that this odds ratio would be significant in a larger sample is justified.

Udry’s study is not just concerned about behaviors but also symptoms such as headaches and skin problems.  Even behaviors such as smoking pertain to health issues not only in the sense of smoking causing health problems but a problematic physical constitution leading to a susceptibility to drug dependence in the first place.  The proportion of people that smoke regularly are a fraction of the number of people that have ever smoked in their lifetime.  Factors implicated in smoking dependence include genetic factors and developmental instability.  If the odds of developmental instability are increased as a result of race mixing in humans, then the incidence of susceptibility to drug dependence will be higher among mixed race individuals.

You mention that you know of no better measure for overall genetic quality than symmetry and that there is a large body of work showing the power of symmetry to predict health, attractiveness, fertility and athleticism.  However, health, attractiveness, fertility and athleticism are influenced by a large number of variables, and the variance in each of these measures that is explained by fluctuating asymmetry alone will be very little, which is evident in the literature.  In addition, as the meta-analysis by Vollestad et al. makes it clear, the relationship between fluctuating asymmetry and heterozygosity is very weak.  In other words, if one assumes that there are no deleterious effects of race mixing, then given the very weak relationship between fluctuating asymmetry and heterozygosity and the very small to moderate effect size of fluctuating asymmetry with respect to health, attractiveness, fertility and athleticism, your argument that race mixing will improve health, attractiveness, fertility and athleticism is a very weak argument, and it is demolished when one considers the costs, namely documented evidence regarding deleterious biological effects, loss of kinship and ethnic genetic interests, etc.

Regarding what motivated you to write this book, there are reasons to question your stated reasons given the tone of your book and your omission of a lot of literature that you have undoubtedly come across.  The science in your book and in my review is easily within the grasp of a college senior majoring in biology, but your education is at a much higher level.  Ignorance or incompetence on your part are almost guaranteed to be non-issues.  And, your point about encouraging a dialog on race is irrelevant.  If you are aware of the nature of race denial, then you should realize that your poor sources in support of biological races among humans do not help at all.  More importantly, it is well-known that sub-populations of a race that have been geographically separated for some time will differ genetically, and that the mixing of these sub-populations will increase heterozygoisty, as shown by Mingroni (Ref. # 76) in his example of allele frequencies taken from various Yanomamo villages, which you have probably read given that you cited his paper.  In other words, your argument simply requires that human populations differ in allele frequencies, which they do, but not that humans be divided into races.  Geographically separated populations need not constitute separate races in order to achieve increased heterozygoisty among offspring born to parents from different geographical regions.  Therefore, how will your argument encourage a dialog on race?

Posted by J Richards on October 15, 2006, 05:10 AM | #

Fred Scrooby,

Damn!  There is no need to criticize Jews in general in this thread.  Avoid it here please; I want Ziv to respond.  Besides, Ziv is right that his book is very readable and has a lot of interesting information; it wouldn’t hurt to read it.

-----------------

Guessedworker,

Ziv does not address EGI, and I have pointed this out in my review.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 15, 2006, 06:01 AM | #

Sorry, I’m supposed to read a “book” that has stuff in it like this?:

“Ziv even says that ‘since race is really a continuum, there is no ideal way to define or document it.’ ”

In other words, since a blade of grass and a giant sequoia are on a continuum there is no such category as “trees”?  For all anyone knows, a tree might be a blade of grass?  (… and a Negro might be a white man, as well as a Chinaman an Australian Aborigine? ...)

I respect you, JR, but you’ve got to be fricking joking.  Read this?  This “book”?  Gee, thanks but ... uhhh ... no thanks ...

That single quote from this “book” by itself identifies the whole shebang as one-hundred-percent pure charlatanism, no different from Gould’s race-denial-by-means-of-the-most-idiotic-sophistries.

Posted by Al Ross on October 15, 2006, 06:07 AM | #

Fred, surely you know that for scientists like Alon Ziv there is only one race - the human race.

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on October 15, 2006, 07:29 AM | #

Damn Fred-You are getting more on-point,and vocal-glad to see it-I usually feel lonely.Not too many US posters,but yours are the most followed by me,although Al Ross and JB pique my interest most times-Soren,Matra,Boris,and others are well informed,but from a European perspective.Bottom line-Great comment!  As an aside,I agree with J Richards-too damn much Jew bashing-leave that to VNN.NO-I’m not a Jew,married to one,nor have relatives who are Jewish.I still consider them our pit-bulls in the Mid-East.Our money is better spent on arms for the IDF than AIDS care in Africa. Semper Fi!

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on October 15, 2006, 08:01 AM | #

J.Richards-As an established member of “the great unwashed”,I truly wish to commend you on your review of the Ziv manifesto-I actually fell off my chair reading your refutations of some of his most elegant and elitist {not to mention ignorant]Pontifications.Just what sort of bubble-world do people like this live-or did he inherit $50 Mill from his senile father?I just got the book,and am trying to read it ,without gagging every third page.I think I wasted my money-back to porn!

Posted by Furius on October 15, 2006, 08:24 AM | #

Maybe if Iceland added some Jew-recommended hybrid vigour it could get its per capita GDP down from 31900 dollars to much-miscegenated Brazil’s 5000 dollars.

That’s another example of why this book is a pile of rubbish. While money is not an issue, buying a book like this would amount to patronising such garbage, which I have no intention of doing.

Posted by Furius on October 15, 2006, 08:38 AM | #

We are on the cusp of a mixed-race explosion

A comment like that shows that Ziv is either an ignoramus or a deliberate and bald faced lier - in the Franz Boas tradition. There are large swaths of the earth that are populated by mixed race populations (most of Latin America, huge chunks of Asia and the Middle East). No “explosion” here (North America and Europe) would change what we already know about mixed race populations.

Unless of course, what he really means is the extinction of European derived peoples which is the only thing he is interested in.

Posted by Steve Edwards on October 15, 2006, 09:09 AM | #

I see Alon Ziv has so far failed to respond to GW’s questions. Perhaps JR can send a reminder email?

Posted by AlonandMichalWedding on October 15, 2006, 09:19 AM | #

The following is not meant to be anti-Semitism nor a personal attack, but it is relevant with respect to the issue of motivation.

Please see here:
(link deleted - Ed)

Also note the surnames, as well as phenotypes, noted under the category of “Michal’s family” (as well, of course, under “Alon’s family).

Alon’s wife is clearly Caucasian.  Based on physical appearance and surnames, it seems most likely that Michal is, like Alon, Jewish, and most probably Ashkenazim.

Interesting.

Posted by Al Ross on October 15, 2006, 10:11 AM | #

In the matter of race-mixing, the European has crossed with every known race of humanity in the course of his Imperial conquest of the world.

This miscegenation has resulted in an inextricable mass of mixed peoples and has availed the world nothing in terms of superior specimens of mankind.

Posted by Steve Edwards on October 15, 2006, 11:01 AM | #

So how come Alon missed out on the opportunity to have “more attractive” and “healthier” children for himself? Or did he only come to his revelation after it was too late?

Posted by Guessedworker on October 15, 2006, 11:21 AM | #

So, we have no reply from Alon to my question - which, of course, is a reply of sorts, always assuming he has the intellectual curiosity to revisit the thread.  His silence is all the more suspicious because we can now see that Alon has not, in fact, pursued the course maritally that he commends to the rest of us.

You know, Alon, there’s something not quite straight in all this that I wish you would sort out.  I admit it could be a case of the bitter and defeated victim of circumstance imploring those he loves to “Do as I say, not as I do.” And if you are such a man, such a charitable, well-meaning man, and we merely misunderstand you ... if you are indeed filled with regret about the “non-vigorous” course your life has taken, I think you had better speak to your wife.

Have you even owned up to her about writing this book on going wild in Rwanda and Burundi?  I could understand if you haven’t.  She could easily worry about you getting the hots for every passing Bantu chick in LA.  And then, she might think that you don’t trust her.  You know the cover of your own book, don’t you ... that recommendation to white girls to go get themselves a better quality of orgasm with a well-endowed Rwandan.

Just by the by, I sort of wondered how that would work out for us pathetic white guys as we follow your advice and try to maximise our “vigour”.  How can we do that ... how can we get anywhere if we just can’t keep a Bantu slack Alice happy?

No Alon, there’s something fishy in all this.  I really wish you would come back and tell us where we are getting you wrong.

Posted by Steve Edwards on October 15, 2006, 11:31 AM | #

Every side here knows exactly what’s going on, and where their opponents are at - but only one side is open about their intentions. What gives?

Posted by Englander on October 15, 2006, 01:57 PM | #

J. Richards has done a great job and I doubt if Alon Ziv will come back. He doesn’t need to, his book is out there doing what he intended it to do.

I see there are two gushing reviews of this book on Amazon.  It would be a great service to add an alternative viewpoint to that site, and perhaps a link to this discussion (if Amazon allows that).

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 15, 2006, 01:59 PM | #

“the extinction of European derived peoples which is the only thing he is interested in.”

Furius, I’m afraid, has got it exactly right.  Furius has named the other side’s motivation in stark but accurate terms.  Furthermore, to anyone who looks at what’s going on with this book under discussion in the context of what’s been going on roughly for the past hundred years this objective of theirs should be transparent.  Things that seemed utter mysteries, seemed to make no sense at all, are fully explained.  This is their nationalism.  They’re fighting for their race by trying to destroy ours.  They may vary the weapons used, never the goal of elimination of Euros as a race.

“Every side here knows exactly what’s going on, and where their opponents are at - but only one side is open about their intentions. What gives?”

Where many of them are concerned, Steve, we may be dealing with repression in the Freudian sense:  they may repress their real motivations, which are (a non-messy, slow but sure) genocide.  Through a mechanism of Freudian repression they may not permit conscious realization of this motivation to enter in their minds.  That would certainly explain how they can deny with such bold faces what they’re obviously up to.  (Some of them, of course, aren’t repressing anything but are fully aware of what they’re doing.)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 15, 2006, 02:01 PM | #

“perhaps a link to this discussion (if Amazon allows that).”

