Majorityrights News > Category: Demographics

James Watson won the Nobel Prize in 1962 along with Francis Crick for discovering the double helix structure of DNA.

New York Times, 1 Jan 2019:

      “James Watson Won’t Stop Talking About Race”

The Nobel-winning biologist has drawn global criticism with unfounded pronouncements on genetics, race and intelligence. He still thinks he’s right, a new documentary finds.

“Decoding Watson,” a new film about Dr. James D. Watson explores the gulf between his scientific brilliance and his views on race.

It has been more than a decade since James D. Watson, a founder of modern genetics, landed in a kind of professional exile by suggesting that black people are intrinsically less intelligent than whites.

In 2007, Dr. Watson, who shared a 1962 Nobel Prize for describing the double-helix structure of DNA, told a British journalist that he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours, whereas all the testing says, not really.”

Moreover, he added, although he wished everyone were equal, “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true.” Dr. Watson’s comments reverberated around the world, and he was forced to retire from his job as chancellor of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on Long Island, although he retains an office there.

He apologized publicly and “unreservedly,’’ and in later interviews he sometimes suggested that he had been playing the provocateur — his trademark role — or had not understood that his comments would be made public.

Ever since, Dr. Watson, 90, has been largely absent from the public eye. His speaking invitations evaporated. In 2014, he became the first living Nobelist to sell his medal, citing a depleted income from having been designated a “nonperson.’’

But his remarks have lingered. They have been invoked to support white supremacist views, and scientists routinely excoriate Dr. Watson when his name surfaces on social media.

Eric Lander, the director of the Broad Institute of M.I.T. and Harvard, elicited an outcry last spring with a toast he made to Dr. Watson’s involvement in the early days of the Human Genome Project. Dr. Lander quickly apologized.

“I reject his views as despicable,” Dr. Lander wrote to Broad scientists. “They have no place in science, which must welcome everyone. I was wrong to toast, and I’m sorry.’’

And yet, offered the chance recently to recast a tarnished legacy, Dr. Watson has chosen to reaffirm it, this time on camera. In a new documentary, “American Masters: Decoding Watson,’’ to be broadcast on P.B.S. on Wednesday night, he is asked whether his views about the relationship between race and intelligence have changed.

“No,’’ Dr. Watson said. “Not at all. I would like for them to have changed, that there be new knowledge that says that your nurture is much more important than nature. But I haven’t seen any knowledge. And there’s a difference on the average between blacks and whites on I.Q. tests. I would say the difference is, it’s genetic.’’

Dr. Watson adds that he takes no pleasure in “the difference between blacks and whites’’ and wishes it didn’t exist. “It’s awful, just like it’s awful for schizophrenics,’’ he says. (His son Rufus was diagnosed in his teens with schizophrenia.) Dr. Watson continues: “If the difference exists, we have to ask ourselves, how can we try and make it better?”

[...]

“There are powerful methods for studying the genetic and environmental origins of individual differences, but not for studying the causes of average differences between groups,” Dr. Plomin he writes in an afterword to be published this spring in the paperback edition of his book, “Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are.”

Whether Dr. Watson was aware of any of this science is unclear. In the film, he appears to have grown increasingly isolated. He mentions missing Francis Crick, his collaborator in the race to decipher the structure of DNA.

“We liked each other,’’ Dr. Watson says of Dr. Crick. “I couldn’t get enough of him.’’

As history now knows, the duo was able to solve the puzzle in 1953, with their hallmark models of cardboard and metal only with the help of another scientist, Rosalind Franklin, whose X-ray photograph of the DNA molecule was shown to Dr. Watson without her permission.

The tools of molecular biology unlocked by their discovery have since been used to trace humanity’s prehistory, devise lifesaving therapies, and develop Crispr, a gene-editing technology that was used recently, and unethically, to alter the DNA of twin human embryos.

And Dr. Watson became perhaps the most influential biologist of the second half of the 20th century. His textbook, “Molecular Biology of the Gene,’’ helped define the new field. First in a laboratory at Harvard and then at Cold Spring Harbor, he trained a new generation of molecular biologists and used his star power to champion such projects as the first sequencing of the human genome.

“You knew when you heard him that you were at the start of a revolution in understanding,’’ Nancy Hopkins, a biologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studied with Dr. Watson in the 1960s, says in “Decoding Watson.’’

“You felt as if you were part of this tiny group of people who had seen the light.’’

Complete story at New York Times

Related at Majorityrights: James Watson Doesn’t Exist.

Occidental Dissent, “Yellow Vests Protest UN Migration Pact In Belgium”, 16 Dec 2018:

       

I’m starting to think The New York Times was engaging in some wishful thinking about the Yellow Vests movement losing steam. The action has shifted to Belgium:

Sotiri Dimpinoudis @sotiridi Dec 16

#Update: Already 1000 people gathered to protest in #Brussels against the #UN Migration Pact of #Marrakech! More Trains and Cars are expected to arrive in the #Belgian capital!

