|
|
|
The Sociobiology of Conservatism and Liberalism by Dr K R Bolton Sociobiology was the ‘new’ scientific synthesis that emerged to challenge decades of liberal and Marxist control of the social and anthological sciences with the publication of Harvard biologist E O Wilson’s The New Synthesis: Sociobiology in 1975.[1] Sociobiology did not emerge from a vacuum. While the biological sciences that had spawned eugenics and the genetic basis of IQ for e.g.. had been largely supplanted and driven to the catacombs by the onslaught of a cabal of social anthologists with Left-wing political motivation, headed up in the USA by Franz Boas, with counterparts in the USSR headed by Lysenko, a significant number of geneticists remained to put up a rearguard action in the interests of science rather than dogma.[2] When Sociobiology mounted its challenge to what is popularly called Political Correctness it had a number of eminent partisans apart from E O Wilson, and one of the primary and most vocal of these has remained Richard Dawkins[3]. Prior to both, Robert Ardrey popularised sociobiological concepts in books such as The Territorial Imperative and The Hunting Hypothesis.[4] The sociobiologists were met not with reasoned argument or a dialectic that engaged all sides in a debate with the desire to reach the truth regardless, but with a barrage of hate, including mobs of Leftist students trying to silence the Sociobiologists by force.[5] While Political Correctness remains the dominant force in academe, and academics are often still forced from their positions or pilloried because of what amounts to a new heresy; the influence of Sociobiology as a general movement among scholars is such as to manifest across a variety of disciplines. Sociobiology, as the term succinctly implies, explains human social behaviour from the viewpoint of biological imperatives, more specifically of the imperative of an organism to ensure the best chances for the survival and perpetuation of its own genes. While Darwin is a starting point, Sociobiology states that genetic survival is one of group or social dynamics rather than hyper-individualism, or at least the imperative of the individual organism to perpetuate its genes or genes most akin to it, manifests in a social manner. Wilson called it “group survival.” Therefore, the individual’s genetic inheritance is best passed on through future generations not by means of the survival of the individual organism, but by the survival of the individual organism’s genes, which might – and often does – amount to the self-sacrifice of that organism. The survival of the individual organism is therefore not paramount, but subjected to a higher instinct. An organism will sacrifice its own life to ensure the survival of other organism’s whose genetic inheritance is most akin to it own. Such a paradigm runs counter to the doctrines of Marxism and to orthodox sociology and cultural anthropology, which discount the importance of genetics, or even any contribution of genetics, in determining human behaviour. These view humans as purely economic beings that might shape and be shaped by their environment at will. The ideologues of the Left, for decades immediately prior to World War II onwards the dominant factor in academe, argue that genetic doctrines are sociopathic in their outcomes, leading inevitably to racism and genocide. However, practise has demonstrates that it is economic and environmental determinism that has resulted in prolonged terror, on the assumption that by changing the environment human nature can be modified. Hence when the theory doesn’t accord with practise, the ideologue will resort to ever more authoritarian control mechanisms concluding in the most brutal expressions of tyranny, from the mass suicides of Jim Jones’ “paradise on earth”, to the Red Terror of the communists, and the Revolutionary Terror of France[6]. Given the fundamental genetic character of all living organisms, including the human, and therefore the genetic basis of social dynamics, it shouldn’t be surprising to find that ones’ political ideology is likely to be shaped by genetics rather than environment and social learning processes. Ideology is a reflection of how one looks at society and one’s place in it, and that conception implies, if one accepts the Sociobiological interpretations, one’s chances of perpetuating one’s genetic inheritance to future generations. It has been said that one is ‘born’ a certain way as far as disposition and outlook go. If personality for e.g. is genetically shaped, as twin studies indicate, along with dispositions, likes and dislikes etc., then it is not too far a leap to conclude that maybe one’s political identity is likewise genetically based. Nebraska study A recent study undertaken by a team at the University of Nebraska. Led by Douglas Oxley, has concluded that our political views are shaped by biology, and that also accounts for why one’s views seldom change. The disposition to be a liberal or a conservative, is as deep seated a biological trait as any of the other biological imperatives involving the survival of the organism. A report in the Dominion Post, citing The Times, states that biology could be an important factor in moulding liberal or conservative beliefs. The study indicates “a persons’ political leanings tend to correspond remarkably closely with physiological traits, indicating that nature, as well as nurture, could play a defining role.”[7]
Conservatism as protective mechanism vs Liberalism as atrophied instinct What one might tentatively conclude from these findings is that liberals and Leftists are an aberration of nature. They have not inherited basic defence and survival mechanisms that optimise the survival of their genes. The basic survival mechanisms are lacking, and this could well explain why liberals and Leftists generally consider it a matter of individual ‘choice’ regarding such issues as abortion, and “gay marriage” e.g., rather than as a matter for the entire social organism, reflecting its chances of genetic continuity. Conservatives, and often religious, attitudes that are ridiculed by the Liberal (and the Leftist generally) as “moralistic”, self-righteous, “old fashioned, etc. arise from an instinct no less vital to survival than that of any instinct among other organisms for the protection and survival of their offspring, and of their herd or flock.