That link would get deleted in less than a nanosecond.

Posted by Guessedworker on October 15, 2006, 02:40 PM | #

A review at Amazon would be a good and perhaps necessary idea.  But, of course, one has to have read the book.  JR?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 15, 2006, 02:56 PM | #

“You know the cover of your own book, don’t you ... that recommendation to white girls to go get themselves a better quality of orgasm with a well-endowed Rwandan.” (—GW, a few above)

How can this man marry any woman in good faith knowing, as he “does,” that, not being a Negro, he’ll only ever give her inadequate orgasms?  Isn’t marriage-to-him something only an extremely selfish man would inflict on any woman?

Posted by Andy on October 15, 2006, 03:59 PM | #

What would be wrong--with JR’s approval of course--with someone copying and posting this outstanding review on Amazon? Obviously it would have to be altered slightly and the pictures and graphs removed.  If you feel that the review is too long for the average Amazon shopper, perhaps someone could shorten this review so that it just hits the high points.

Posted by Guessedworker on October 15, 2006, 04:16 PM | #

Well, here anyway are a few more serious questions for Alon.

1) As you agree that race exists, do you also agree that the Boas-Montague-Gould-Lewontin-Diamond-Wise line on the non-existence of race, for example the following passage on race from Encyclopedia Brittanica ...

Genetic studies in the late 20th century denied the existence of biogenetically distinct races, and scholars now argue that “races” are cultural interventions reflecting specific attitudes and beliefs that were imposed on different populations in the wake of western European conquests beginning in the 15th century.

... was and is a Marxist scam?

2) Do you accept that Jewish intellectuals were disproportionately to the fore in that scam, and would you care to put forward an explanation for that?

3) Do you accept the validity of the genetic research that has found population clusters as well as clines, or are you a “clines only” man?  Because that’s just another way of denying race, which you say you don’t do.  If you are indeed a “clines only” man, how do you refute the research showing clusters?  Or do you just want to cherry-pick?

4) Steve Sailor’s VDare article on your opus states: Gregory Cochran told me that he and University of Utah population geneticist Henry Harpending once scanned the medical literature to see if interracial mating increased human fertility (due to hybrid vigor) or decreased it (due to genetic incompatibilities). They concluded that whatever net effect might exist was smaller than the statistical margin of error in the studies.

So, if mixed-race couples don’t produce more children than endogamous parents, on what basis can you compensate for their loss of parental kinship?

Would not this loss of parental kinship constitute a loss of fitness?

5) What hard evidence do you have that shows that, in the round, mixed race children are actually healthier than white children?  For example, what health benefits accrue from Bantu-European miscegenation that compensate for the known increase in mental health problems that afflict black-white mixed-race children and adolescents.

6) JR tells me that you took no account of ethnic genetic interests in your book.  Don’t even mention them.  But in this world of unidirectional migration the loss of fitness that results from loss of parental kinship plainly projects on Europeans in general as a loss of EGI.  How can exogamy possibly throw up “compensations” for something of which it is the cause?  It’s double-talk.

7) Now let’s fast forward to a future Zivworld.  Whaddya know, we’re all brown and, well, bigger and we spend one heck of a lot of time chasing that next great orgasm.  But what will have happened to the mean IQ of the West, Alon?  And its prosperity, civility, aesthetics, its culture of progress?  Any loss of fitness percolating through to your brain there?

8) Now a really tough test of integrity, Alon ... if you were ordered by an employer, say, to gather research evidence against hybrid vigour from second generations on, could you find any?  It’s interesting you see, because my local plant nursery breeds fuschias and camillas from original parental stock.  They keep these fabulous plants just for that purpose.  They must have found, don’t you know, that outbreeding depression reduces their livelihood.

Strange how humble plant-breeders know that only too well but you, an IQ 130 man I suppose, don’t.  Or perhaps you do but don’t want to tell us.

So which is it?  Could you find evidence against your own thesis of human hybrid vigour?  Did you look before you wrote your book, or did you merely cherry-pick?

And what might have been your reason for cherry-picking?

Posted by onetwothree on October 15, 2006, 04:25 PM | #

Maybe his publisher came up with the title “breeding between the lines” but something about it bugs me a little. The term “breeding” is rarely used in reference to humans, and strongly implies a deliberate policy, as imposed by a rancher on his cattle.

Anyway. If you “breed” a thoroughbred horse with a draft horse, you’ll have an offspring much more suited for certain uses, at the expense of the speed and strength of the parents. An animal really doesn’t belong to a race unless it has this or that characteristic sticking out. And any characteristic far from the average can easily creep into excess.

Part of white people’s characteristic look is the long nose, while blacks have wide noses. While Asians rarely have noses too long or too wide, it is common for whites or blacks to, as I said, creep into excess. “Breed” a white and a black, and you tend to average out every characteristic, including those near the extreme, reducing the possibility of too much of any.

My point is: This trims off the edges of the curves. I can see a slight improvement in average looks because of this. Any improvements will be seen mainly in ugly people (*).  But _real_ beauty depends upon those characteristics remaining.

Also, you might want to submit an abridged version of your review to Amazon.

(*) Not exactly scientific, but I invite my readers to compare the models on this website (ethnic info included) with the model on Alon’s book. See how many pages you have to flip through before finding a woman less attractive than his:

http://models.com/model_culture/model_of_week/

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 15, 2006, 04:48 PM | #

“I invite my readers to compare the models on this website (ethnic info included) with the model on Alon’s book. See how many pages you have to flip through before finding a woman less attractive than his” (—Onetwothree)

I only looked at the first page that came up via the link; didn’t go to any others.  Every gal on that first page, including Diana, an Oriental, and Jeneil, a Negro, is more attractive than the supposedly “attractive” model on Ziv’s book cover except for Nicol, also a Negro, who is less attractive.  Nicol is the only one of the 25 on that page whom Ziv’s mixed-race “beauty” beats in attractiveness.

Posted by James Bowery on October 15, 2006, 05:18 PM | #

By the way, when I said that quality is more important that quantity—and that with the departure of John Jay Ray, the quality of the site has gone up due to reduced quantity, an article like J Richards’ is what I was referring to.

I have paused posting my own potential blog entries for a while out of respect for J Richards’ extraordinary contribution to MR as apparently have others.  If JJR were still around he’d not have had the courtesy to pause his postings out of said respect and this refutation of Alon Ziv’s propaganda would have been long buried. 

PS: A saving characteristic of this site’s software is that the “Most Recent Comments” side-bar does help keep higher quality articles active longer—sometimes much longer.

Posted by Guessedworker on October 15, 2006, 07:02 PM | #

I agree with every word of that, James.

Posted by Englander on October 15, 2006, 07:10 PM | #

IMO mixed race people, and ethnic minorities in general, hold an exotic appeal which increases their actual value in the minds of many of the white public. Mixed-race people are also heavily promoted in the media at this time, probably by men like Mr Ziv, and we all know that gaining celebrity status increases the desirability of a person beyond what they are actually worth. Are Hollywood celebrities really the most beautiful people on earth?  Not at all, but becoming one can make you seem that way in the eyes of the public.
The most in-demand mixed-race celebrities at the moment are not even the finest examples of their kind.

Posted by MaliceZiv on October 15, 2006, 08:03 PM | #

Outbreeding depression:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outbreeding_depression

Note how in the first admixed generation -which is of course what Ziv wishes us to concentrate on - relief of inbreeding depression (hybrid vigor) is most pronounced, while outbreeding depression usually does not yet peak.

However, in subsequent generations, vigor is lost and outbreeding depression is a more serious problem.  The low quality of mixed race populations that can be observed today reflects this timing phenomenon, as these populations have been in existence for many generations.

As a noted Philosopher, L.P. Berra, once said, “The game ain’t over until the fat lady sings.”

With respect to “improvement” of phenotypic traits, one cannot end the examination with the first generation, but must follow through on the evidence of history showing the end results of admixture over multiple generations. The “game” isn’t over after the first generation.  It in fact never ends as long as particular lineages are in existence.

Of course, Guessedworker’s objection also stands.  If mixed race people do not have more children than others, than what is the point?  If the loss in kinship from exogamy is not compensated by at least an equal gain from exogamy, what is the point? One of the first things one learns in an elementary biology course is that biological fitness is not about how much someone can benchpress, or how fast they can run.  It is about genetic reproduction.

Ziv must hope his readership does not realize this.

Posted by Guessedworker on October 15, 2006, 08:15 PM | #

I’ve decided to delete the link to that wedding page.  It has been pointed out to me that there is insufficient likeness between the guy in the shots and the image on Alon’s book jacket to be confident that they are the same guy.  Doubt means deletion, and also an apology to whichever Alon Ziv was a-jumpin on that site if it wasn’t our man.

The questions to him, of course, remain.

Posted by Furius on October 15, 2006, 09:11 PM | #

The whole argument behind Ziv’s thesis is so flimsy that anyone with good sense and a bit of understanding as regards the JQ would see through it in an instant.

I am delighted to see, however, that this book ranks 26,000th in Amazon’s list. That’s nothing to worry about with great seriousness.  If this book had the same level of success as Freakonomics, for example, it would require a lot more work in terms of rebuttal because it could do a lot more damage.

Lastly, attraction is mostly pure animal instinct. For example, white males that are not attracted to mulatto women will continue to be disinterested in them regardless of what anyone tells them in any thesis. If I stand and keep screaming that the sky is green (and back it up with fancy arguments), it won’t make people believe it any more than if I didn’t have fancy arguments.

