Updating “On Genetic Interests”

Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, 31 July 2008 20:31.

By JW Holliday

Leading on from this MR essay, where I asked some questions that needed to be addressed in future updates of Salter’s work, I now repeat and, in some cases, expand upon these here:-

1. Genetic patterns/combinations as genetic interests

This refers to genetic structure, and this has been discussed in detail already – e.g, here. This is a crucially important point that needs to be expanded. It can certainly be done theoretically and qualitatively based upon the known facts. A quantitative examination would require the services of an objective/sympathetic population geneticist (if such exists - doubtful today) and/or further studies about genetic structure and population differences in said structure. In any case, this topic needs to be addressed in future editions of On Genetic Interests.

2. Compare and contrast kinship genetic interests and adaptive genetic interests

Adaptive genetic interests can be renamed functional genetic interests, since the pursuit of kinship genetic interests IS , of course, adaptive and there is no clear distinction here.

Functional genetic interests are a subset of total genetic interests. A simplistic view would be:-

Total Genetic Interests = Kinship Genetic Interests + Functional Genetic Interests.

That is simplistic because of overlap – some portion of functional genetic interests are also kinship genetic interests, since important functional genes can vary in ways correlated to kinship.

Better:-

Total Genetic Interests = Kinship Genetic Interests + (Functional Genetic Interests – The Kinship Component of Functional Genetic Interests).

Simply put, kinship genetic interests are those genetic interests based upon relative kinship, independent upon the functional consequences of the gene sequences in question, while functional genetic interests focuses on how the gene sequences influence phenotype to make the individual and/or group more competitive, and more likely to pass on distinctive genetic information to the next generation.

In some cases, these can be in conflict – changing gene frequencies at particular functional loci could diminish kinship, but increase competitive advantage due to the phenotypic consequences of the changes. If a particular disease gene is found at a high frequency in an ethny, attempts to diminish its frequency would have a negative effect on kinship, but a positive effect on “functional fitness.” If the net effect on total genetic interests of the change is positive, then Salterism definitely includes the possibilities for eugenic changes to boost the adaptiveness of the total distinctive genome.

3. Intrinsic value of genetic information; compare and contrast roles of functional and non-functional genes

This has been discussed in detail already - e.g, here - and needs to be addressed in future editions of On Genetic Interests.

4. Do dominant alleles have greater influence (positive or negative) on genetic interests than do recessive alleles?

Salter stresses functional genes in his analysis. Although I disagree in that I believe that non-functional genetic information does in fact constitute part of genetic interests (if it is distinctive and, hence, relevant information), it seems reasonable that functional genetic sequences are, all else being equal, more valuable on a per-bp level, since they influence their own replication (and, indeed, the replication of the entire genome). This influence manifests at the level of the phenotype, and so-called dominant genes can mask the phenotypic expression of so-called recessive genes. Does the predominance of dominant genes in influencing the phenotype and, hence, replication of the genome, mean that these are more valuable than recessive genes on a per-bp basis? Or is the reverse the case – the recessive genes are more valuable since their effects are more “fragile,” and the “scarcity” or “recessive phenotypes” makes the recessive genes coding for them more valuable in particular environments (supply and demand, scarcity in the face of fitness “demand” results in greater value)?

5. Discussion on how ethnic and meta-ethnic identities can boost adaptive behavior with respect to genetic interests even in light of potential kinship overlap between closely related groups

So, even if, say Poles are genetically closer to Germans than they are to Balkan (Southern) Slavs, can pan-Slavism still be adaptive if the ideology results in a net gain of ethnic genetic interest for groups known as “Slavs?” This would, in general I believe, require peaceful relations between (relatively) closely intra-continental groups, so that kinship overlap at the “borders” does not become a concern, and does not work at cross-purposes at the establishment of meta-ethnic identities that may, at times, cross lines of kinship overlap, but would still be adaptive if such identities motivate towards the defense of net genetic interest.

This essay appreared today at Western Biopolitics.