[10] In fact the Nebraska study included questions on abortion, gun control and the death penalty, questions that ultimately can be interpreted as matters of optimal genetic survival of the social organism. Likewise the way the conceptions of family and of nationhood, as collective biological survival mechanisms have little or no value to the liberal and the Leftist. Pacifism might also be another such reflection of an aberrant lack of basic genetic survival traits. Supportive attitudes toward Feminism and “gay rights” would be salient e.g.s of genetic self-abnegation, or a minimal regard for genetic perpetuation. The conservative, conversely, sees all these elements, the importance of family, of children, and an abhorrence of abortion, etc., as very much part of the process of ensuring one’s genetic survival. The genetic foundations of one’s political outlook are not surprisingly often poorly articulated by the individual conservative. The liberal (Leftist) by contrast has an overly rationalised response to his environment that is detached from instinct. The conservative ‘thinks’ instinctively. He feels he is right, but might not quite be able to express exactly why. It is what Dr Highfield has termed one’s “gut instincts”. The conservative is therefore the subject of liberal lampooning in the Archie Bunker, Alf Garnett mode. However, Sociobiology is increasingly showing in an expanding number of areas that Man is still the product of his genes; that the outlook of the Left is a rationalised expression of instinct in an atrophic state. That what is instinctively recognised as healthy and unhealthy in every other living organism is reversed in the human by dominant political ideologies maintained by people literally of atrophied instinct. In short: it might be said that the liberal is an aberration of nature, a revolt against his own self as an organism, an aberration bereft of the will to genetic perpetuity; that liberalism (and its variants of communism and feminism) literally means “death”. The conservative has an innate sense of the will to perpetuity that pervades all healthy organisms in nature. His “gut instincts” on issues such as immigration control, gun ownership, and opposition to abortion and to “gay rights”[11], etc. emerge from a genetic predisposition to recognise what is detrimental to the social organism. —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— [1] Wilson E O, The New Synthesis : Sociobiology, Harvard University Press, 1975. [2] The Left-leaning social and cultural anthropology of Columbia University’s Franz Boas was given impetus by the defeat of Hitlerism, as the aftermaths of World War II resulted in anything of a genetic nature being condemned as leading to racism and hence to genocide. Franz Boas taught a generation of stalwarts of anthropology such as Ashley Montague and Margaret Meade, and the hitherto genetic basis of anthropology was pushed aside. [3] Dawkins, R., The Selfish Gene, Oxford University Press, 1976, 1989. [4] Robert Ardey, although a playwright and screenwriter, had an academic background in anthropology. He pre-empted Sociobiology with African Genesis, 1961; The Territorial Imperative, 1966; The Social Contract, 1970. Konrad Lorenz’s ethology also laid the groundwork for Sociobiology. Interestingly, Lorenz was a patron of the French New Right. [5] In one incident, members of the International Committee Against Racism, a front for the Leftist organisationScience for the People, poured a pitcher of water on Wilson’s head and chanted “Wilson, you’re all wet” at a conference in 1977. It is reminiscent of the disprution of lectues of Nobel Laureate Dr William Shockley, a physicist who devoted himself to expounding the genetic basis of IQ. [6] The French Revolution had its scientific rationale in the form of the pre-Darwinian and pre-Mendelian evolutionary theories of Lamarck, which stated that acquired characteristics in one generation are passed on to subsequent generations. The theory, because it accorded with Marxism, was revived in the USSR via Lysenko, while geneticists were disgraced and exiled. The New Left and orthodox sociologists and cultural anthropologists continue to believe in substantially the same theories. [7] Reaction to spiders gives clue to political views, Dominion Post, Sept. 20 2008, B2. [8] Highfield, R., Laws of nature: how to spot a conservative, Daily Telegraph, 18 Sept. 08. Dr Highfield is a scientist in his own right, and is editor of New Scientist. [9] Ibid. [10] Ironically, one of the first pioneers of a Sociobiological perspective was the Anarchist philosopher Kropotkin, whose Mutual Aid, based on his observations as a naturalist, postulated the survival of the group, rather than an individualistic fight for survival. He expounded the instinctive nature of “morality” and altruism as a survival mechanisms. Such a concept is more akin to conservatism than anything now being pushed by the Left, including the self-styled “anarchists”, whose positions are now indistinguishable from those of the liberals. [11] Might not support for the death penalty” be an instinct to excrete toxins from the social organism? Kerry Bolton is the editor of Restoration Magazine.
Comments:2
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:40 | # In fairness, Monitor, Kerry writes, “While Darwin is a starting point, Sociobiology states that genetic survival is one of group or social dynamics rather than hyper-individualism” There are plentiful spaces between Darwin and J Philippe Rushton, David Sloane Wilson and Frank Salter through which Dawkins can slip to salve his liberal conscience. Rushton was put through the wringer, even facing at one point a government effort to prosecute him for hate speech, I believe. EO Wilson, writing in 1975, didn’t suffer anything so disgraceful as that. But Stephen Gould wrote how he and Richard Lewontin sent him to Coventry, turning their backs on him completely - even in the lifts at Harvard. 3
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:03 | #
Wow, imagine what the odds against that must have been, given their ethnicity — must’ve been astronomical! 4
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 02:26 | # There are plentiful spaces between Darwin and J Philippe Rushton, David Sloane Wilson and Frank Salter through… It works both ways, Science + peer review = truth, right? So why does the Darwinist establishment not run to embrace these guys, if what they say is true? 5
Posted by Lurker on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 02:46 | # Dawkins is always careful to aim his guns at creationists and the like and to steer clear of other more dangerous waters. In the Selfish Gene he talks about the basis of altruism - and its not too many steps from that to something like EGI. Steps the Dawk will not be outlining anytime soon. 6
Posted by Captainchoas on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 03:29 | # “It works both ways, Science + peer review = truth, right? So why does the Darwinist establishment not run to embrace these guys, if what they say is true?”- The Monitor Why do the bulk of Christian authorities support race replacement? If so many Christian authorities agree that “racism” is a moral evil why do you think that you are in the right and they in the wrong? Because what is true is independent of what we THINK the truth is, right? Or at least we think (eschewing perspectivism). Yet so much of your rhetoric (the “whore of oratory”) is based in perspectivism. Hoist on your own petard? How can you be so sure that what you exhort is the “true” Christianity and not just the Christianity that you find most emotionally appealing? Maybe the anti-racist Christians are right and you sin grievously. 7