Posted by calvin on October 15, 2006, 10:43 PM | #

Sorry guys. I’ve nothing clever to say and there have been some great posts on this topic but I think that Mr Fred Scrooby hit the nail on the head in his first post. If a Jewish academic thinks that miscegenation is a great thing let him preach it to his brethren first. Practice and then preach and you might get some converts and maybe collect a little bit of credibility along the way Mr Ziv; preach but don’t practice and you are only exposing yourself as another in a long line of sanctimonious hypocrites.
Racial integrity brought us Shakespeare, Milton, Newton, Abelard, Edison, Mozart etc, etc, ad infinitum. Am I supposed to abandon my ancestors in the hope that we might breed a few more Mike Tysons? There is an old Spanish saying, “ If hard work was such a great thing the rich would have kept it all to themselves” and if race mixing was a sure fire way to increase genetic fitness, you can bet dollars to donuts that the discoverers of this truth would be more keen to shit a porcupine than to disseminate this knowledge to all and sundry. To show our generosity as a race we’ll let you and your race have all the “benefits” of mixing all to yourselves. I personally intend to stay White, stay proud and stay here. Thanks all the same!

Posted by Amalek on October 15, 2006, 10:43 PM | #

We are on the cusp of a mixed-race explosion

Don’t think so; at least not indiscriminately between all races and both sexes in our thrice-blessed multiracial societies. And certainly not in the USA. There the incidence of mixed-race marriage (and childbearing relationships outside the peculiar institution) is still rather small-- when you consider that one in four of the population is non-white, formal segregation ended one or two generations ago and colour-blindness has been dinned into the majority as a Good Thing for 40 years or more.

Steve Sailer noticed this reluctance in ‘Is Love Colorblind?’, which has become something of a classic:

http://www.vdare.com/sailer/interracial_marriage.htm

In Britain, however, it is said that we are lucky to have the highest rate of b/w miscegenation anywhere: over half of black males keep company with young white ladies, and the black gals complain that the bruthas flip them off.

White men and black girls do not click nearly as much (for which Sailer also has reasons) and the bm/ww statistic perhaps should undergo further scrutiny, like the Jewish outmarriage rate. But if it’s true, one can interpret it less as a heartwarming challenge to prejudice than as the sound of the selfish gene working overtime.

Black man thinks: ‘I’m on a quantity, not quality, repro strategy-- better give my numerous offspring a better start by splicing with a white, and odds are that my kids will interbreed with other whites. In two or three generations the black will be pretty well washed out, and the IQ and social acceptability of my descendants will be preferable to those of a pure black or half-caste… Right, biological destiny calls. It’s my fate to drown my bloodline. Better hit the clubs where the chocolate chasers hang out; if Phil Rushton’s right I’ve no time to lose, man!’

PS: A curious feature of mixing and non-mixing (not that I’ve yet perused Mr Ziv’s tome yet) is that Israeli Jews stay so aloof from their semitic neighbours the Arabs-- even fellow Israelis-- when it comes to the mating game. Why aren’t peoples which Jewish geneticists have demonstrated are virtually identical keener on the mating game? That’s one “cusp” that the Jews never get over.

Posted by Rnl on October 15, 2006, 10:47 PM | #

Alon has written everything from musical comedy to academic papers. He enjoys presenting science to the public in new and entertaining ways. Most recently, he has written online for Flak Magazine, Opium Magazine, and Recess.

http://dolphin.upenn.edu/~checkone/newsletter0203.htm

The links below are implicitly ad hominem. Ziv’s learned opinion on the merits of various chocolate bars doesn’t, of course, undermine his factual arguments in favor of White annihilation, but still ...

Ziv’s Mind at Play:
http://www.flakmag.com/misc/watcha.html

Ziv the Movie Reviewer:
http://www.jmdb.org/about.htm

Alon is excited to be a part of the JMDb, but the truth is that movies are mostly just a popcorn delivery system for him.

That sounds plausible, since Jackass Number Two is among his favorite films. He gave it an 8/10 rating. He also loved Pleasantville (a 9/10), which tells you quite a bit, but out of deference to the initiator of this thread I won’t elaborate.

Ziv the Thoughtful Dissects Survivor:
http://www.breedingbetweenthelines.com/essay.htm

Richards has challenged the scientific evidence Ziv adduces for his case. Ziv is, I assume, factually wrong, though I’m not competent to tell. But what any of us can reasonably infer is that Ziv has no serious interests outside his area of expertise. He enjoys trashy pop culture, so it’s not surprising that he advances quasi-scientific arguments that, leaving aside their genocidal intentions, promote more of the same. As long as the degraded culture of Jackass Number Two survives and flourishes, Ziv will be content.

Posted by Rawlinson on October 15, 2006, 10:49 PM | #

OK, Alon Ziv, I’ll play here.  If you’re such a believer in interracial mixing, then tell me-- how many Israelis marry Palestinians in any given year?  What’s the Israeli-Palestinian interracial rate?  Do you or your kids plan on marrying Palestinians, bringing about this “mixed culture” you wax so dreamily about?  Your denial of race and ethnicity is truly idiotic-- you and your kind in Israel obviously adhere to it firmly, yet you deny it for others?  Even outside of the realm of social relations, from a strictly scientific standpoint, race is commonly accepted-- certain health issues for example are divided according to race, at least in part.  It’s not precise but it very much does correspond to specific physical variables.

My guess is-- you’d respond to this with revulsion, you want Israel *for* Israeli Jews and recoil in horror at the idea of Israeli Jews intermarrying with the despised Palestinians.  Now, we here can actually understand that (really, we can)-- you in Israel have a distinct, separate ethnic culture that you want vigorously to preserve.  If so, fine.  But this also makes you a hypocrite, since you affirm this right to self-association and solidarity for yourself, yet attempt to deny it to everyone else.

The problem, Alon, is that you’ve failed to realize how corrosive the multi-cultural ethic has been in the USA, how it’s doing nothing less than destroying our nation.  Do you have any idea how damaging affirmative action is to the US?  Somehow, stemming from the machinations of that idiot Richard Nixon in 1969 and his Philadelphia Plan, all Whites in the US-- doesn’t matter where-- were declared “guilty as charged” for vague acts of “past discrimination.” Didn’t matter if we’d never discriminated ourselves, didn’t matter if our ancestors were Irish who were brutalized by the British ourselves, or descended from Russian serfs enslaved for centuries.  No, if we had White skin, we were somehow evil oppressors, and we had to “pay up.”

This affirmative action burden becomes ever more oppressive as Whites in the USA are pushed increasingly to minority status.  This is also something that you and your people, Alon, helped to push-- the 1965 immigration law and its descendants have consistently had your heavy support, although I will acknowledge that plenty of Gentiles were also integral to the introduction of this suicidally stupid policy.  As we become a minority here-- White kids are already a minority in the early grades of school-- Whites in the USA have to pay more and more and more to the “preferred groups.” No legal remedy for this can even slightly change it-- affirmative action is too well-entrenched in both the public and private sectors.

Oh, and one more thing-- the products of these “interracial marriages” are still considered to be Blacks or other favored groups in the affirmative action system, which thus accelerates the extent to which the preferences system becomes an unbearable burden for Whites.  Or maybe this is your plan all along, eh Alon?  This system, intermarriage mixed with affirmative action, mixed with outsourcing and idiotic imperialistic foreign wars (like Iraq, which after all was fought in part to support Israel’s interests) is so toxic that it’s already crushed the heart of the USA-- we’re already headed to disintegration.  The future of White civilization resides most likely in a few countries in Central Europe, not in North America, and people like you, Alon (and I again, I’m referring to plenty of deluded Gentiles here in addition to Jewish writers), are in part responsible for this ruin. 

Most of the smart people I know in the USA are already picking up a new language or two and getting out.  Even my best friend will likely soon be joining them.  Your stupidity, blindness and hypocrisy has ruined for good this once-great bastion of White civilization in North America.

Posted by Rawlinson on October 16, 2006, 12:10 AM | #

Nick Tamiroff wrote:

“As an aside,I agree with J Richards-too damn much Jew bashing-leave that to VNN.NOI ... still consider them [Israel] our pit-bulls in the Mid-East.Our money is better spent on arms for the IDF than AIDS care in Africa. Semper Fi!”

That’s stupid Nick, really flagrantly I-just-verbally-farted stupid.  First of all, your suggestion that we fork over still more money to our “pit bulls” the IDF, in the ME is idiotic.  At least a part of the IDF’s mission is this “Greater Israel” stupidity that involves direct invasions and appropriations of Arab homelands, an effort in which they’re supported by a subset of US psuedo-Christians of the evangelical set who have allowed themselves to be duped into the idea that they’d be heaven-bound by encouraging a big, bloody Middle eastern war.  The Arabs, understandably, are thoroughly pissed about this-- angry at Israel and angry at the US for so nakedly supporting Israeli aggression. 

This, combined with stupid US actions like invading Arab countries ourselves, and placing our troops and bases on Arab lands, leads to terrorism against the USA.  Ideally, we’d have a full separation-- Arabs stay in their homelands, Americans stay in theirs.  But no, we get the worst of both-- Middle Easterners invited here in large numbers as part of the “diversity” scheme, while we invade and brutalize Arab lands ourselves, or subsidize the Israelis to do it.  Arabs and Palestinians don’t belong in the West, but by and large they want to be left to their own distinctive culture in their own lands.  I’m totally cool with that-- I have no animosity toward them.

As for your “Jew-bashing” insinuation, I suspect that the vast majority of people here don’t have any built-in animosity toward Jewish people in general or toward most individual Jews.  There are many Jewish people whom I greatly respect and have befriended, and in respect I overall respect the contributions of Jewish civilization in general.  Conversely, I accept that many idiotic Gentiles who are also driving the US and Britain to complete ruin.

IOW, Nick, we don’t hate Jews or Jewish civilization-- what we do despise is hypocrisy and disingenuous nationalism masquerading as ultra-liberal and freedom-loving ideals.  And unfortunately for many vested interests, we’re also realists-- we call a spade a spade.  And what’s indisputable, unfortunately, is that a very large number of important Jews in high places are carrying on a truly reprehensible and hateful operation against Europeans whom they consider to be enemies.  I suspect that most Jews don’t harbor anti-White animus, but many in powerful positions very clearly do, and for reasons that are easy to grasp-- solidarity of White European “tribes” threatens their own fantasies of supremacy.  So they strike out at us in subtle ways, affecting our minds and cultures so as to corrode our culture from within. 

