Majorityrights News > Category: The Proposition Nation

Celtic Jewelry of the native Britons 2000 years ago

In England 2,000 years ago lived the “Celtic people”. They were the first Britons. They lived on small farms and in small tribal villages all over England. They often fought with other Celtic tribes.

Dieneke’s Blog, May 08, 2016

Natural selection in Britain during the last 2,000 years:

The latest ancient DNA studies from the British Isles (Schiffels et al and Martiniano et al. and Cassidy et al.) support continuity over the last 2,000 years. Sure, there were continued migrations like the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons, but these were very similar groups in the grand scheme of things.

But, while ancestrally the modern Briton is probably a descendant of the Britons of 2,000 years ago with some admixture from similar continental European groups, he is not the same, as (apparently) substantial genetic adaptation has continued to operate in Britain over the same period. A new preprint by Field, Boyle, Telis et al. makes the case for adaptation in a variety of traits in the ancestors of Britons over this period. Mind you, the genetic underpinnings of many important human traits known to have high heritability are currently unknown, but there is little doubt that selection would have affected traits beyond those detected in this study. I am quite curious to see whether the striking efflorescence of cultural achievement in Britain over the last half millennium could have (at least in part) a genetic underpinning.

Depigmentation is a trait whose genetic architecture is as well as understood as any. The results of this study might surprise writers of decades and centuries past who supposed that the spectrum of pigmentation of modern Europeans was the result of admixture-in varying measure- between Xanthochrooi and Melanchrooi races of primordial antiquity. All indications seem to be that depigmentation of hair, skin, and eyes did not co-occur in such a hypothetical race, but rather in different parts of the Caucasoid range, only reaching a high combined frequency in northern Europe to form the distinctive physical type that is distinctive of the natives of that region. It would be quite interesting to see how these traits evolved in Fennoscandia and the Baltic, regions that sport an even higher depigmentation than the British Isles. Traditionally, these areas were viewed as refuges of the Xanthochrooi but it may very well turn out to be that for whatever reason selection has acted in that area as well, as it did in the Eastern European plain where rather dark Bronze Age steppe groups gave way to rather light pigmented living eastern Slavs.

bioRxiv doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/052084

Detection of human adaptation during the past 2,000 years

Yair Field, Evan A Boyle, Natalie Telis, Ziyue Gao, Kyle J Gaulton, David Golan, Loic Yengo, Ghislain Rocheleau, Philippe Froguel, Mark I McCarthy, Jonathan K Pritchard

Detection of recent natural selection is a challenging problem in population genetics, as standard methods generally integrate over long timescales. Here we introduce the Singleton Density Score (SDS), a powerful measure to infer very recent changes in allele frequencies from contemporary genome sequences. When applied to data from the UK10K Project, SDS reflects allele frequency changes in the ancestors of modern Britons during the past 2,000 years. We see strong signals of selection at lactase and HLA, and in favor of blond hair and blue eyes. Turning to signals of polygenic adaptation we find, remarkably, that recent selection for increased height has driven allele frequency shifts across most of the genome. Moreover, we report suggestive new evidence for polygenic shifts affecting many other complex traits. Our results suggest that polygenic adaptation has played a pervasive role in shaping genotypic and phenotypic variation in modern humans.

We still have serious work to do with regard to distinguishing who we are, who our friends are, and what alliance means.

News united, KENNETH SHINZATO, WORKER ON U.S. MILITARY BASE IN JAPAN ACCUSED OF DUMPING BODY OF LOCAL WOMAN RINA SHIMABUKURO, 20, RAISING ANTI-AMERICAN TENSIONS AHEAD OF BARACK OBAMA’S VISIT TO HIROSHIMA, 20 May 2016:

Kenneth Shinzato, worker on U.S. military base in Japan accused of dumping body of local woman Rina Shimabukuro, 20, raising anti-American tensions ahead of Barack Obama’s visit to Hiroshima news

A worker at a U.S. military base in Okinawa has been arrested on suspicion of dumping the body of a 20-year-old Japanese woman, police said Thursday - sparking outrage among locals.