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 04:07 | # Why do the bulk of Christian authorities support race replacement? That doesn’t necessarily affect the rightness of a claim. In the scientific worldview, observation and testing only count if the your peers accept you. Otherwise, you are unacknowledged. 8
Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 04:42 | # Perhaps Monitor should cease his futile efforts at refutation of WN views on MR and, instead, resort to the invincible power of prayer (the efficacy of which is scripturally assured by his Saviour) to achieve what his mediocre intellect cannot effect. He’d stand as good a chance of success muttering Jesusjabber to the stratosphere as he would in continuing to spread tedium and ennui among the MR supporters. 9
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 05:59 | # Al, you only prove my point that WN’s real enemy is the church, not the Jews. Otherwise, you would have forced to tone down your uncivil ravings. Since your are accepted, if not applauded, it tells all I need to know. Just don’t get upset when Christians overreact to people like you and refuse to hear any discussion of race. 10
Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:48 | # Any plea aimed at gaining respect for the content of an unscientific belief system is a non-starter. The best that can be hoped for is respect for the right to practice the ridiculous rituals. Be careful now, sheath your teeth and swallow the proffered holy wafer efficiently. You surely wont get to heaven if you bite old Jesus. 11
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:28 | # Any plea aimed at gaining respect for the content of an unscientific belief system is a non-starter. Oh, big deal. Psychoanalysis is a scientific belief system. So is osteopathy. So was phrenology, until recently. “Science” just refers to what people in lab coats will approve, which may or may not relate to conclusions based on observation and testing. And if you’re going to be a nihilist, Al, could you do so in a more socially acceptable way? Don’t pretend you want a healthy future for White children, either. My genetic interests will thank you for it. 12
Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 09:14 | # Psychoanalysis is largely guesswork as any moderately well-educated, socially acceptable person would know. Perhaps I dont give Catholics enough credit for their contribution to child pedagogy - after all every RC classroom has a Jew nailed to a cross. 13
Posted by snax on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 11:54 | # GW -
I thought their v. of events had Wilson afraid to use the lifts and risk having his “pseudo-science” publicly destroyed? Lurker -
I’m not sure that’s true. He is credited with assisting John Hartung in his writings on Jews, and while I haven’t read The God Delusion or his other anti-religious stuff, I’m advised that orthodox elements of both Judaism and Islam, as well as Christianity, are criticised. tm -
He’s gone in and out of fashion. The Selfish Gene period was a high, the Extended Phenotype began a decline, now he’s up again with the anti-religion theme. I don’t think it’s sociobiology per se that constitutes a threat - or a defence - of the ruling class (or classes within it), but the more specific ideas he talks about may do, and might very well track his popularity/influence. 14
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:38 | # snax, I read an article on Wilson by Gould, but it was a fair few years ago, and you may be right. But the memory that sticks with me is that of the pair of them revelling in making Wilson a marked man around the campus. Gould actually mentioned the lifts. I think all sociobiologists ran some sort of risk during the bad time, and eventually, of course, sociobiology was driven underground, emerging as the harmless, race-denying Evolutionary Psychology of John Tooby, a tribalist, and Ms Cosmides. 15
Posted by snax on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:47 | # Yep. I haven’t read this ‘anti-genetic-determinist’ article by Lewontin, but apparently its title, “The Corpse in the Elevator” is a dig at Edward O. Wilson - a Harvard Sociobiology Study Group in-joke, based on Wilson’s supposedly comic discomfort at being assailed in the elevator by said thugs. 16
Posted by birch barlow on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:25 | # I should probably do a “full disclosure” because I have so often been accused of being part Jewish, East Asian, etc. My ancenstors (dad’s side) were toll collectors in the Swiss Alps; there was considerable interaction between the natives and Jews, as well as Mongolian and Hunnish invasions. So yes, I am part Jewish and East Asian. On my mother’s side, there was considerable interbreeding with American indians. Both my maternal grandparents and my aunts and uncle on that side could pass as “Hispanic” i.e. Mestizo. Since my mom’s side of the family lived in the south, there may have been some interbreeding with black slaves as well. All in all, I would guess that I am less than 90% Euro ancestry, and probably less than 80%. More on topic, it is most certain that the “sex, drugs, and rock’n'roll” lifestyle is not sustainable. Only Hollywood stars and others with massive unearned wealth can live such a lifestyle and not end up in the gutter (or in prison). People do not need freedom and democracy, which essentially means bread and circuses and mindless consumerism. What is needed is a return to the so-called Protestant work ethic. People need hard work, tight-knit-families, a sense of the value of education (as opposed to school=daycare), loyalty to family, friends, community, and country, and an idea that there is something greater than one’s own selfish desires. None of this is to say that people have to be saints, or completely abstinent from everything. An obsession with purity has its own problems. Sex, violence, “mature” entertainment, alcohol, tobacco, pharmaceuticals, cannibis etc have their place, but if one revels in the sleazier and darker side of human nature (as opposed to acknowledging that such a side exists) the result will be disaster. 17
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:15 | # That’s GREAT prep for the Oprah Show, Birch! FANTASTIC! Hey, do you think you could you work some incest into it? And how about some insanity, maybe a little mental retardation ... you know ... maybe a Down’s here and there in the family? But that’s OK if you can’t, you’ve already got real winner-material there, B, I mean you’ve got the interracial, you’ve got the Jewish, you’ve the alcoholism, you’ve got the drugs, you’ve got the clinical depression ... WOW!! Forget Oprah, this might get us onto Maury Povich, Birch! Or even ... JERRY SPRINGER!!! And then, who knows!! The sky’s the limit!!. We’re sitting on a gold mine! And think of the book deal! Even film rights!! I tell you, Birchy, this is gonna make both of us RICH! YOU’RE DOIN GREAT! YOU’RE GONNA PUT BOTH OF US ON EASY STREET!!! 18
Posted by Othelma_Jr on Sat, 27 Sep 2008 08:58 | # “Al, you only prove my point that WN’s real enemy is the church, not the Jews.” LOL! Christianity is just judaism for gentiles. For crying out loud the Pope himself wears one of those jew beanies!!! ALL the problems can be traced back to the jews, those evil incarnate demons of decay. PS “Christian Theology is the grandmother of Bolshevism”—Oswald Spengler 19