Tags: Ethnicity and Ethnic Genetic Interests

Comments:

Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 01 Aug 2008 16:05 | #

Actually, there is another, quite practical, reason for de-emphasizing the problems created by biases imposed by sampling functional genes:

Ultimately, convergent evolution tends to create not just similar genes but similar genetic correlation structures and it is the genetic correlation structures we seek to preserve. This remains true even in the case of isolated demes that are brought together for sexual reproduction: The demes that have more genetic correlation structures in common with each other will be less functionally destructive to each other during sexual mixing than will other demes.

Having said that, it is reckless to the point of malignancy to allow modern technology to dramatically enhance rates global panmixia, let alone use state power to coerce it.

PS: In terms of “loss of function” aka recessive mutations at a single locus, we have to view their “function” in the ecological context of other genes and more precisely the genetic correlation structure of the ecology. A loss of function at a single gene level may, within the context of such an ecological genetic correlation structure, be a gain of function.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 03 Aug 2008 15:50 | #

“Ultimately, convergent evolution tends to create not just similar genes but similar genetic correlation structures and it is the genetic correlation structures we seek to preserve. This remains true even in the case of isolated demes that are brought together for sexual reproduction: The demes that have more genetic correlation structures in common with each other will be less functionally destructive to each other during sexual mixing than will other demes.” (—James Bowery)

JWH discusses this issue.

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 04 Aug 2008 03:18 | #

Yes, his counter argument, that the combinatoric explosion renders convergence very unlikely, is valid—even more so given that we both conflated genotype with phenotype in discussing convergent evolution. It is more likely that convergent evolution will produce similar phenotypes than similar genotypes but since phenotypes are composite and genotypes are pleiotropic, it remains only marginally, if that, more likely that phenotypic correlation structure would properly converge in evolution.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 04 Aug 2008 04:35 | #

Important commentary at Western Biopolitics which everyone should read and understand: it deals with the thesis that people don’t cherish their society as much, or (which follows from the first) generally see to its well-being as much, when it’s multiracial or even just multiethnic as when it’s mono- either of those (monoracial or monoethnic):

http://westbiop.blogspot.com/2008/08/theory-more-egi8308.html

Though presented (at the link) partly as conjecture, this is a profoundly important topic.

Posted by birch barlow on Tue, 05 Aug 2008 01:34 | #

There really is *nothing* to Salter. It is not beneficial to keep out high-IQ, law-abiding nonwhites because they aren’t white. Salterism just seems like a highly intellectualized version of white, mid-western blandness, sort of like the kind of people who are always following the lives of boring, plain celebrities like Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan. Salterism=blandness (at best) and unnecessary racial strife at worst. There’s no reason why we should encourage the clannishness of the Hatfields and McCoys. What a piece of work Salter is.

Posted by birch barlow on Tue, 05 Aug 2008 01:37 | #

I would also add that Salterism takes away from legitimate research on race and genetics. Really, you guys are shooting yourselves in the foot, and only giving fuel to the far left. And the Auster/Sailer hating stuff is just creepy.

Posted by Dave Johns on Tue, 05 Aug 2008 02:18 | #

Birch has the same worldview of an anti-white radical lesbian.

Posted by silver on Wed, 06 Aug 2008 01:38 | #

It is not beneficial to keep out high-IQ, law-abiding nonwhites because they aren’t white.

It is if you understand that “diversity destroys trust.” (An “insight” so elementary and obvious that only highly intelligent people and hapas (and hapa wannabes) can fail to get it.)

Salterism just seems like a highly intellectualized version of white, mid-western blandness, sort of like the kind of people who are always following the lives of boring, plain celebrities like Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan.

White mid-westerners are the biggest Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan fans? Now I’ve heard it all.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 06 Aug 2008 05:32 | #

The most common surname (last name) in the PDSSRC (The People’s Democratic Soviet Socialist Republic of Canuckistan) is now the Chinese one, Li (or Lee).