Céderic@Cederic_V

#Brussels #Belgium approximately 5.500 protesters march against #Marrakech without violence.

Riots broke out AFTERWARDS and should not be associated with the march.
3:04 PM - Dec 16, 2018

Oom Ashii@AshiiK11
Chaos in EU’s capital #Brussels.

Massive protests have erupted in Brussels against adoption of #UNMigrationCompact. Signing of this compact means Belgium has been sold to Globalists.

Protestors have been beaten and arrested.

more of the same
DECEMBER 17, 2018 AT 9:16 AM
UN Migration Pact: The Final Solution to The White Problem. I can’t imagine why there’s been so little MSM coverage about it.

Yellow Vests are zeroing in on what really matters.

Sotiri Dimpinoudis@sotiridi
Replying to @sotiridi
#Breaking: Protestors are smashing every window of the European Commission building they can see in their path! To protest against the #UN Migration Pact of #Marrakech in #Belgium!
2:19 PM - Dec 16, 2018

#Update: Picture of the European Commission building in the European district “#Schumanplein” in #Brussels Surrounded by Tear-Gas cloud! To protest against the #UN Migration Pact of #Marrakech in #Belgium!
Sotiri Dimpinoudis
@sotiridi
Replying to @sotiridi
2:20 PM - Dec 16, 2018

A “yellow vest” (gilet jaune) protestor holds a sign reading “Dear bourgeois we are deeply sorry to disturb you but could we all live with dignity please ?” on December 8, 2018 near the Arc de Triomphe in Paris./AFP The Nation.

       
        AFP

Populism in its Pure Form

                                                    Photo/AFP

Alain de Benoist

1,025 words

Interview by Nicolas Gauthier

Translated by Greg Johnson

Boulevard Voltaire: For about ten days now, France has been living in the era of the yellow vests, and opinions about it are already piling up. Flash in the pan or groundswell? New Fronde [a series of civil wars in France between 1648 and 1653]? New Jacquerie [a peasant revolt in northern France in 1358]? What is your feeling?

Alain de Benoist: Five years ago, almost to the day, on November 23, 2013, you asked me about the red caps movement. I then drew your attention to the fact that “all protests or uprisings of some magnitude which we are witnessing today are born on the margins, or away from parties and unions, which are obviously no longer capable of embodying or relaying the aspirations of the people.” My conclusion was this: “Just one watchword: red hats everywhere!” Well, here we are: the yellow vests are the red hats everywhere. After years and years of humiliation, impoverishment, and social and cultural exclusion, it is simply the people of France speaking again.

Even if the lower classes and the lower middle classes are the driving force — which gives the movement an extraordinary class dimension — the yellow vests come from different backgrounds; they bring together young and old, peasants and businessmen, as well as office employees, blue-collar workers, and managers. Women as well as men (I think of those septuagenarian pensioners who do not hesitate, despite the cold, to sleep in their cars so that barricades can be held fast, day and night). People who do not care about the Right or the Left, and who for the most part never even participated in politics, but who fight on the basis of what they have in common: the feeling of being treated as second-class citizens by the media caste, considered as conscriptable and exploitable at the mercy of the predatory oligarchy of the rich and powerful, never to be consulted, but always to be deceived; indeed, to be the “scapegoats” (François Bousquet) of France’s dregs, this “peripheral France” that is today undoubtedly the most French in France, but who are nevertheless abandoned to their fate to be victims of unemployment, declining wages, insecurity, relocation, immigration — and after years of patience and suffering, they ended up saying: “That’s enough!” That’s the yellow vests movement. I respect them, I respect them all!

Boulevard Voltaire: What strikes you the most about this movement?

Alain de Benoist: Two things. The first, and the most important, is the spontaneous nature of this movement, because this is what is most frightening to the public authorities, who don’t know to whom they should talk, but also the parties and unions, who discover with astonishment that close to one million men and women can mobilize and unleash a solidarity movement that has rarely been seen (seventy to eighty percent of the public support them) without even having to think of how to appeal to the people. The yellow vests are a perfect example of popular self-organization. No leaders, small or great, neither Caesars nor tribunes — only the people. Populism in its pure form. Not the populism of parties or movements that claim this label, but what Vincent Coussedière called the “populism of the people.” Frondeurs, sans-culottes, communards, it does not matter under which label one wants to place them. The people of the yellow vests have not entrusted anyone to speak for them. They have asserted themselves as a historical subject, and for that, too, they must be approved and supported.