Posted by Othelma_Jr on Sat, 27 Sep 2008 09:04 | # “What is needed is a return to the so-called Protestant work ethic. “ Oh so Whites (the ones your kind call goyim) should work as slaves whilst Calvinist (Calvin was a Maranos originally named Cohen) usurious types kick back in their sky-scrappers and wire money back to ZOG?!?!?!?!?! “They pretend to pay us so we pretend to work”!!!! NO! What is needed is a return to a True Community based on Race and some type of Socialism (maybe even National Socialism) so Whites don’t get screwed over by jewish bankers like they are now (WaMu just went belly up!!!!) 20
Posted by birch barlow on Fri, 03 Oct 2008 19:16 | # “What is needed is a return to the so-called Protestant work ethic. “ Oh so Whites (the ones your kind call goyim) should work as slaves whilst Calvinist (Calvin was a Maranos originally named Cohen) usurious types kick back in their sky-scrappers and wire money back to ZOG?!?!?!?!?! “They pretend to pay us so we pretend to work”!!!! NO! What is needed is a return to a True Community based on Race and some type of Socialism (maybe even National Socialism) so Whites don’t get screwed over by jewish bankers like they are now (WaMu just went belly up!!!!) “My kind?” I’m still probably ~70% to 90% European, which may very be more than Hitler, Goebels, Goering, Stalin, and most certainly Tojo and Hirohito, those wonderful racialist, nationalist-socialist, militarists, could claim (tho genetic testing, using a very large number of AIMs (ancestry-informative markers), or better yet, the entire genome, is the only way to prove this for sure). Also I would not be surprised if some of the Japanese Imperialist higher-ups had some amount of Jewish ancestry, thanks to international commerce, “diplomatic” missions, world travel, etc. Of course you guys might say if only the Nazis, Soviets, and Japanese Imperialists weren’t infected with Mongol/Hunnish and Jewish DNA, they wouldn’t have been so power-hungry, greedy, corrupt, cruel, fornicating, speedfreaks/junkies/alkies/etc, and anti-Anglo, one or a combination of them could have taken over the world. I’m sure only Jews, Asians, and other non-Europeans could ever be corrupt, greedy, in favor of drug abuse and sexual promiscuity, etc, and those good old “pure” Anglo-Celtics and Nordics would not be corrupted were it not for those evil, greasy, fat-lipped, dark-skinned, facially deformed, dope-pushing, sex and money obsessed people infiltrating good Euro countries. 21
Posted by birch barlow on Fri, 03 Oct 2008 22:24 | # To make a quantitative estimate of my ancestry (again, this can only be proven by genetic testing, the more extensive the better). Amerind: 1/16 (6.25%) to 1/8 (12.5%) avg. 9.4% Total non-Euro: 9.4+9.4+4.7+2.4 = 25.9% So roughly I am 75% Euro and 25% non-Euro, though the range (95% confidence) could be anywhere, I think, from 60% to 94%, with 68% or 1 SD confidence interval, 68-85%. Note that this is non-Gaussian, with a skew towards the left (non-European) side of the distribution. Going further, I could estimate genetic distance between me and a “pure” Anglo European, with 100 “points” representing 0.1% of the Human Genome, or 3 billion base pairs. Amerind .094*16= 1.50 1.50 + 0.47 + 0.75 + 0.72 = 3.44 So if two Anglo-Celtic Euros are ~99.60% genetically identical, I am roughly 99.56% identical, though a little less thanks to Central and Eastern European ancestry, so maybe down to 99.52-99.54 (Genetic Distance Index, i.e. % of genome 46-48), compared to 99.60 (Index 40) vs. 99.38 (Index 62) for a “pure” Southeast Asian, 99.42 (Index 58) for a “pure” Amerind, or 99.32 for a “pure” African (Index 58). Btw if you are 99.60% genetically identical to your own ethnic group, you are 99.80% (Index 20) genetically identidical to a sibling, child, or parent if all are from the same ethnic group, and 99.70% (Index 30) genetically identical to an uncle, aunt, grandparent, grandchild, or half sibling. Incidentally, the genetic distance in Genetic Distance Index for a human vs. chimp is roughly 130, for human vs. mouse, 500-1000, for a human vs. cat or dog, about 1000, for human vs. extinct “mammal-like reptile,” again about 1000, for a human vs. lizard, snake, turtle, or bird, anywhere from 1250 to 2000, fish, 2500-3000, insect, 5000-6000, plant, 7500-8500, bacterium, 8000-9000. So I may be about 0.6-0.8% as genetically distant from Anglo-Celtics as from a Therapsid, an extinct “mammal like reptile,” while a “pure” SE Asian is 2.2% as genetically distant. For Chimpanzees, the numbers go up by 1000/130, or a factor of about 7.7, so respectively the percentages are 4.6-6.2 (!) and 20.8 (!). As much as I ethically disagree with Salter, there is little doubt that he is empirically correct, and actually may be understating the empirical evidence that would be in his favor. KMD, I think also is not completely off his rockers when it comes to his empirical beliefs, even though again, his ethical beliefs are evil to me. 22
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 00:03 | # “As much as I ethically disagree with Salter, there is little doubt that he is empirically correct, and actually may be understating the empirical evidence that would be in his favor. KMD, I think also is not completely off his rockers when it comes to his empirical beliefs, even though again, his ethical beliefs are evil to me.” - birch barlow There is “evil” in the forced race-replacement of Western countries that will ultimately lead to the genocide of the European peoples. I refuse to accept that ensuring our genetic continuity is “evil”. 24
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 00:41 | # It seems that those who give a damn about morality should care to see the bringing about of optimal conditions for the nurturing of moral actors and actions: genetic similarity theory, Dr. Frank Salter’s prescriptions based upon quantified genetic data of populations, history, and common sense all suggest powerfully the optimal conditions for a moral civic and private life are those of a homogeneous community/nation. And what the hell is “evil” about that? That and the necessary philosophical system and logistics to make our homogeneous communities/nations run smoothly is just about all that is being recommended here. Pretty simple. 25
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:03 | #
What’s “evil” about it in Birch’s eyes is he can’t get the little-boy look in his G/Fs which he so craves: relative Euro-race homogeneity severely limits the availability of Oriental college-age girls whose racially-determined estrogen-level norms are so low compared to white females they look and act like sexless eleven-year-olds, the females he yearns for but can’t get when there are only whites around. 26
Posted by silver on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:15 | #
Interesting, Barlow. Where would GW’s Identity thesis leave you? A yearning “Cosmic Race-er”?