What I suspect most of find to be most contemptible, is the utter hypocrisy of people like Alon Ziv and other Jewish people who preach the joys of multiculturalism and miscegenation to White Europeans-- chiefly in North America, the UK and Australia, which have most fallen prey to these ideas-- yet vigorously fight against such practices among their fellow Jews.  As many have pointed out, Israel has the Western world’s harshest laws against intermarrying and miscegenation-- it’s flatly illegal and socially despised for a Jew to marry a non-Jew in Israel, and even Jews in the USA express spite for Jews who marry outside of the Jewish community.  That’s called “Bullshit” and it indicates some less-than-respectable, flat-out sinister motives among people like Ziv.  After all, if they believe so strongly in the virtues of miscegenation, why do they advocate it for others-- yet resist it for themselves?  Obviously, they don’t actually believe in it deep-down, they it as a tool to damage their perceived enemies in the West.

I’ll conclude by agreeing that in the USA and UK, intermarriage has done nothing to solve race relations, only made them even more strained.  Blacks and Whites don’t intermarry nearly as much Ziv fantasizes, but it does happen, especially in the UK-- which is dealing with nothing less than a demographic crisis made much worse by the steady decline in its White population.  The mixed kids, however, almost always identify as “Blacks,” get affirmative action benefits as Blacks, and often grow up hating Whites, including their own White family members. 

All of us, I’m sure, remember the White-Black mulatto Halle Berry after her Academy Award, clearly identifying as Black and talking up Black causes-- despite the fact that her alcoholic Black father abused her White mother and abandoned them both, while her White mother patiently worked multiple jobs with grueling long hours while raising her daughter at home.  In the UK, where the intermarriage of Black men and White women truly is ridiculously high, the mulatto children tend to grow up rootless, frustrated, angry and confused about their own identity, though more often than not they identify as Black.  Moreover, British mulattos have the highest rate of any group of converting to Islam, higher even than the Black Jamaicans and other Caribbeans (who also convert at a high rate), and this is in part because Islam is seen as a form of rebellion against the British White ruling class that they hate so much.

IOW, Britain is destroying itself from the inside, and has fallen utterly for the miscegenation angle.  This is why so many White Britons these days are emigrating permanently to Continental European countries with a stronger sense of their own White culture.  The USA hasn’t gone quite as far in the same direction, but it plagues us here as well.  The most bitter opponents of race-mixing, in case you haven’t noticed, are Black women, who are deprived of capable Black husbands.  Moreover, Black-White intermarriage only exacerbates the affirmative action crisis which is tearing the nation apart.  Not a few Americans I know who’ve emigrated to the Europe Continent, like their British emigre counterparts, say they did so because they hate the idea of paying their taxes and their labor to a regime that hates them so much and wants to whittle away at their ethnic identity. 

The only sort-of mixed-race marriages that sort-of work in the US are those between Whites and East Asians, probably in part because the East Asians have a culture that has equalled and even surpassed European civilization for a good portion of the last millennium.  Still, even here such marriages often face big problems-- the differences in cultures, national identification, identity and basic logistics are often very, very hard on such White-Asian couples and their kids.  While the idiotic US divorce laws have done severe damage to hard-working and capable Whites in general and made the institution a costly and dangerous risk for our best and most productive among the White ethnicity, still, White-White marriages overall tend to produce the healthiest and most accomplished offspring. 

In conclusion, Ziv is full of crap.  He’s a hypocrite posing as a humanitarian, like someone else who posted, who in fact is a nationalist trying to drive another stake into the heart of White European civilization-- which he and his compatriots are in part succeeding in doing in Britain, the US and Australia.  I’m afraid that it’s too late to reverse the tide in the US and Britain in particular.

Posted by J Richards on October 16, 2006, 01:24 AM | #

To the bloggers,

Those of you holding back on posting because you want my entry to be on top for a while, please don’t.  I have made my entry sticky and left a note on top that for a while, newer entries will be posted below mine.

---------------------

To the readers,

Amazon.com does not allow links in reviews; its software automatically deletes a line if it encounters http or www, but it will probably not delete a link posted as follows:

majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/alon_ziv_on_race_mixing/

Those of you who want to read Ziv’s book but do not wish Ziv to benefit from royalties, go to a bookstore and read it.  For instance, I didn’t purchase Ziv’s book; I read it at Barnes and Noble.  Anyway, Ziv’s book is cheap.  I may post a review at the website of Barnes and Noble.

Posted by Northerner on October 16, 2006, 02:46 AM | #

Alon Ziv:

I appreciate you cautioning your friends against anti-Semitic comments, though the fact that such a warning is necessary speaks volumes about this forum. ... Since you are a member of a website that advocates the preservation of a single race I’m not surprised that you don’t agree with my thesis.

J. Richards appears to have given your book a more than fair hearing. He argues in good faith, and that good faith has not been returned. The fact that you preface your reply the way you do tells me you’re less than confident you can defend your arguments on their merits.

Since you question Richards’ ability to evaluate evidence impartially, I’ll add my voice to those asking where you stand on the preservation of Jews and why you aren’t preaching the loudest to the inbred minority most in need of it. Let Jews show us the way, by example this time. When Israel is a populated wholly by a race of Jewish-San-Hmong-Palestinian supermen, get back to us.

From your website:

One of my goals in writing Breeding Between the Lines was to start a dialog at the intersection of race and biology. My hope was to use this site as a forum for that dialog. Unfortunately, in the few days that this site has been online I have already been flooded with hateful email. I fear that any public forum would be quickly taken over by racists. To avoid this I have set up this page as a space for questions and answers.

Racists are so evil their concerns hold no weight? You’re not interested in showing racists the error of their ways in time for the upcoming, inevitable “mixed-race explosion”? Or you’re only interested in encouraging a “dialog” with those already susceptible to your message, and those damn racists would only get in the way by raising arguments you have no answer to?

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on October 16, 2006, 03:14 AM | #

Rawlinson=Wow,I really raised your ire-but effective in seperating the sheep from the goats,and you definitely require a shearing.Your verbal premises are scatter-shot-going in all directions while postulating no aim point-Just WHAT are your perceptions on world affairs,and how do you perceive we mitigate the ME cluster-fuck without Isreal in our pocket. No-I will not join hands with you and sing KOMBAYA!Are you from Colimbia,Harvard,Chapel Hill,MS,or Berkley?Dick-heads like me want to know-or did your daddy leave you $10 million,and I will remain among “the great unwashed” LOl{and no semper fi for you]

Posted by Northerner on October 16, 2006, 03:25 AM | #

J. Richards’ glowing assessment of Razib (actual name removed- Ed.) Khan’s worth is now the number one hit for searches on “razib khan” at Google.

I suspect MR users can make this review the number one hit for “Alon Ziv”, and put it in the top 5 for “Breeding Between the Lines”. Amazon is always going to be the top hit for the book title, but if this review makes the first 5 or 10 hits on Google, it is likely to come to the attention of critically-minded readers or potential readers, who can take note of Ziv’s failure to respond to substantive criticisms of his book.

Rnl:

Can’t believe you didn’t mention Ziv’s favorite movie is “Annie Hall”.

More for Ziv:

How do you reconcile your claims that:

(1) You are not promoting interbreeding, merely reporting on an “interesting”, inevitable phenomenon.

(2) “As a country we need to be reminded that our diversity is a gift. ... And the real power of that gift is seen, not when it is separated and compartmentalized, but when it’s brought together. America is finally starting to fulfill its destiny as The Melting Pot; maybe someone should tell Mark Burnett.”

Further, if it’s acceptable to talk about the alleged “superiority” of mixed-race people, how would you react to a book asserting the superiority of whites over blacks in intelligence (the white-black IQ gap is much better established than many of the alleged advantages interbreeding you tout).

Since you argue for an intelligence advantage in white-Japanese hybrids, do you discuss the intelligence deficit for white-black hybrids (relative to whites)? If not, why not? Whites should be concerned with “superior intelligence” where it might induce them to interbreed, but not where it might make them think twice?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 16, 2006, 03:34 AM | #

“Unfortunately, in the few days that this site has been online I have already been flooded with hateful email.” (—from Prof. Ziv’s web-site)

Right, when you’re telling Euros they have to go out of existence by marrying and having children with non-whites instead of with whites it can get some of them pretty steamed and they might just stop by your web-site and tell you what they think of you.  Isn’t this clear?  Why the passive-aggressive pretense of not comprehending this reaction on their part? 

I call on you, Professor, to tell Jews specifically, diaspora Jews and Israeli Jews, they have to marry and have children only with Nigerian Negroes, Mexicans, Chinamen, and Moslem Moroccans.  Not whites in general but Jews specifically.  They should not marry and reproduce among themselves.  Tell them that.

I’m waiting.

We’re all waiting.

Hello? ...

Anyone there? ...

Hellooooooo??? ...

...

Boy, suddenly you can hear a pin drop around here ...

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on October 16, 2006, 03:36 AM | #

Rawilson-I just re-read your post for a third time,and offer an abject apology.Iwish I could retract my previous post to you,but’,as you know,the written word cannot be retracted.I was just so incensed at the anti-Semite aspect,that I failed to reconize the underlying truths you esposed,and the basic veracity of your overall position. Again,sir-My Apologies,and Semper FI!

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on October 16, 2006, 03:46 AM | #

Fred S-You have once again dropped a turd in the punchbowl-let’s see who takes the first drink.LOL,CLASSIC!

Posted by J Richards on October 16, 2006, 03:57 AM | #

Northerner,

I removed Razib’s actual name from your comment; please do not post it.  He is the webmaster of a site that posts a lot of interesting but politically incorrect information, and he has a number of leftist haters that want to physically harm him, which we don’t want. 

In my first entry, I posted a link to him being featured at the leftist extremist group, onepeoplesproject’s website, but in retrospect realize that this was the wrong thing to do, for which I am sorry, and am glad that Guessedworker removed the link.