                       
                        Rina Shimabukuro

RT, “Japanese PM ‘outraged’ over 20yo woman’s murder after US Okinawa base contractor arrested”, 20 May 2016:

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe says he’s outraged at the murder of a 20-year-old woman, following the arrest of a US man on suspicion of homicide in Okinawa. Japanese media later reported that the suspect admitted killing his victim.

“I feel extremely strong outrage,” Abe told reporters.

He added that he has no words “to express, considering how the family” of the victim feels.

“We urge the US side to take thorough measures to prevent the recurrence of such events.”

Kenneth Shinzato, a 32-year-old civil employee of the US military base in Okinawa, and former US Marine, has been arrested for his alleged involvement in the woman’s death. He allegedly admitted that he throttled and stabbed his victim, Kyodo News said, citing sources close to the police investigation.

Related Story: Okinawa rape incident.
                             

We believe you, that it isn’t so, Joe.

Some people don’t understand the great appeal of sports fanship to males in particular. But in the topsy-turvey of modernity in particular, when tribal affinity is disallowed as a barometer and all else seems to be so unfair - a rigged deck that females don’t tend to care about because it is rigged largely in their favor, sports, the historically coherent and statistically objective, verifiable comfort, persists - particularly when your guys, guys that you can identify with as being not very different from you have proven their objective merit despite rigorous competition.

See? We know that the way of life that we produce is fine enough, if not better, though it is sometimes hard to prove our part in an instant or episode - still, we appreciate the capacity for vicarious identity also because we do not normally have the opportunity for the exhilarating display of taking it to them in instantaneous and episodic action. Still, we can even out-manifest them in an instant and episodically, if not vicariously ..it can be proven ..on balance ..sometimes.. on balance…depending on the sport ..and other things.. oops ..its not so reliably objective… can have an anesthetizing, intoxicating effect ..not a comfort conducive to our interests after all.

Never really was. As disingenuously imposed objective criteria, it was counter productive illusion leading to the phenomenon of White fan cuckoldry. Inadvertently, however, Bonds using steroids to shatter Ruth’s slugging marks did a favor by rendering the crowning criteria of sports statistics, for Americans, anyway, the homerun, 60, 714, 755, whatever, so relative, so corrupted as to be unworthy of admiration.

               
That may seem obvious to the girls out there, but to the young boys who are looking for a reprieve from their shit tests, sports statistics have provided recourse more than vicarious identity, but assertion of heterosexual identity and indication that one is not shirking competitive proofs, even while not actively in the hunt - attending to the serous, manly criteria of purely objective measures nevertheless.

Any sensible boy who looks at baseball stats now should face the facts, that the criteria of measure of who his heterosexual identity is constructed with needs to take into account, or should take into account, his people, including particularly noting difference from the criteria that females may have regarding selection for our fitness or rejection of our non-fitness; and, in turn, rejection of their criteria when it is not adaptive to the fitness of our kind.

Though most of us White boys put a mental asterisk by Hank Aaron’s record breaking 715 (in 1974) and new record setting of 755, to note that he accumulated the number in many more games than Ruth, the record and baseball nevertheless lost much of our identification as blacks started to become emblematic among its leaders.

        In different times:
       
“Say it ain’t so, Joe” was the cry for Joe Jackson to defend himself against unfairly puritanical standards to protect baseball’s criteria.

Country bumpkin, “Shoeless” Joe Jackson, was one of the greatest hitters of the early part of last century. He was banned from baseball by the baseball commissioner for allegedly being part of the “Blacksox scandal”, in which the Chicago White Sox threw the 1919 World Series in a deal with Jewish Mobster Arnold Rothstein.

Though some of his teammates almost assuredly did throw the series, Jackson’s statistics illustrate that he played hard and well - that he was not a part of throwing the series. But such were the times and such was the concern for the integrity of the game, its statistics and objective criteria - that his merely being associated with players who would cheat was enough to get him unjustly banned from baseball.