What is potentially evil is the methods employed to get there. If you’d spend as much time discussing that as you do the vital importance of getting there you might actually stand a chance of shifting into first gear instead of continuing to travel in reverse. 27
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:19 | # (By the way, don’t anyone tell Birch about this, posted this morning over at JWH’s. Shhhhhhhhhh ............ Poor guy’s drug and alcohol addictions are enough for him to have to deal with, without adding shockers like that article at this juncture ....) 29
Posted by silver on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:33 | # Pointing out shortcomings or inadequacies, recommending they be remedied and suggesting possible remedies are not consistent with trolling. Your propensity to label anyone you dislike an “asshole,” “creep,” or “troll” on the other hand… 30
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:42 | # But the “shortcoming” you “pointed out” has been replied to. Yet you keep “pointing it out” as a “shortcoming.” 31
Posted by silver on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:47 | #
I’m not sure which shortcoming you’re referring to; there are many, imo. Besides, a replying to it is not the same as adequately addressing it.
Probably because it (whatever you’re referring to) hasn’t been adequately addressed. You, of all people, shouldn’t have a problem with one repeating himself. 32
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:51 | # “Pointing out shortcomings or inadequacies, recommending they be remedied and suggesting possible remedies are not consistent with trolling. Your propensity to label anyone you dislike an “asshole,” “creep,” or “troll” on the other hand…” - silver Silver, the sum total of your “advice” seems to be to tone down the abrasive rhetoric and to have a little more sympathy of those on the outside looking in - duly noted. IOW, GW’s periodic refrain to “play the ball and not the man.” I’ve been corrected myself for some pretty intemperate rants regarding the you-know-who’s. It is not as if you are “without sin” in this department, so, why all the throwing of stones? Any other constructive advice/strategies/wellness tips you care to dispense? Lets have it, all this holding of breath is starting to deprive my brain of much needed oxygen. 33
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:52 | #
34
Posted by silver on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 02:15 | #
It goes much further than that. But even with that superficial level of understanding, “noting” it is a long way off incorporating it.
Sure. It’s a little difficult doing so amid the steady flow of silly accusations about being a “paki” or a troll etc though.
That’s only your (typically myopic) opinion. It’s no “highly detailed” plan I ask for, just the beginnings, the rough sketches, of a plan. Any school kid will tell you theories are always better understood after being led through an example. This isn’t much different. Your ‘target audience’ has been programmed to believe any affirmation of ‘white rights’ is a prelude to unspeakable horrors. Even a cursory reflection on racialism quickly raises troubling questions about the problems of “separating people.” In the absence of anything resembling answers on your part, the imagination quickly moves in to fill in the blanks by rolling “death camp” footage. This is an incredible shortcoming. A “plan” would, at the very least, give the mind something other to dwell on than that most off-putting imagery. Providing such a thing isn’t necessarily the job of “MR” (whatever the “MR project,” as you understand it, is even supposed to be). But it would be nice if just one of all these internet organizations (NPI, Euro-Americans United etc) could trouble itself to flesh out some detail rather than competing with each other to regurgitate the same message. On another issue, I’d really like to see some EGI maven attempt to relate GW’s Identity thesis to someone like Barlow. 35
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 02:31 | #
Stop bullshitting. This blog has published many thousands of words doing exactly that. I’m not going to sit here and compile a links list for an annoying troll. Use the site’s Search feature yourself. As for this,
it’s one-hundred percent bullshit. And the whole remainder of your comment is repetitive bullshit. Looks like you get today’s Fred Scrooby Bullshit Award. 36
Posted by silver on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 02:43 | # Er, this isn’t a skeet shoot, Scrubby. I wasn’t demanding any two minute answer. And don’t worry your troubled little head, you’re the last person I had in mind for the job. You just keep flailing your arms and screaming “race-replacement,” and breathlessly relaying vdare excerpts which everyone has already read, another of your talents. 37
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 02:49 | # “It’s no “highly detailed” plan I ask for, just the beginnings, the rough sketches, of a plan.” - silver What about the BNPs plan? You know, cut off services for immigrants, crackdown on employment of immigrants, and pay them to leave. That leaving something out? If so, drop Nick Griffin a line. 38
Posted by silver on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 03:04 | # Cool. Now, what about the ANP’s plan? And what about the legal immigrants? And what about non-immigrant non-Britons? Why hide it or play it down, Cap?