Posted by Northerner on October 16, 2006, 04:42 AM | #

J Richards:

I’ll respect your request, though I believe razib is in no physical danger due to the information being known.

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on October 16, 2006, 05:56 AM | #

Rawilson-after the fourth and fifth reading of your post;I rescind my apology,to a certain extent.A QUESTION- J ust who the hell are “Palestinians”,and what lands are theirs by heredity or common culture? Arabic {Muslim} cultures have been imposing their beliefs on White Europeans for seven centurys,and have no adversity to mayhem ,murder,rape ,beheadings,tribute,or suppression of other religions.These camel-fucking,pederast,honor-killing,bearded ragheads who wish nothing but ill for all not “blessed by Allah” should not be allowed in ANY White culture,let alone be allowed to immigrate.Deal with it mate-you got rag-heads,we got beaners.

Posted by Rawlinson on October 16, 2006, 06:16 AM | #

Oh Ziv, BTW-- I know this has been mentioned here in some form before, but your little “mass miscegenation experiment” already has an on-site laboratory.  It’s called “Brazil.” Perhaps nowhere else is intermarriage and blurring of racial/ethnic identity so encouraged, as in Brazil.  Now, Brazil has some appealing aspects, but a “vigorous nation” it ain’t.  Its poverty and crime rates are some of the worst in the Western Hemisphere and in the entire world.  Sao Paolo is such a violent place that it seems to be in a permanent state of war, between rival gangs and other types of factions.  Obviously, race-mixing in the capital of miscegenation has not had the successful result you seem to fantasize about.

Another thing you might find interesting Ziv, regarding ideals of beauty in Brazil.  Even though Brazil is the world capital of race-mixing, its ideal of beauty is very much, defined as White and European.  Brazil in fact is one of the few countries that has consistently required that its top fashion and swimsuit models be White and European-- practically every icon of beauty in Brazil is basically European-looking, often blonde.  Those who aren’t European are practically barred from the cover of magazines in Brazil.  I myself will admit that many of Brazil’s mixed-race and part-African women are quite gorgeous, with exotic features that stand out in many respects, but that’s not the point here-- the point is the standard of beauty *as Brazilians themselves define it*. 

And for the mixed-race Brazilians themselves, they define their most gorgeous women pretty much as European, in fact northern European.  Brazil’s top model is a goddess named Gisele Bundchen (who’s a standard of beauty no matter what angle you’re coming from-- http://heinars.photosite.com/~photos/tn/371_1024.ts1099046396651.jpg ).  It’s not only Brazil that obsesses over her, no less than the Rolling Stone declared her “the most beautiful girl in the world.” Even if you don’t know much about her biography, you can make a pretty good guess from her last name-- Gisele is German, and in fact her parents come from Germany.  Thus, the Brazilians themselves have embraced as their icon of beauty, a Teutonic beauty straight out of the German heartland. 

This should be telling you something, and above all it should tell you that even in the world’s most mixed-race society, it’s not natural or even “advantageous,” however you define it, for distinct ethnic groups to hybridize.  I’m not against individuals from different races meeting and marrying if love pushes them in that direction, but as a sort of generalized government-ordained policy to encourage, or a supposed “fad” to push in the culture (as MTV does for example), it’s an incredibly stupid and often even damaging idea.  It’s ruining Britain entirely.  In the UK, White women are inculcated with a deep-rooted hatred of their fellow Whites, with some of the lowest birth rates for Whites in all of Europe and among the highest Black-White rates of childbearing.  It’s a poorly-kept secret among the African and Jamaican immigrant communities that White British woman poot-tang is easily had, even for Blacks who are ugly and certifiable losers.  For example: http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006420583,00.html
that Eversson Banda guy had HIV and is just plain butt-ugly, but he managed to convince scores of naive, deluded British White women into sleeping with him, getting AIDS in the process themselves (and probably spreading it to a few British men, too).  This cult of White self-hatred and pro-miscegenation is literally killing Whites in Britain, it’s toxic and it’s combined with government policy that is taxing Britons to death to pay for the war in Iraq and other neo-globe-trotting foreign policies.  So Britain is slowly perishing, and White Britons leave the island in hopes of continuing some semblance of White Western culture elsewhere, on the Continent.  This is the price of miscegenation Alon, perhaps the reason you’re so keen in pushing it.

Posted by Rnl on October 16, 2006, 06:18 AM | #

Are you advocating eugenics?

Not at all. For one, Breeding Between the Lines is not an instruction manual. I encourage people to marry whomever they want. Secondly, eugenics historically argued for the exact opposite of interracial unions. Racist eugenicists were attempting to create some kind of “pure” race. Breeding Between the Lines shows why this type of institutionalized inbreeding is a very bad idea.

http://www.breedingbetweenthelines.com/questions.htm

Ziv’s “not at all” is false. He is, clearly, advocating a certain kind of eugenics. Interracial unions, he says, give you better children on average than monoracial unions. Mixed-race kids are likely to be smarter, more physically attractive, less malodorous, etc. He is not advocating institutionalized selective breeding, but he is advocating better breeding leading to better ("well-born") human results.

The eugenicists did not contend that within-race mating would invariably produce better White offspring. They knew that a smart White man and a smart White woman could produce a dumb White child, though they thought such a result would be rare. Their advice, on this elementary point, was formally no different from Alon Ziv’s. The eugenicists believed, inter alia, that Whites were wise to marry other Whites, and Alon Ziv believes we would be wise to marry non-Whites. Both pieces of advice constitute recipes for good children; the only material difference lies in the respective ingredients.

Ziv’s claim that he is not advocating any form of eugenics rests solely on the fact that “eugenics historically argued for the exact opposite of interracial unions.” In other words, the eugenicists were bad Whites ("racists"). Ziv is not a bad White. His recipe for optimal children is different from the eugenicists’ old recipe, and therefore (he says) he is not a eugenicist. That’s wrong.

If Ziv is correct in his analysis, mixed-race people will in the future form a stronger, smarter, more attractive, and more pleasant smelling breed of humans. They will on average be _better_ than deficient non-mixed Whites. In comparison with non-mixed Whites they will be a master race, able to jump higher and think faster and copulate more skillfully. They won’t be “pure,” but they will be superior. If you want superior kids, interracial marriage is your best option, and science, as interpreted by Alon Ziv, proves it.

Ziv’s evidence may be faulty and his political motives are certainly suspect. It’s important, however, to stress as well that he _is_ a eugenicist—perhaps not a good eugenicist, but a eugenicist nevertheless. As a eugenicist, an advocate of breeding well for optimal human results, he cannot legitimately invoke the tired clichés of anti-racism against those who propose a different recipe for genetic success.

***

Northerner wrote:

Can’t believe you didn’t mention Ziv’s favorite movie is “Annie Hall”.

I confess (or boast) that I’ve never seen it.

Posted by Rawlinson on October 16, 2006, 06:38 AM | #

Nick, you truly are a head-case and need professional help-- why don’t you bother reading at least one of these posts in full, then maybe you might have one small clue what I’m talking about.  It’s called basic reading comprehension skills.  I very much *do not* like Palestinians or any other Arabs being in Western countries-- their culture is not compatible with that which we have in the West, which would have been obvious to anyone who actually read my post, which you clearly have not.  My point is, they have their own native territories, and I’m fine with them staying on them.  A truce IOW-- they stay out of our lands, we stay out of theirs. 

As should have also been clear from my post, overall I also admire the Jewish people and their own achievements, but I and many others seriously dislike the tendency of a significant fraction of Jewish tribalists in the USA and other Western countries to encourage things like miscegenation, and to make it socially unacceptable for Whites in our own countries to self-associate and stand up for our own kind.  Obviously as I said, many Gentiles have participated in this stupidity, but a significant number of the most radical people pushing affirmative action, race-mixing and the denial of Whites’ right to self-associate, has been coming from Jewish intellectuals here who-- very clearly-- wish to deny European-extracted North Americans the same rights that they reserve for themselves in Israel.  If they want to be tribalist in such a way, that’s fine for them-- in Israel, not here. 

As for your incendiary comments about the Palestinian people-- the whole sheep fscking, pederasty stuff-- as I said, Nick, you SERIOUSLY need professional help.  You sound like a guy projecting your own fantasies on others.  Furthermore, that sort of derision of such a broad class of people is juvenile and entirely inappropriate for a forum of this nature, where we actually try to debate on some intellectual level.

In case you didn’t notice, none of us here have engaged in such idiot stereotyping of the Jewish people, nor have we lambasted them as a whole-- we, instead, lambaste the specific hypocrisy of a certain powerful cohort among their members.  Overall, I suspect that I and most others here respect their achievements, even if we react angrily against the way so many have undermined basic elements of the ethnicity and culture of rival “tribes.” You, OTOH, arrogantly and stupidly cast grade-school gross-out accusations at the Palestinian people.  (And yes, they are a people Nick-- any such “self-identification” of people is arbitrary, “British” or “Italian” or “Australian” is just as arbitrary as “Palestinian,” but when such a collective mass of people identify themselves as such, that means the identification is real.)

I don’t like the means that many Palestinians have used to fight, suicide-bombing cafes with Israeli teenagers in Tel Aviv is reprehensible and not winning them any sympathy.  OTOH, I can see how the Palestinian people as a whole would be pissed about what happened in 1967 in particular-- they were basically ethnically cleansed from their homes and colonized in their own lands, despite having actually been a relatively civilized, urbane, cultured people in the region.  I certainly have NO RESPECT for what the Israelis just did in Lebanon, killing thousands of peace-loving, civilized Lebanese Arabs (many of them Christian) in response to their own military’s blunder allowing their soldiers to be captured on the Lebanese border. 