Crucially, the game maintained integrity as a White criteria until integration started with Saint Jackie Robinson a little after World War II. The game’s integrity predictably degenerated in a myriad of nasty ways after that. Statistical degeneration culminated with Barry Bonds, who, incensed that “White boy” Mark McGwire had used steroids to hit 70 home runs in a season and shatter Babe Ruth’s one time single season record of 60, went onto a steroids program himself; to not only hit 73 in a season, but to break Babe Ruth‘s single season slugging percentage record and the sine qua non, to become the all time home run king, surpassing Ruth’s legendary mark of 714, for an altogether new, steroid enhanced bar at 762.

                                                 
Conscientious, talented but troubled Croatian, Roger Maras, compared to Mark McRoids

There was some public shaming; but not so much as an asterisk by the roiders statistical record breaking marks. Its worth mentioning since there was large consternation for Roger Maris - first one to break Babe Ruth’s single season record with 61 in 1961 - meeting resistance for recognition as the record bearer by his generation’s baseball commissioner, who suggested that his new single season record should have an asterisk by it because he did it in 162 games while Ruth did it in 154. That’s how concerned American boys and their fathers were about maintaining the game’s objectivity (and how concerned the commissioner was, who also happened to be Babe Ruth’s biographer).

Now Barry Bonds does steroids, a more destructive example to kids and greater detriment to the game’s objectivity even than gambling against one’s own team, let alone merely being on the same team as others who did it, and Bonds doesn’t get so much as the asterisk that Maris was threatened with, let alone banishment from the game - as he should have been and as Shoeless Joe Jackson should not have been - “Say it ain’t so Joe” was the saying in 1919 when Joe Jackson was accused of participating in throwing the world series. Jackson did maintain his innocence, said it wasn’t so; and his world series statistics in 1919 bear that out.

       
Babe Ruth taking batting tips from Joe Jackson, the man he modeled his hitting style after because he considered him the best.

So much the standard bearer of the game’s style and grace was Joe Jackson, that Babe Ruth, the all time statistical king and most famous baseball player of all, stated that he modeled his swing after Joe Jackson, because he thought he was the best hitter that he’d ever seen.

I believe that it wasn’t so, Joe, that you should have been banned; but that it is so, Barry, that the way you accomplished your record should have little boys forever look upon baseball statistics, let alone salaries, as sham objective metric of worth, no comfort and no measure worth concern for White men.

Ty Cobb, the all time Batting Average leader at .367, was concerned not only for the integrity of the game and its statistics - lamenting that Ruth had made “the home run king and strategy a deuce”  - but for its racial hygiene as well: he referred to Ruth as “that nigger” and “nigger lips” (to say nothing of Ruth’s nose). In truth, he liked Ruth and would let him, his nose and lips slide. However, he did correctly want to maintain the game as a criteria to assess baseball skills relative to Whites and their way of life.

READ MORE...

Steve Mnuchin, derived fortune at Goldman Sachs

Trump is looking less like the one who is freeing the White Republican base from its Neo Con backing than he is a somewhat lower grade interface - a bit more gritty and streetwise, perhaps, perfect to stay ahead of reactionary trends in the WN curve; having shared interest with the YKW to protect domestic real estate assets - he has neither extricated himself nor the implicit White Republican base from YKW entanglements.

Zero Hedge, “Trump Picks Former Goldman Partner And Soros Employee As Finance Chairman”, 5 May 2016:

In an oddly ironic twist, today Donald Trump announced that he has picked as chairman of his newly launched fundraising operation none other than a former employee of the bank he has repeatedly criticized in the past, and which he used as a foil to criticize Ted Cruz: Goldman Sachs.

Trump announced that heading up his own personal fundraising operation as national finance chairman will be Steven Mnuchin, a long-time business associate, chairman and CEO of the hedge fund Dune Capital. More importantly, however, he spent 17 years at Goldman Sachs where he was most recently a Partner, having built a fortune of $46 million before launching his own hedge fund.

While employed at Goldman, he purchased the remains of IndyMac Bank (now known as OneWest Bank), the Pasadena, California-based mortgage lender that collapsed in 2008. “Notoriously press-shy, the executive endured 2011 protests on the lawn of his Bel Air mansion by foreclosed homeowners angered at his lender’s handling of soured mortgages.”