Mind you, by all means, feel free to want to engage in all manner of atrocity, rahowa-style. Just have something at least hinting of humanity to present to doubters and skeptics. Now, don’t worry, you’re in Scrubby’s category, as far as I’m concerned. I’m not expecting anything from you, and certainly not in the next two minutes. No, I’m addressing this to the EGI mavens and associated Big Thinkers. 39
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 03:30 | # silver: “So when that egghead…” You? An “egghead”? LOL! “...set the transports rolling east and shoving kikes into ovens.” You’re making a fool of yourself. Sober up. “And what about the legal immigrants?” What about the loss of kinship and damage to EGI of native Britons due to the presence of “legal” immigrants? Whose interests justly win out in the end? “And what about non-immigrant non-Britons?” I take it you mean the offspring of “legal” immigrants. Again, whose interests justly win out? Theirs or native Britons? “Now, don’t worry, you’re in Scrubby’s category, as far as I’m concerned.” That’s good company. “No, I’m addressing this to the EGI mavens and associated Big Thinkers.” Mmmm, I’m guessing it would be something like “the carrot or the stick.” It’s that “stick” part that just gets your frantic, fevered little imagination running wild, isn’t it? Have fun. 40
Posted by birch barlow on Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:19 | # The solution to the problem in JWH’s article is simple: just avoid the 4’11” 85 pounder Asian girls. You know, not all Asians are short, breastless, hipless, and buttless, especially ones raised on a good high-protein western diet. Thus my preference for Asian females like her or her (if you don’t want to see, don’t click—tho don’t worry these are PG or PG-13 at worst). 41
Posted by birch barlow on Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:28 | # There’s also this solution (may not be work safe, not due to pornographic content but to copyright laws…anyway screw the corporate aristocracy…I mean most college students Asian, white, or otherwise, and most intelligent and sophisticated people in general don’t respect such worthless refuse anyway, I mean even the Nazis started expropriating the wealth of “old money” by 1943-45, esp. Goebells and Goering who tried to do so even earlier, not to mention the Soviets, Imperial Japanese, and modern Chinese who at least knew (know) how to manage a country better than any of the 4 losers running for prez or VP right now). 42
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:32 | # It wouldn’t let me see the second pic on my machine, Birch, but that first girl had HUGE breasts, you’re RIGHT! I guess you’ve proven it, B — you’re DEFO not into flat-chested Oriental girls! 43
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:42 | # As time goes by we’re gaining a MUCH better understanding of why Birch has the honor of being one of the very few whites, specially hand-picked by GC, who are allowed to blog at GnXp.com in the company of such caucasian brilliance as Randy “South Africa Is An Economic Powerhouse” MacDonald and David “Clines Prove Race Doesn’t Exist” B! 44
Posted by birch barlow on Sun, 05 Oct 2008 23:52 | # See also here (same girl as above), here, and here. Note:free registration may be required for the 2nd one in my first post, as well as for the 2nd and 3rd pic here, and for the full version of the song in the above post. Tho as a side comment, I would agree that white, black, and Latino men, especially those who are non-upper middle class and non-Cogelites, would tend to prefer thicker ie fatter and less fit and shorter and more submissive women than Cogelites would tend to. So yes a 160 lb 5’ 3” white woman may have large breasts, but probably just because she is, should we say, a tad Cartman-esque…or far that matter, with fake ones. 45
Posted by bb on Sun, 05 Oct 2008 23:56 | # btw, the title of the song is “Genetic Engineering.” Lyrics: Efficiant, logical, effective, and practical. Chorus: These are the little children, the future in our hands. Repeat chorus (2) These are the little children, the future in our hands. 46
Posted by bb on Sun, 05 Oct 2008 23:59 | # oops, for a Cogelite, I do like to make typos. the last line 2 posts above should start out with “For that matter…” 47
Posted by n/a on Mon, 06 Oct 2008 04:13 | # birch, You are not “upper middle class” or a “cogelite”. You are a drunken loser. Last time you checked in, you were hoping to apprentice as an electrician. If, as I suspect, you failed at that, you’ve proven you can’t even cut it as a high prole. Nor is there any thing “upper middle class” or “cogelite” about mating with SE Asians. The good news: plenty of your peers (lower/working-class all-around-failures) manage to bag SE Asian brides, though I suspect the “punishment” you have to look forward to will be less whatever you’re fantasizing about in your flickr comment and more along the lines of paying to import your inlaws and then gettting cleaned out in the divorce settlement. Thank god that with the discovery of your rainbow coalition ancestry you can no longer project your failure onto Northern Europeans. 48
Posted by silver on Mon, 06 Oct 2008 09:29 | #
They are perfectly legal, whether you like it or not. The scare quotes are simply another example (as if I needed one) of the sort of person I’m conversing with, ie a raving nut who couldn’t tell a helping hand from an extended middle digit if his life depended on it. It’s not unreasonable to imagine you’ve so thoroughly absorbed the concept of northerners’ downfall being your typically high levels of trust that you twist your neck out of shape attempting to locate between the lines something more insidious than what is clearly written on them. Still, that doesn’t excuse it. This will be the last time I respond to your sort of inanity.