I actually DO believe that the Jewish peoples of the world have a right to their own state, and (perhaps a shock to you) I actually believe that Israel has a right to exist and flourish, including the 1948 borders and even a few of the underpopulated territories gained in 1967, which the Israelis developed.  However, quite a few within Israel have plans for a “Greater East-West Israel” that is nothing less than mass ethnic cleansing of Palestinians-- using American tax dollars and weapons.  Sorry, but I suspect that 90+% of Americans don’t want their tax dollars to be used to support an intra-Semitic tribal war in the Mideast that only drags us in along with it. 

You see Nick, the views of all of us here on this board are quite complex and we in general respect the Jewish people and wish them well, especially within their homeland of Israel but in general as well.  But we all have in common, a strong intention to protect and further our own ethnic civilization as White Europeans, as-- speaking objectively-- one of the world’s great civilizations bar none, with exponents like Pasteur, Bach, Beethoven, Newton, Galileo, Heisenberg, Kant, Bocaccio, Chaucer and Cervantes to our credit, among many others.  We are vigorous in our defense of our own civilization, just as Jewish people are (rightfully) vigorous in defense of their own, and we strongly criticize those, of any ethnicity, who commit acts and push cultural norms so obviously ruinous and damaging to our very integrity.  That’s called nuance, Nick, and that’s the heart of this discussion.

Posted by Al Ross on October 16, 2006, 08:10 AM | #

Rawlinson is, of course, right to mention Brazil as an example of the practical application of Ziv’s anti-White pipedream.However, as I pointed out in a post at Friedrich Braun’s excellent Civic Platform blog, not all of Brazil is languishing in miscegenation-engendered lassitude. The state of Santa Catarina is 92% White and, as expected, boasts both the highest per capita income and the lowest crime rate.

Posted by Zimmerman on October 16, 2006, 09:49 AM | #

Great stuff Rawlinson, your point of Brazil idolising a pure German as the ideal beauty blows Ziv right out of the water.

But do you guys honestly think Ziv is gonna be truthful on these forums? You think he’s gonna say, “yeah guys, you got me. I really have a deep hatred for Europeans, and even if my book results in only a few hundred white woman shacking up with Negroes, then I have helped the cause.” Its like Survivor, he’s playing the game. He’s not gonna take off his game face.

To see a beauty like Heidi Klum smiling and happy with her ugly reject child, man that is sad and depressing on a profound level. I saw those pictures last night and have been feeling ill all day today.

Posted by John Thomas on October 16, 2006, 12:10 PM | #

Apart from the ‘Seal’/Heidi Klum progenyclearly displaying a dsygenic, savage facial countenance, another well publicised example can be seen in the child of the well-known Britiish shameless whore (for that is what she is) ‘Jordan’ and the Trinidadian soccer-player Dwight Yorke.
The child was born blind with mental defiency, symptoms f the disharmonious, dsygenic assortment of the two sets of radically differing genes can be clearly read on the child’s face.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 16, 2006, 12:46 PM | #

Alon Ziv is a foot soldier in a tribal war Jews are waging against Euros, and his “book” is a weapon in that war.  That’s it.  That’s all that’s going on.  Never in a billion years would he marry a Bantu woman, wish his children to marry Bantus, or advocate intermarriage and procreation with Bantus for Israel’s Jewish population.  He tries to wiggle out of being scrutinized by saying his recommendations are intended for all people.  Since he knows that Jews are, by and large, immune to such recommendations and Euros, by and large, clearly aren’t he’s being not just dishonest but dishonest in an especially slimy, nauseating way.  There’s no science going on here.  There’s tribal war.  Not science.

I agree with the commenter who said not long ago at this site there should be an attempt to prosecute professional genocide advocates like Prof. Ziv under Nuremberg-type charges:  isn’t it true that some, such as the theoretician Alfred Rosenberg, were condemned at Nuremberg not for killing anyone but for advocating genocide in direct or indirect language?  Rosenberg was hanged, if I’m not mistaken, for his writings which were considered to have advanced the cause of genocide.  Well, professional genocide advocates like this Prof. Ziv also advance the cause of genocide through their writings.  Let them also face juridical penalties:  wasn’t the precedent set at Nuremberg?

Posted by MaliceZiv on October 16, 2006, 01:06 PM | #

Fred:

“Let them also face juridical penalties:  wasn’t the precedent set at Nuremberg?”

You are certainly correct and your reasoning is sound.  Unfortunately, the current global establishment supports Ziv’s acts of aggression and wishes for the same outcome.  Therefore, Ziv is safe from indictment under the present international regime.

We can hope that in some point in the future, if Ziv is unsuccessful and western nations regain control over their destinies, legally convened tribunals will indict him for incitement to genocide.

However, if this fantasy utopia comes to pass in Ziv’s lifetime, we can assume that he will be, like Solomon Morel, safe in Israel, and, like Morel, attempts at extradition will be met with a stony refusal.

In many cases Justice is, in fact, not only blind, but deaf and dumb as well.

Posted by Al Ross on October 16, 2006, 03:28 PM | #

Ziv’s book seems to be of the ‘tribal war-cry’ category and this genre is best exemplified by Theodore Kaufman’s hateful book, ‘Germany Must Perish’. The reason Germany had to perish was because the indigenous people had the temerity to wish for a country of their own, and entertained hopes for an existence without the undermining presence of vicious racially alien predators and parasites.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 16, 2006, 04:21 PM | #

Al, I agree completely the two books are part and parcel of, fundamentally, the exact same tribal warfare campaign.

Posted by Voice on October 16, 2006, 04:28 PM | #

My only question for US based MR contributors is when should we expect the PBS special?

Next spring would be lovely…

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 16, 2006, 04:54 PM | #

LOLOL@Voice! Yes, this crowd and PBS certainly work hand-in-glove coördinating their efforts, don’t they ...  I’d say some time next spring sounds about right for the coming out and hyping of the inevitable PBS special ...  I’ll be sure not to miss it ... hey no kidding, I’m serious ... I’m marking my calendar right now ... right this minute in fact ... Sure ... Absolutely ... Without fail ............ Definitely ..............................

Posted by John Thomas on October 17, 2006, 11:59 AM | #

‘Seal’ has that particular cast of countenance that on a black man, would make one think twice about opening the front door to him.
In his facial and bodily features can be read aggression, ruthlessness, brutality and deceitfulness, it is no surprise to note that ‘Seal’ before he made it in the ‘pop industry’ had a string of criminal convictions, including an association with prostitution.The dark black marks on his face are, I believe, the result of an acid attack on him.
I would not be at all surprised to learn that ‘Seal’ is descended from the Benin people, an African tribe noted for extreme brutality and ferocity.

Posted by Guessedworker on October 17, 2006, 12:06 PM | #

His real name is Henry Olusegun Olumide Adeola Samuel.  He is descended from Adebisi Samuel, a Nigerian immigrant, and Francis Samuel, an Afro-Brazilian immigant.  Samuel must be a common name in Christian West Africa.

Posted by Englander on October 17, 2006, 04:00 PM | #

I have heard different rumours about the marks on Seal’s face, but the truth is that they’re scars from lupus which he had as a child.

Are the comments about his criminal past based on any sound information? He might look tough but some of the biographical information I have read on him points to him being a well-functioning member of society. Apparently he has a degree in architecture and has worked as an electrical engineer. Doesn’t sound like something your average negro criminal is capable of.
His music is also very pleasant.

I don’t like seeing him with Heidi but he doesn’t seem to be as bad as he looks.

Posted by joker on October 17, 2006, 07:41 PM | #

According to A Ludovici
“It is not a hundred years since the important truth gradually began to emerge — and ninety-nine and nine-tenths per cent of educated people still do not know it — that physical traits, organs, and parts of organs, bones and parts of bones, endocrine glands, body cells and blood cells, may be inherited independently from either parent; so that if parents are disparate, as most parents are today, their child or children are mosaics of odd parts, a confusion of more or less badly adjusted, badly proportioned, badly balanced, bodily components, and cannot, except by a fluke, form a harmonious whole.”

Need I say more?

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on October 17, 2006, 09:11 PM | #

Rawilson-I see once more I have been taken to the woodshed by a P iled H igh and D eep.However,I still don’t have an answer as to just who are “Palestinians”? Isrealis have far more right to that geography than any diverse collection of nomadic rag-heads whose base language encompasses some 60+ dialects,and never so much as PLANTED a fig tree.Yes,I am crude,rude,and show inadequate respect for my intellectual “bettors”,but have paid my dues over 67 years,never had to go to jail or counseling,served my country,worked in more countries than most can name,survived three bouts with cancer,and can still piss of the Pope.Because my mind-set is obviously different than yours, maybe you would be willing to send me,say $25,000,so I can get your proscribed “help”? Fragile egos are as bad as wasted minds-learn to deal with the other 90% of the world!And let me know when you take your first combat wound.P.S. ,you may live to piss on my grave,but I’ll be there to welcome you-Cheers!

Posted by J Richards on October 17, 2006, 11:47 PM | #

Rawlinson,

It is true that white beauty occupies the top rung in Brazil, but Gisele Bundchen is a bad example.  Fashion models generally do not cater to public tastes, and, with few exceptions, are best not mentioned if one is to cite examples of beautiful women.  Gisele had to have a nose job because her nose looked bad.  She also got breast implants to improve upon her flat-chested look.  She has masculine and rugged facial features and does not have a feminine physique.

If you wanted a cite an example of white Brazilian beauty, Luciana Vendramini is a good example; see also this, this, this and this. 

Regarding your example of black HIV-positive fiend Everson Banda who infected several women with HIV, published photos of his white lovers reveal them to be overweight/obese; one woman was even described as having lost her virginity to Banda, i.e., the woman was probably unattractive and did not interest white men.  It is not white British women that are easy for black men, but the obese and unattractive ones that are.  Black men generally tend to have the lowest standards when it comes to women, and some have virtually no standards, which is not difficult to understand given the looks of black women.  Also consider that unattractive low IQ women from a low socioeconomic background would be making a better reproductive choice by breeding with criminal-type men given that they would generally not be able to produce sons who would have what it takes to be successful in life via an education or talent.  Therefore, letting in blacks into Western nations is to have an increase in mulatto offspring, mostly as a result of black men pairing with unattractive and low status white women.