As Zero Hedge readers are familiar, Trump often critized his main competitor Ted Cruz for his links to the bank because of loans used to finance Cruz’s Senate campaign, and because Heidi Cruz was a one-time employee of Goldman. “I know the guys at Goldman Sachs. They have total, total control over him. Just like they have total control over Hillary Clinton,” Trump said in one debate.

He had no qualms, however, in hiring one of the most prominent Goldman alums to raise money for him.

In addition to Goldman, Mnuchin also worked at Soros Fund Management, whose founder, George Soros, has funded many left-leaning causes. Where it gets even more bizarre is that Mnuchin has donated frequently to Democrats, including to Clinton and Barack Obama.

As a hedge fund manager, Mnuchin is part of a group of businesspeople Trump has excoriated. In August, Trump said hedge fund managers were “getting away with murder” as he touted his proposal to end the so-called carried interest loophole, which gives private equity and hedge fund managers preferential tax treatment.

“The hedge fund guys didn’t build this country,” Trump said at the time on CBS’ Face the Nation. “These are guys that shift paper around and they get lucky,” he said. “They are energetic. They are very smart. But a lot of them—they are paper-pushers. They make a fortune. They pay no tax. It’s ridiculous.”

They apparently are also very good at raising money.

Some more on Mnuchin’s background: starting his career in the early 1980s as a trainee at Salomon Brothers before moving to Goldman Sachs in 1985, Mnuchin was front and center for the advent of instruments like collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps. He has called securitization “an extremely positive development in terms of being able to finance different parts of the economy and different businesses efficiently.” The pitfalls of the financing method came later, he’s said.

Mnuchin’s father, Robert Mnuchin, was a partner at Goldman Sachs in the 1960s. The second-youngest of five siblings, Steven attended the prestigious Riverdale Country School and then Yale University, where his roommate was Edward Lampert, who would go on to become a hedge-fund manager and owner of Sears.

More recently, in October 2014 Mnuchin became co-chairman of the board of the Hollywood studio Relativity Media due to Dune’s fascination with movies. Dune has provided financing for batches of winning movies, like the “X-Men” franchise and “Avatar,” Hollywood’s all-time box-office champion.

Relativity Media filed for bankruptcy last summer, just a few months after Mnuchin’s arrival. According to Variety, Dune was intimately involved in the studio’s failure.

The money-man and fellow investors in a Dune Capital fund are said to have lost as much as $80 million — equity that is almost certain to be lost for good, said two sources familiar with the situation. And disgruntled Relativity investors privately are questioning how a bank Mnuchin once headed – OneWest Bank of Pasadena – was allowed by Relativity to drain $50 million from the studio just weeks prior to the July 30 insolvency filing.

Mnuchin had left Relativity just days before the company reached an agreement with OneWest to extend the loan deadline and allow the bank to claim that money.

To be sure, Hillary Clinton, who in turn has been attacked for her paid speeches to Goldman Sachs, also has a high-ranking Goldman official in her ranks, former CFTC commissioner Gary Gensler, who is the former secretary of state’s chief financial officer and whom she is grooming for a potential Treasury Secretary. But for Trump, a self-professed “anti-establishment” candidate, who has repeatedly stated he will fund his own way and is not “for sale to special interest groups”, his sudden proximity to Wall Street comes as a big surprise and will leave many of his supporters demanding an explanation.

The Atlantic, “How Donald Trump Speaks to—and About—Minorities” 3 May 2016:

Does the presumptive Republican nominee see African Americans and Hispanics as part of the American “we”?

Lucas Jackson / Reuters

Celebrating his big win in Indiana—and his elevation to presumptive nominee of the Republican Party—Tuesday night, Donald Trump spoke at Trump Tower in New York City, where he delivered a promise to heal the deep fractures in his party.

“We want to bring unity to the Republican Party,” he said. “We have to bring unity. It’s so much easier if we have it.”

Do Black Votes Matter to Donald Trump?

That will be a tall order. But as a general-election candidate, Trump will need to win over more than just Republicans. In his inimitable way, he pledged to bring together the rest of the nation as well.