Not even close. But to answer, no, not personally. 49
Posted by silver on Mon, 06 Oct 2008 09:53 | # Birch, you should give Thailand a try if that sort of woman floats your boat. I could pick up better than those pics throwing a dart down Walking Street. They’re very into youthful, athletic European men here so if that’s you, you can get it free. (“Thai gook” on here has the accent totally wrong. Walking past a bar, it’s usually something like “Harooooo. Weo-cum hensa man. Where you goooo?”) Personally, I’m not attracted to them at all, and have to sift through hundreds before I find one that excites me, and she’s usually heavily made up. There are so few white women here even very average ones catch my eye, and it just drives home what is being lost. 50
Posted by birch barlow on Mon, 06 Oct 2008 21:25 | # You are not “upper middle class” or a “cogelite”. You are a drunken loser. Last time you checked in, you were hoping to apprentice as an electrician. If, as I suspect, you failed at that, you’ve proven you can’t even cut it as a high prole. Well actually I am going back to school for my degree in biomedical physics at a top 50 ranked university. So much for your theory that I’m not apprenticing for being an electrician because I’m too proletarian or too low-IQ. Also based on my GRE scores my IQ is up around 150. Not sure if I believe it’s really *that* high, but it is at least well over 125, TBC’s cutoff for Cogelite status. Though I will admit that I have a lot of really bad genes as well as a lot of really good ones. Though based on my family history (for ex. my non-addicted parents, grandparents, and full auncles and aunts vs. my two addicted half-uncles) I’d say almost all of my bad genes come from the Anglo-Celtic part of my ancestry. It is well documented (in George Vaillant’s THE NATURAL HISTORY OF ALCOHOLISM) that Anglo-Celtics have the highest levels of alcoholism in the world, and are the most likely to have to stay completely abstinent for decades in a row to stay out of the gutter, compared to lower levels for Slavs (at least those in wealthier countries—alcohol and drugs are a big problem in Russia, but that’s largely cuz of poverty and govt corruption), Mediterraneans, Jews, and East Asians. Of course Vaillant is a liberal, multiculturalist, French, and probably part Jewish and Hunnish-Mongolian himself, so he’s probably not qualified, thanks to his supposed EGIs and ivory tower multi-culti politics, according to you guys. Just another person who hates good small town Anglo-Celtic Americans I suppose. On the other hand, James Grahams VESSELS OF RAGE suggests that alcohol and drug abuse without sterotypical addiction are rampant in Cogelites, including Asians and Jews. But I think there is a big difference between heavy, frequent, and diverse drug use and being a gutter/prison drunk or dope fiend, the latter being more common amongst non-Cogelites and NW Europeans than more genetically and culturally unrelated groups. James Graham does indeed point this out, though he also says that the former can be far more dangerous than the latter (which I don’t necessarily disagree with, see the Holocaust, declaring wars against multiple enemies (Nazis), bayoneting babies and other war atrocities (Imperial Japanese) and great purges (Stalin)—drug use and abuse, of the non-gutter variety, were all rampant amongst the Cogelites, Party members, and military men of these govts). Also as a side note, the Nazis, and possibly Japanese and Soviets, also sterilized or executed people who had drug and alcohol problems and failed to become productive again after multiple treatments. 51
Posted by birchy aka O'Brien on Mon, 06 Oct 2008 21:44 | # Maybe I should just change my name to O’Brien. So many people suggest I am a closet totalitarian of some variety that maybe its true. And O’Briens ethnicity was never disclosed in 1984, other than his name is of Celtic origin. It is also stated in 1984 that Party membership is “by examination” at age 16, that “Jews” and other “coloured people” can be found “in the highest ranks of the Party.” Orwell was also English and a Socialist, his preferred ideology being Socialist and English, thus the Party name IngSoc for the perverted English Socialism in 1984. Cogelite is also a telescoped/compound word that requires little thought and can have whatever political meaning its user wants, much like IngSoc, newspeak, oldthink, goodthink, ungood, ComIntern, Nazi, Gestapo, duckspeak, doublethink, sexcrime, crimedrug (drug used to one’s ownlife, goodrug (drug used to enhance state control or pacify the populace, esp the proles and unruly or potentially dangerous Party members), and many others. Maybe I should just stop talking about East Asian females, female domination, etc and just talk about my penchant for sexcrime which in 1984 refers to any sex other than “normal” sex between a male and female, for the purposes of reproduction, with no pleasure on the part of the female, and presumably no ethnic, racial, or other “fetishes” involved in either party [see “NINETEEN EIGHTY FOUR” for more details, and precise orginal description]. 52
Posted by bb on Mon, 06 Oct 2008 21:51 | # See also James Burnham’s “THE MANAGERIAL REVOLUTION” and “THE MACHIAVELLIANS.” Burnham was influential on Orwell, and incidentally on Sam Francis as well, and probably many others such as Sailer and maybe even Godless Capitalist. He was a supporter of “mangerialism” and later was a (somewhat) prominent paleocon. He was born in shortly after the turn of the (19th/20th) century and lived up until the late 1980s. 53
Posted by birch barlow on Mon, 06 Oct 2008 22:48 | # Oh boy, forgot to mention that the good old “dark and dumb” stereotype has been trotted out again. It is true that there is mixed evidence RE: Thai, Filipino, Indonesian, and Malaysian IQ (much of it unfavorable in their home countries, much of it favorable in the U.S. esp for 2nd gen and greater), though the evidence in terms in the Vietnamese and South Chinese, who cluster with SE Asians genetically, is that they have very high IQs and extremely good executive functions to boot. So again, much like the problems in Russia and parts of Eastern Europe re:crime, alcohol, drugs, mental problems, low IQ esp among non-Jews and part Jews, I think the IQ problems in SE Asia, with the POSSIBLE exception of the Hmong, who may very well be the Gypsies of East Asia, are due to poverty and America’s (and up to around WW2 much of W. and central Europe’s) foreign policy. But then again maybe Southern and Eastern Europeans aren’t as equal as NW Europeans. Some whites seem to be more equal than others. This certainly seems to be true wrt to American foreign policy, esp RE Russia, and with white American prole sentiment too. As horrid as Obama and Biden are (and they are dangerous) McCain and especially Palin scare the hell out of me. I don’t see how “cultural conservatism,” whether of the Palin-McCain or White Nationalist variety* can lead to anything other than an a war in which atomic weapons are used, probably by Russia and China, and possibly Iran, Pakistan, and even India. And hate to say it but I think many Palin-lovers out there would be deserve getting hit by a Russian, Chinese, or Indian nuke, unlike many of the Japanese who got nuked in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. God help us all, if indeed He is really out there. And finally, yay for a Cogelite Party that is all powerful!!! The world most certainly needs a good strong leader like Godless Capitalist, with all his friends and supports in all world govts. I would most definitely get my Pervitin and Victory Gin, Victory Cigarettes, Victory Pain Rx, and Victory Cough (or is that Diversity Gin, Diversity Cigarettes, Diversity Pain Rx, and Diversity Cough…will need an overpaid and corrupt committee to decide these things). *note there is some real overlap even though there are big diffs like with “Christian” brotherhood between said supporters and say, illegal alien gang members and strength and uniformity of the support of the War on Drugs (significantly greater for Palin-McCain). 54