Posted by Michael Dupont on October 19, 2006, 03:13 AM | #

“Rosenberg was hanged, if I’m not mistaken, for his writings which were considered to have advanced the cause of genocide.”

I think you mean Julius Streicher. And he never advocated killing Jews in his newspaper.

Posted by Third Root of Unity on October 19, 2006, 06:32 AM | #

For those of you interested in brazilian girls I would recommend Luize Altenhofen.

Posted by John Thomas on October 19, 2006, 12:04 PM | #

Englander,
Don’t believe those ‘puff-pieces’ and potted biographies issued by the PR departments of record companies, to say that they ‘embroider the truth’ is an understatement.

Posted by wjg on October 20, 2006, 11:24 PM | #

This whole thread just reminds me just why Ziv’s tribe (hopefully that doesn’t violate Mr. Richard’s admonition to not scare away the good Rabbi) treats us with such contempt.  They propose another strategy for our destruction - in as obvious a fashion as is possible this side of Theodore Kaufman - and we respond like this is a Toast Master’s meeting.

Un-f’ing-believable.

Then again we might “prove” by this discussion that maybe, just maybe, the White Race has a legitimate claim to survival.  Of course even entering in the discussion at all puts us in the same effeminate defensive posture conservatives are now famous for.

Posted by JB on October 21, 2006, 03:53 AM | #

Alon Ziv:

Our diversity is a gift, and to keep ourselves separated and compartmentalized would be to waste that gift.

Diversity is good so… let’s destroy it.

That’s the kind of dumb nonsense I’d expect from some “anti-racist” street thug in the ARA, not from an author who has a few university degrees but then again anti-white propagandists have no serious arguments anyway.

Fred Scrooby:

I call on you, Professor, to tell Jews specifically, diaspora Jews and Israeli Jews, they have to marry and have children only with Nigerian Negroes, Mexicans, Chinamen, and Moslem Moroccans.

not to forget australian aboriginals

abori1.jpg

Posted by Rnl on October 21, 2006, 04:22 PM | #

Alon Ziv wrote:

Since you [i.e. Richards] are a member of a website that advocates the preservation of a single race I’m not surprised that you don’t agree with my thesis.

This is a telling remark, as JJR Apologist pointed out earlier.

Intention is important in both law and ethics. Ziv himself identifies two opposing positions on the White Question. One side favors White preservation and the other side doesn’t. He knows that he is on the anti-preservation side of this debate, so he is not surprised that preservationists disagree with the anti-preservation thesis proposed in his book. His anti-preservationism is conscious. He is not naively investigating the effects of miscegenation, unaware of miscegenation’s real-world consequences in an era of mass immigration. He knows the consequences and expects criticism from Whites who want their people to survive.

***

[The execution of the Romanovs] symbolized the end of centuries of Russian history, so that it can be compared only to the execution of Charles I in England or Louis XVI in France. It would seem that representatives of an insignificant ethnic minority should keep as far as possible from this painful action, which would reverberate in all history. Yet what names do we meet? The execution was personally overseen by Yakov Yurovsky who shot the Tsar; the president of the local Soviet was Beloborodov (Vaisbart); the person responsible for the general administration in Ekaterinburg was Shaya Goloshchekin. To round out the picture, on the wall of the room where the execution took place was a distich from a poem by Heine (written in German) about King Balthazar, who offended Jehovah and was killed for the offense.

http://library.flawlesslogic.com/tsar_1.htm

The author of the preceding paragraph is the mathematician Igor Shafarevich. If the Russian Tsar and his Russian family were to be murdered, Shafarevich argues, they should have been murdered by other Russians. Jews should have kept as far as possible from this terrible event in Russian history, which would have such profound repercussions for the Russian people. Yet they didn’t.

The principle is relevant here. If Whites are to breed and race-replace ourselves out of existence, we should do it of our own accord, without any helpful advice and assistance from Jews. Our coming non-existence, if it is indeed coming, is _our_ decision, not theirs. Someone named Alon Ziv should keep as far as possible from the question, and he shouldn’t write a book promoting the alleged benefits of White self-annihilation. If there are real benefits, we should discover them ourselves.

Any Jew who violates this principle shouldn’t be surprised if he gets some verbal anti-Semitism in return. No one begrudges Ziv his right to evaluate candy bars or review moronic movies. But on the subject of our survival, he should keep quiet.

Posted by wjg on October 21, 2006, 05:00 PM | #

RNL,

Excellent comments but it seems that many at MR think this Ziv should be debated.  The only debate should be where in the pantheon of Jewish scheming this latest effort falls.  Whenever we see a member of the master race in the future and he is not in the arms of some hominid as diverse as a congoid or australoid - with several little mongrels in tow - we need to remind them of their hypocrisy.

Everything Ziv says needs to be applied to his tribe and only his tribe.  Let’s see if these liars conform.

Posted by Guessedworker on October 21, 2006, 05:54 PM | #

Rnl,

Brilliant.  But you are forgetting Chutzpah.

Posted by Daedalus on October 22, 2006, 12:15 AM | #

Can’t say I have ever been impressed by the “dynamism” of the Dominican Republic.

Posted by Rnl on October 22, 2006, 05:29 AM | #

wjg wrote:

The only debate should be where in the pantheon of Jewish scheming this latest effort falls.

But not everyone agrees that there is a “pantheon of Jewish scheming” (nice phrase, by the way), and many sincere European nationalists, like Faye, believe the issue should be ignored. They would not be interested in any discussion of the racial motives that undoubtedly inspired Ziv’s book. Many of the IQ racialists are the same. We must accept that.

Issues have to be addressed on different levels and to different audiences. Personally I wouldn’t care if miscegenation really could produce a superior breed of human, as Ziv claims. But since nonracialist Whites might care, it’s good to know that Ziv’s factual case—if evaluated dispassionately, without overt reference to his motives—turns out to be false.

Posted by Elan Viz on October 23, 2006, 01:02 PM | #

What about Mr. Obama of Illinois?  He is a perfect example of the theory.  He is far superior to any unmixed politician; in his first term as senator, he is a legitimate Presidential candidate!  He was talked about as a Presidential contender even before getting elected to office! 

Look, his mixed background gives him all the advantages.  Every time a white woman looks at him, or hears his voice, she goes into immediate orgasm.  Here, Obama is far superior even to the other mixed race sex symbol, Benjamin Bratt.  Confronted with Obama’s superior masculine charisma and personal force, white men collapse into groveling, feminine submission.  It is therefore only natural that this superior specimen of mixed race humanity be the future leader of the United States, and that unmixed whites pay homage to him.

Now, the inadequate, feeble white men here will attempt to argue that Obama’s political rise is the product of an alien establishment that worships people of color and actively promotes miscegenation.  You will point to the fawning, Soviet-style monopolized coverage of Obama, which treat him as the flawless second coming of Christ, rivaled only by the great and superior Tiger Woods.  In your desperation, you will point out that the highly ethnically inbred CONSERVATIVE political pundit David Brooks has recently editorialized “Run Obama Run”, proving that both wings of America’s one party system have bought into the totalitarian propaganda machine of inculcating into a brainwashed America that Obama is the “New American Man.” You will therefore argue, as your unsatisfied women swoon to the tone and timbre of Obama’s richly deep masculine mixed race voice, that Obama’s political rise is an artificial construct of an utterly corrupt system that wishes to make a biracial “African-American” – with no real credentials of any kind – into the showpiece of the mongrelized nation that they envision for your future.

To which I say: no.  All these facts are merely more evidence of Obama’s obvious physical superiority.  The mass media have no agenda; they are the honest purveyors of unvarnished truth.  If they have elevated Obama, it is merely because they realize that his multiracialism makes him a demigod, a veritable Titan towering over you mere unmixed and pathetic, pale mortals.  That a “conservative” like Brooks fawns over, and promotes, a far-left liberal Democrat has nothing to do with Brooks’ own ethnicity and agenda; it is merely that the honest and upstanding Brooks has succumbed to Obama’s superior physical presence and masculine power.  There is no conspiracy to elevate a mediocrity to the highest levels merely because the establishment approves of his ancestry and what his represents.  No, that is your jealousy talking.

Yes, indeed, come election day, 2008, you all, with heads bowed low in humble submission, will join your eager women in casting your vote for the next President of the USA – Superman Obama!

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 23, 2006, 01:30 PM | #

Brilliant, Elan Viz!  I was going to post something here or at The Civic Platform making exactly the points you make — that Obama is a one-hundred-percent media-created, media-driven phenomenon being pushed and hyped from the top by the usual media-manipulating suspects — but I was going to say it straightforwardly.  Your choice of satire for getting the point across was much better.  Good comment!

Posted by Bo Sears on October 23, 2006, 04:04 PM | #

When US Senator Barack Obama announced on an American TV Sunday morning talk show yesterday that he was considering running for the presidency in 2008, he sealed his fate.

Everything he does now will be judged in light of that and, I assure you, the Clintonistas well know how to deal with first term US Senators who display such ambition too soon. Without executive experience and with only two years’ national senatorial experience, Obama will be cut down to size so quickly it’ll make heads spin.

It shows how bright he is not to realize that the media excitement was about his announcement, not about the wonders of an Obama presidency. He just gave up 12 months of free publicity for 30 minutes of national TV yesterday.

Senators Biden, Levin, and Clinton are not impressed with this youngster, and he will gradually be edged out. All he really had going for him was an excellent speech at the national Democratic convention two years ago. He’s authored no substantial federal legislation, uncovered no national scandal, and carried out no major oversight investigation.

He’ll be gone politically by the end of 2007, never to return, unless he adopts the Harold Stassen tactic.

He spoke much too soon yesterday.

++++++++++

On a related note, there is something strange about Senator Obama and that is his mother’s story. Obama is great on bragging up his father (a Kenyan economist who promptly abandoned his mother when Obama was born), but he is very silent on his mother. She’s just a “white woman.” It’s a little odd that he maintains silence about his mother’s national origins, ethnicity, regional origins, and ancestral roots, while puffing his father’s roots.