“We’re going to bring back our jobs, and we’re going to save our jobs, and people are going to have great jobs again, and this country, which is very, very divided in so many different ways, is going to become one beautiful loving country, and we’re going to love each other, we’re going to cherish each other and take care of each other, and we’re going to have great economic development and we’re not going to let other countries take it away from us, because that’s what’s been happening for far too many years and we’re not going to do it anymore,” he said. (That’s a single sentence, if you’re keeping track at home.)

Trump faces significant obstacles to achieving that unity, particular with blocs that are not white men. Seven in 10 women view him unfavorably. It’s even worse with minorities. A recent Gallup poll found that 77 of Hispanics view Trump unfavorably. A Washington Post poll pegged that number at eight in 10, seven of them “very unfavorable.” An NBC News/Survey Monkey poll found an astonishing 86 percent of African Americans had a negative view of Trump.

One reason for those atrocious ratings is the way Trump speaks to and about minorities, which was on display during his victory speech Tuesday.

“We’re going to have great relationships with the Hispanics,” he said. “The Hispanics have been so incredible to me. They want jobs. Everybody wants jobs. The African Americans want jobs. If you look at what’s going on, they want jobs.”

Part of Trump’s rhetorical power is his supercharged used of “we,” a method that persuades people across the country that they are part of a larger movement, and somehow share with Trump his aura of wealthy and luxury. (It’s the same technique he’s used to sell real estate for years.) In the midst of his spiel about all the ways “we” would make America great again, Trump tossed in this passage about minorities.

His phrasing is telling. First, it suggests that for Trump, blacks and Hispanics aren’t part of “we”—“they” constitute separate groups. Perhaps that’s an accidental, unthinking division, but subconscious racial division is no less dangerous. Second, it shows him assuming that minority concerns can be reduced to economics. That view is perhaps unsurprising for a man who has spent his career trying to accumulate wealth, but it is a two-dimensional view of black and Hispanic Americans.

The fact that his policies simply don’t line up with what most African Americans want in a president is one reason his numbers with black voters are so bad. Another factor is a presidential campaign driven in large parts by divisive appeals to racism and bigotry against Hispanics, Muslims, and other groups. Trump also has a long history of racially charged incidents, from alleged tenant discrimination to his strident reaction to the Central Park Five.

The entertainer has long spoken about minority groups with the outdated formulation involving a definite article: “I have a great relationship with the blacks. I’ve always had a great relationship with the blacks,” he said in 2011, using language that undermined his claim. He’s said similar things about “the Hispanics.”

Changing the way Trump speaks about African Americans and Hispanics won’t solve his problems with those groups, but if he wishes to unify the country, beginning to speak about them as though they are part of the American populace would be a good place to start.

Way to go right-wingers. As usual, the real Republican men are too rational to see race…these men are color blind, love everybody.

This loving domestic unity is going to be good for European EGI, going to be good for the economy - Asia is going to buy its products.

TNO, “Muslim Set to Win London Mayor,” 2 May 2016:

Britain’s capital city of London is set to elect a Muslim Pakistani-origin mayor this week, making it the first such formerly European city to officially fall before the nonwhite invasion of Europe, started more than five decades ago.

Sadiq Khan, standing for the Labour Party, is far and away the strong favorite to win London’s mayoral election on Thursday, despite a racially-charged campaign and allegations from his Conservative opponent that he is linked to Muslim extremists.

Sadiq Khan MP at Westminster, London, Britain - 11 Oct 2012

Earlier, Khan had announced that there were “too many white men” working in the London government, and that if elected, he would “rectify” this “problem.”

Khan is set to win the election not because he is the better candidate, but because the city is now majority nonwhite, perhaps the largest metropolis in Europe to have been completely overrun by Third World immigration.

As a result, the Conservative Party candidate—Zac Goldsmith, a Jewish-origin Member of Parliament, married to a member of the Rothschild family—trails Kahn by more than 20 points in all opinion polls.

As a Reuters article understated the situation: “London’s population of 8.6 million is among the most diverse in the world and it is rare for identity politics to enter British campaigning.”

This “identity politics,” as Reuters calls it, is of course nonwhites block voting for the nonwhite candidate, and London’s Jewish population voting for the Jewish candidate. The ethnic British voters in the capital—now an absolute minority—appear to be favoring Goldsmith, but this is unlikely to affect the race’s outcome.