Posted by birchbarlow on Mon, 06 Oct 2008 22:54 | # Oh yeah, and lots of sexcrime and crimedrugging in the Cogelite Party too, especially in those corrupt and worthless committees and conventions. Sounds kind of like IUPAC conventions, no? Bet I could find some exotic crimedrugs around there. Did you see Dilbert on Sunday? Oh how I love Dogbert and his “most important” goal. LOL. Anyway I am really wasting too much time here, time to get back to Organic Chemistry, Biology, and Physiology. Not as fun as politics though and thinking about becoming all-powerful. Will need to do some real work though (ugh) before I can get to what’s really important, like CogElite and IUPAC committees and conventions. Though oneday IUPAC will probably just be another branch of the CogElite Party…wait its a little that way now. 55
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 06 Oct 2008 23:07 | # Birchy how about staying off the hard drugs next time you post? You’re starting to sound like Silver. Repeat after me: “From now on I, Birch, will not touch liquor or hard drugs for at least 48 hours prior to posting comments at MR.com.” 56
Posted by O'Brien on Tue, 07 Oct 2008 01:10 | # Do over-the-counter Robitussin (dextromethorphan), prescription drugs like Vicodin (hydrocodone) and medical marijuana count? Oh I did inhale some ether a week ago. Actually I haven’t drank any kind of booze in almost 48 hours now. And I’m sure nicotine, caffeine, and white sugar do not count as “hard” drugs except to the anti-tobacco and anti-junk food Nazis. Won’t even say what other drugs I have done (lets just say Dr. Feelgood wouldn’t prescribe them, curse her, and no I don’t think they can be found in most Chem stockrooms either) but I haven’t done any of those in awhile. 57
Posted by snort on Tue, 07 Oct 2008 01:27 | # Anyway I am really wasting too much time here, time to get back to Organic Chemistry, Biology, and Physiology. [ .. ] Won’t even say what other drugs I have done (lets just say Dr. Feelgood wouldn’t prescribe them, curse her, and no I don’t think they can be found in most Chem stockrooms either) LOL. Birch, I’m just guessing, but I’ll bet you are going to do quite well in your chosen course-work ... given the motivation you have! 58
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 07 Oct 2008 01:31 | # Looks like Birchy’s vying to be known henceforth as “Birch de Quincey Barlow.” 59
Posted by birch barlow on Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:38 | # Well actually my greatest difficulty is that my executive function sucks…I think that should be obvious by the amount of time I spend posting here instead of doing more productive things—especially given the amount of crap I take, and how much things I love (e.g. beautiful East Asian females) are derided. In fact my goal is to not post here, no matter how nasty or misleading any replies I get could be, for at least 72 hours. I’m wasting too much time and emotional energy throwing pearls to swine.* Poor executive function is probably a cause rather than a symptom of drug abuse; as I have had poor executive function well before I started using at age 20…in fact I’d say ever since I was a small child. Indeed my first grade teacher noticed this problem and was sometimes quite annoyed by it. Good executive function is one reason I admire East Asians so much, I think they have a huge edge here even more so than with regards to IQ. My horrid executive function may be what ultimately marginalizes me out of the beloved Cogelite, with or without drugs, in spite of my fairly high (even for Cogelites) IQ. Though wrt to drugs, I do think they had a lot to do with the many truly awful decisions made by all sides in WW2. The “greatest generation” might have been the original generation Rx. Something that does make me think twice. *Yes I know I can get snarky and trollish even as I make intelligent comments, but look what I’m dealing with here. Anyone who could so hate East Asians, or make them all out to be peasants no better than the illegals coming to the US is off his/her rocker. Oh and btw I wonder how many posters here are (or at least are relatives or friends of) white women who can’t compete with East Asians in the dating world. Indeed I’d say a lot of the disadvantages of Asian men are from (1)growing up in a 3rd world hellhole and getting a lousy diet, thereby ending up short and not as healthy as they could be and (2)their women being so irresistable and so superior. 60
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 07 Oct 2008 20:04 | # Birch it’s not very considerate of you to use this site’s threads as warm-ups for your upcoming gig on Jerry Springer (or was it Dr. Phil? I forget.). Won’t GC permit you to do your practice-runs for Dr. Phil over at GnXp? I mean, we’re sympathetic to your plight and all that, and no one here wants to be mean or make you feel you’re not welcome, but ... it’s just that over here we have more interesting fare to discuss than your personal soap-opera. (What did you think of de Quincey’s “Confessions of an English Opium Eater,” by the way? Bet it could double as your autobiography!) Hey don’t forget to give us the dates of your appearance on Dr. Phil — we can all tune in! 61
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 07 Oct 2008 20:13 | # I heard a rumor you’re forcing your Chinese G/F to get a reduction mammoplasty, Birch — according to what I heard she’s an A-cup and you told her you can’t stand women who are that buxom, and she needed to get it down to an “A-minus pre-teen training bra” otherwise you two wouldn’t be able to continue seeing one another. Will you at least be paying for her surgery? 62
Posted by n/a on Wed, 15 Oct 2008 10:49 | # RE birch: http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/10/alcoholism-genetics-and-race.html Post a comment:
Next entry: TECK: The Electoral Corruption Killer
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) Computer say no by Guessedworker on Thursday, 09 May 2024 15:17. (View) |
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 07:26 | #
And if sociobiology was really a threat to the ruling class, Richard Dawkins would not be a celebrity. He’d be sharing a cell with Ernst Zundel.