We always get suspicious when we see such an obvious discrepancy. We would enjoy hearing from anyone with information on his mother. As a matter of fact, it appears that it was her parents who reared, housed, and fed Obama, but there is a good deal of mystery about his childhood for one so prominent. He’s apparently never thanked his grandparents for caring for him while bragging up his father who abandoned him. Kind of the Halle Berry story.

++++++++++

In a way, he is the ideological opposite of Tiger Woods who boasts all his ancestors. Obama believes in the “one drop” rule and disclosed that in his public discourse with Bishop Tutu. I’m not sure how meaningful that is to this web site, but it is a huge difference in attitude in America.

Posted by rustymason on October 23, 2006, 04:27 PM | #

“We would enjoy hearing from anyone with information on his mother.”

We know one thing for sure: she wasn’t very smart.

Posted by rustymason on October 23, 2006, 04:37 PM | #

“This whole thread just reminds me just why Ziv’s tribe (hopefully that doesn’t violate Mr. Richard’s admonition to not scare away the good Rabbi) treats us with such contempt.  They propose another strategy for our destruction - in as obvious a fashion as is possible this side of Theodore Kaufman - and we respond like this is a Toast Master’s meeting.  Un-f’ing-believable.”

It astrounds me, also.  Overall, we are too polite—way too polite.  Everywhere one looks, the intellectual Whites distance themselves from the mainstream and blue-collar Whites.  Yet, most of these intellectuals perceive themselves to be “radical rightests.” Un-f’ing-believable.

Posted by Guessedworker on October 23, 2006, 04:41 PM | #

Wikipedia’s entry on Obama says:-

Obama writes in Dreams from My Father that one of his mother’s Kentucky ancestors “was rumored to have been a second cousin of Jefferson Davis”. This statement, itself neither proven nor disproven by genealogical investigation

That investigation into Shirley Ann Dunham’s background would appear to be this by one William Addams Reitwiesner.

As for her personality, one may judge from her marital choices that this was an unusual lady.  Here’s a story Obama told in Dreams of my Father, about a time she insisted on him and, apparently, a half-sister named Maya accompanying her to see the film Black Orpheus:-

About halfway through the movie, I decided that I’d seen enough,and turned to my mother to see if she might be ready to go. But her face, lit by the blue glow of the screen, was set in a wistful gaze. At that moment, I felt as if I were being given a window into her heart, the unreflective heart of her youth. I suddenly realized that the depiction of childlike blacks I was now seeing on the screen, the reverse image of Conrad’s dark savages, was what my mother had carried with her to Hawaii all those years before, a reflection of the simple fantasies that had been forbidden to a white, middle-class girl from Kansas, the promise of another life: warm, sensual, exotic, different.

Cruel to speak ill of the dead, I know.  But one wonders whether the reason why Obama speaks so little of ObamaMa is because she was mentally ill.

Posted by rustymason on October 23, 2006, 04:50 PM | #

The media and academia is controlled by the Jews—we will never gain respectability in the public mind, never.  In America, we will be a political minority in our lifetimes, guaranteed, in about 20 years.  Instead of wasting our time trying to fine-tune the latest piece of shite from the Chosen Ones, we should be formulating strategies on how to survive.

Posted by Wunderbar on October 23, 2006, 08:02 PM | #

Are there no rich whites with WN sympathies who can start buying media companies? That is the best strategy. Think how much easier it would be with the mass media on our side. Or, second strategy would be creating online video media company. Its too late for the older generation, but aiming at under 30’s, who will in 10 yrs time will be in policy-forming job positions.

Another thing I was wondering, are there perhaps more of the Chosen than we realise. I mean they could have European surnames and wed ever know. There could be alot more of them working in government and media than we realise.

Posted by rustymason on October 23, 2006, 09:39 PM | #

Controlling the media is important for the Jews because the media controls culture which in turn controls politics.  It even has a strong influence on religion. 

But ask Ted Turner, Mel Gibson, and Thomas Edison what it’s like dealing with Jews over media properties—either one fights to the death or one will lose.  No one with any money is going to risk taking up the White cause now, I don’t think.  They all are safe in their walled villages or in die Schweiz.  Maybe a White Knight will emerge to fight for us but it would be foolish to hope for it.  More intellectual energy across the Internet and the university systems should be planning for what to do when the inevitable happens.

Posted by allotmentkeeper on October 23, 2006, 11:02 PM | #

rustymason - one ‘rich white with WN sympathies’ who has used his capital and influence to start media companies is William Regnery II of The Occidental Quarterly and The National Policy Institute, but afaik he’s about th only one.

--

I think it would be worthwhile posting a few book titles for people doubtful of the claim of Jewish ethnic animus and social-political influence to check out and see for themselves. What can seem a settled and old issue for some is a baffling contradiction to everything they’ve ever been told for some others.

I think first of Kevin Macdonald’s trilogy especially “Culture of Critique”; John Murray Cuddihy’s “The Ordeal of Civility” and “No Offense: Civil Religion and Protestant Taste”; Joel Kotkin’s “Tribes”; Ben Stein’s “The View from Sunset Boulevard”; Benjamin Ginsberg’s “Fatal Embrace”; Michael Medved’s “Hollywood vs. America”; Israel Shahak’s “Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel” and “Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years”; and Yuri Slezkine’s “Jewish Century"…

There’s also the website Jewish Tribal Review and their book “When Victims Rule"…

Perhaps others who are already converted can offer some more?

Posted by Bo Sears on October 23, 2006, 11:04 PM | #

More on Obama:

http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/23183/edition_id/462/format/html/displaystory.html

Posted by Andy on October 23, 2006, 11:13 PM | #

When US Senator Barack Obama announced on an American TV Sunday morning talk show yesterday that he was considering running for the presidency in 2008, he sealed his fate.

Everything he does now will be judged in light of that and, I assure you, the Clintonistas well know how to deal with first term US Senators who display such ambition too soon. Without executive experience and with only two years’ national senatorial experience, Obama will be cut down to size so quickly it’ll make heads spin.

It shows how bright he is not to realize that the media excitement was about his announcement, not about the wonders of an Obama presidency. He just gave up 12 months of free publicity for 30 minutes of national TV yesterday.

Senators Biden, Levin, and Clinton are not impressed with this youngster, and he will gradually be edged out. All he really had going for him was an excellent speech at the national Democratic convention two years ago. He’s authored no substantial federal legislation, uncovered no national scandal, and carried out no major oversight investigation.

He’ll be gone politically by the end of 2007, never to return, unless he adopts the Harold Stassen tactic.

He spoke much too soon yesterday.

You’re dead on, Bo----The Lizard Queen is going tear Obama limb from limb.

Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 >

Post a Comment:

Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Smileys

You must prefix http://anonym.to/? to gnxp.com links...
e.g., http://anonym.to/?http://www.gnxp.com/...

Copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting
it just in case the software loses it because the session time has been exceeded.
 @ 
<a>
Close Tags

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: (not needed for preview)

captcha shown here

Next entry: The Bear’s Lair: Is the world global?

Previous entry: New mouse may mean new hope for Europe.
image of the day

Existential Issues

Of note

Majority Radio

Recent Comments

FlemingLakeisha30 commented in entry 'A strange thing' on 03/19/10, 08:00 AM. (go) (view)

Drifter commented in entry 'Automatic for the Sheeple' on 03/19/10, 01:58 AM. (go) (view)

Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/19/10, 01:13 AM. (go) (view)

cladrastis commented in entry 'Automatic for the Sheeple' on 03/19/10, 12:59 AM. (go) (view)

Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/19/10, 12:42 AM. (go) (view)

Søren Renner commented in entry 'Automatic for the Sheeple' on 03/19/10, 12:25 AM. (go) (view)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Automatic for the Sheeple' on 03/18/10, 11:30 PM. (go) (view)

PF commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 11:08 PM. (go) (view)

Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 10:32 PM. (go) (view)

Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 08:02 PM. (go) (view)

PF commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 06:38 PM. (go) (view)

Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 02:19 PM. (go) (view)

PF commented in entry 'Romilly Jenkins: Truth and 'Ethnic' Truth' on 03/18/10, 04:10 AM. (go) (view)

PF commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 02:39 AM. (go) (view)

Wandrin commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/18/10, 02:17 AM. (go) (view)

Wandrin commented in entry 'Serious Crime - The Ethnic Dimension; Fact and Fantasy' on 03/18/10, 01:45 AM. (go) (view)

Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 01:24 AM. (go) (view)

Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 12:35 AM. (go) (view)

Borvo commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/17/10, 11:44 PM. (go) (view)

PF commented in entry 'Diasporal Hijinks: Christopher Hitchens and the Janjaweed' on 03/17/10, 10:31 PM. (go) (view)

Maximilio commented in entry 'Is Dr. David Duke, Ph.D., a Kosher Nazi?' on 03/17/10, 10:12 PM. (go) (view)

Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 08:01 PM. (go) (view)

PF commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 07:44 PM. (go) (view)

Robert Reis commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/17/10, 07:29 PM. (go) (view)

PF commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 07:27 PM. (go) (view)

Dan Dare commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 06:33 PM. (go) (view)

Dan Dare commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 05:44 PM. (go) (view)

Gorboduc commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 05:22 PM. (go) (view)

g commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 05:06 PM. (go) (view)

Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 03:16 PM. (go) (view)

Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 02:30 PM. (go) (view)

DRS commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 02:22 PM. (go) (view)

James Bowery commented in entry 'Serious Crime - The Ethnic Dimension; Fact and Fantasy' on 03/17/10, 02:00 PM. (go) (view)

Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 01:45 PM. (go) (view)

MsAnnThrope commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 03/17/10, 12:17 PM. (go) (view)

Recent Posts

General News

Science News

Science Categories

All Categories

The Writers

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Crime

General

Immigration

Islam

Jews

Nationalist Political Parties

New Right

Science

Whites in Africa