Goldsmith, with the support of Prime Minister David Cameron, has for weeks focused on Khan’s past appearances alongside radical Muslim speakers, accusing him of giving “platform, oxygen, and cover” to extremists.

Khan was briefly forced to the defensive on the issue, and said that he regretted sharing stage with speakers who held “abhorrent” views.

In turn, Khan has accused Goldsmith of “using Donald Trump-style tactics to divide Londoners along faith lines.”

Khan has also admitted that the recent “uproar” over “anti-Semitism” in the Labour Party had hurt his chances with Jewish voters.

“I accept that the comments that Ken Livingstone has made makes it more difficult for Londoners of Jewish faith to feel that the Labour Party is a place for them, and so I will carry on doing what I have always been doing, which is to speak for everyone,” he told the media.

The real importance of Khan’s expected election victory is however that the predictable end-result of the policy of mass Third World immigration—pursued by successive Conservative and Labour Party governments—has now come to pass.

It is conclusive evidence—if any more was needed—that legal immigration is a larger threat than illegal immigration, and any nation which does not take immediate steps to ensure its racial homogeneity, will suffer London’s fate.

TNO, How Obama Order Opened Border, 11 April 2016:

Barack Obama’s Executive Action on immigration, which provided a free break for nonwhite invaders who entered the US before January 1, 2014, created an “open border” situation with Mexico, the head of the National Border Patrol Council (NPBC) told the US Congress.

NPBC president Brandon Judd told the House Judiciary Committee that Border Patrol agents were instructed to take invaders’ “word for it” that they had been in the US before that date, even though they were dripping wet after just having crossed the Rio Grande River.

Judd said that Border Patrol agents were ordered to “release dripping-wet illegal immigrants at the Rio Grande unless they actually see them climbing out of the river.

“This has created what amounts to an open border with Mexico,” Judd said.

The agents were, he continued, given the orders verbally soon after President Obama laid out plans for limiting immigration enforcement in 2014.

“We have apprehended illegal aliens just north of the border who are still soaking wet from crossing the river. If they claim, as increasingly they are doing, that they have been here since January 1, 2014, we will process and then release them,” Judd said in written testimony following up on questions from a hearing earlier this year.

“They are still wet from the river and miles from any civilization and on their word alone we release them unless we physically saw them cross the river,” he said. “This policy de facto creates an open border with Mexico for any illegal alien who wants to claim that they were here before 2014.”

The January 1, 2014, date was part of Obama’s “enforcement priorities” he laid out in November that year, which were designed to remove the threat of deportation to the vast majority of the illegal invaders in the US.

The Obama plan consists of giving long-time illegal immigrants “lower priority” for deportation in favor of recent border-crossers, and those with gang ties or who have amassed serious criminal records in addition to their immigration violations.

The rule meant that those illegal immigrants already in the pipeline for deportation were told they could have their cases dropped if they met the new cutoff and didn’t have serious criminal records.

Judd said that the invaders had quickly learned to “game the system,” and if apprehended anywhere, simply said that they had arrived before 2014—and Border Patrol agents had been instructed to simply “take their word for it” even if it was patently untrue.

Judd added that under the verbal directions, agents have been told to fingerprint illegal immigrants and process them to see if they have serious criminal records.

But those that claim to have been here since 2013, and who don’t show up with problems in their criminal history, are released into the US rather than held for deportation.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, Virginia Republican and Judiciary Committee Chairman, agreed, and said that the order had led to more illegal immigrants trying to make the trip into the US.

“Word has spread around the world about the administration’s lax immigration policies and now we see unlawful immigrants gaming the system and the administration’s so-called ‘enforcement priorities’ to come here,” said Goodlatte, after listening to Judd’s testimony.

Rerevisionist: April 11, 2016 at 6:33 pm - “Obama’s ‘own country’ is not the USA.”

Though he claims to have seen tickets going for tens of thousands of dollars, John West bought a ticket for himself, his wife and son at $66 each - the cheapest that he could find, highest and farthest from the court. He recommends this to everyone.

READ MORE...