Here, let’s take that again, just in case some may have missed it: The commonest last name, family name, in Canada is now a Chinese last name, a Chinese family name.

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2008/08/05/greyhound-killer-bore-canadas-most-common-surname/

Chew on that a bit.

Thanks, Jews; you satisfied now? Thanks, Euro misfits, malcontents, and wackos, like Birch. Thanks, clueless women voters. Oh and thank you thank you thank you Catholics and Canadian Euro “ethnics” such as Ukes and Italians, who never saw a Jewish race-replacement initiative they didn’t enthusiastically embrace, regretting only they hadn’t been first to think it up.

Hey, when’s the commonest last name in China gonna be Smith, guys? Or in Israel, Jones? Anyone wanna take a stab at it?

Did someone say “Any day now”?

Yeah, someone did, and he’s right on the money ... any day now is the correct answer!

(Right, any day now, guys ... That’ll all happen real soon.)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:58 | #

Herewith is the source article (URL link below) on that surname disclosure by Allan Wall (see my comment above). Check out the most common surnames in the city of Vancouver, originally a totally white city of course. Have a look at Toronto too, ditto. Although the article points out these surname surveys are not scientific, I’m sure they’re highly suggestive of what’s going on, namely methodical government-enforced race-replacement of Canada’s original population.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/name-change/common-surnames.html

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 06 Aug 2008 15:04 | #

Look for the Jews to move out of the cities they’ve been instrumental in race-replacing (the way they moved out of South Africa after being instrumental in race-replacing that) and into Euro-race cities not yet heavily race-replaced such as Montreal, and get to work on methodically race-replacing those next, then moving on to new victims as each previous one succumbs. Anyone see a pattern here? Hey maybe it’s just me ....

Posted by silver on Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:01 | #

This one’s for your, zorn.

Oh and thank you thank you thank you Catholics and Canadian Euro “ethnics” such as Ukes and Italians, who never saw a Jewish race-replacement initiative they didn’t enthusiastically embrace, regretting only they hadn’t been first to think it up.

Intent can’t be readily inferred from effect. One isn’t justified in inferring that Paul overeats (consumes more calories than he expends) in order to get fat (the result of overeating); it is much more likely that Paul overeats because he enjoys eating. Similarly, it’s not right to condemn “Ukes and Italians” for embracing race-replacement since race-replacement is hardly likely to have been their intent.

Ukes and Italians, like Greeks and Serbs, and any number of other minorities, “embrace” immigration and, to a much lesser extent, multiculturalism, in order to justify their own presence in countries they’ve emigrated to. That race-replacement is the effect, in the long run, of such immigration is another matter entirely—except for ole fulminatin’ Fred.

zorn, pay attention. Either what I just said is rational or it isn’t; either it makes sense or it doesn’t. My own “beliefs” (about race-replacement, or the desirability of it, for example) are irrelevant.

Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 08 Aug 2008 01:01 | #

i>Similarly, it’s not right to condemn “Ukes and Italians” for embracing race-replacement since race-replacement is hardly likely to have been their intent. </i>

No one ever said it was. The intent was to further there own ethnic interests.

They embraced immigration and multiculturalism to further their own ethnic interests.

...those who see cultural isolation as a permanent way of life tend to cripple their own possibilities, limit their ability to contribute to Canada, and create impregnable communities in which they can nourish their imported grievances and generate hatred for democracy and the West (or further their own EGI).

How did we get to this point?

A good starting point is the recent autobiography of Manoly R. Lupul, The Politics of Multiculturalism: A Ukrainian-Canadian Memoir.

In the 1960s, after Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson assigned the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism to design a fresh approach to English-French relations, citizens whose origins were neither British nor French began to fear they were being excluded from a new version of citizenship.

Ukrainian-Canadians, in particular, feared the extinction of Ukrainian uniqueness.

How we became a land of ghettos

Robert Fulford
National Post

Monday, June 12, 2006

Didn’t they get the Boas/Hirschfeld memo?