       

The other point that struck me was the incredible hate speech directed against the yellow vests by supporters of the dominant ideology, that sad alliance of laughably affected petty technocrats and the financial markets. “White trash,” “morons,” and “nerds” are the words that are heard most often (to say nothing of “brownshirts”!). Read the letters of the readers of Le Monde, and listen to the moral Left — the kerosene Left — and the well-behaved Right. Until now, they held themselves back, but not anymore. They have now let go, expressing their arrogance and class snobbery in the most obscene manner, as well as their sheer panic at being immediately dismissed by beggars. After the formidable demonstration in Paris, they no longer have the heart to tell those who complain about the price of gas that they only have to buy an electric car (the modern version of “Let them eat cake”!). When the people fill the streets of the capital, they raise the drawbridge! If they express their naked hatred of this popular France — the France of Johnny, the one who “smokes cigarettes and drives diesel” — of the France that is insufficiently diverse, excessively French, those who Macron has described as illiterate, lazy people who want to “fuck in the brothel” — in short, the little people, they know that their days are numbered.

       

Boulevard Voltaire: We can see how the movement started, but it is not very clear how it will end, supposing, moreover, that it must end. Are there elements in place to allow this revolt to be translated into political terms?

Alain de Benoist: It is not in these terms that the problem arises. We are in the midst of a groundswell that is not about to falter, because it is the objective result of a historical situation that is itself bound to last. The gasoline question was obviously only the last straw that broke the camel’s back, or rather the drop of gasoline that blew up the can. Right away, the real demand was: “Macron, resign!” In the immediate future, the government will use the usual maneuvers: repress, defame, discredit, divide, and wait for it to unravel. It may unravel, but the causes will always be there. With the yellow vests, France has arrived at a pre-revolutionary state. If they radicalize even more, so much the better. If not, this will still have been a major warning sign. It will be worth repeating. In Italy, the Five Star movement, which was also born out of a “day of anger,” is now in power. In France, the final explosion will occur in less than ten years.

Source: http://www.bvoltaire.fr/alain-de-benoist-les-gilets-jaunes-la-revanche-des-ploucs-emissaires/

Stasi-Minded Experiments in human pan-mixia

Voice of Europe, “Is Angela Merkel behind the UN Migration Pact? New document sheds light”,  29 Nov 2018:

Germany’s Deception: Internal documents from Germany’s Federal Foreign Office divulge that Angela Merkel’s government has been the main mastermind behind the controversial UN migrant pact.

The document, described by MP Petr Bystron of the populist Alternative for Germany (AfD), reveals that the Federal Foreign Office taking credit for the disastrous UN Migrant Pact, claiming they’ve been working on the agreement since 2016.

The deception runs deep, the Foreign Office having stated that the German government has been behind the Global Compact on Refugees and the Global Compact on Migration, saying that though they are not legally binding, they were both designed to be “politically binding”.

Belgian International Law professor Pierre d’Argent, has explained that the agreement sets up a “legal framework” that can be used by lawyers in interpreting the meaning of the law. “…one can imagine that in some cases before international jurisdictions, lawyers use this pact as a reference tool to try to guide them,” d’Argent said.

Alexander Gauland, Co-leader of Germany’s populist AfD party told Breitbart London:

“It’s becoming glaringly obvious that the German government was trying to deceive the public, and still is. They are trying to retroactively legalise Merkel’s illegal opening of the borders since 2015. If the AfD had not raised the topic of the Global Compact, no one would ever have known about it until it was too late.”

“Now we are discovering that this contract has been in the works for a long time, and on German initiative, no less. However, those responsible never bothered to mention it. For good reason. We will do everything we can to avert this disaster in the making,” he said further.

The US, Austria, Hungary, Poland, Israel, Australia, The Czech Republic, Italy, Slovakia and more have backed out and will not sign the pact.

“We are only responsible to our Austrian population as government officials. Austrian sovereignty has top priority for us, this must be preserved and protected,” Austrian Vice Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache said about pulling out of the pact.

Related at Majorityrights:

UN MIGRANT COMPACT: THE DEATH OF OUR NATIONS

Germany Introduces Forced Integration

Prime Minister of Slovakia, Peter Pellegrini

Voice of Europe, “Slovakia will not support UN migration pact under any circumstances, Prime Minister says”, 25 Nov 2018:

By PAUL DIJKS

“Slovakia will not support this United Nations pact under any circumstances and will not agree with it,” Pellegrini said after the meetings. The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration is set to be signed in Marrakech in December.

The rejection of the migration pact could pose problems for Pellegrini’s government as Foreign Minister Miroslav Lajcak, who was President of the United Nations General Assembly when the migration pact was adopted, threatened to resign if the government rejects the agreement. Pellegrini has faith that Lajcak will stay even though they are rejecting the pact, “I will do everything I can to keep him in his seat”.

Innocent until proven guilty we are.

Nobody alive should be presumed guilty and made to suffer and pay with their lives and ethnonationhood, even if it is true that forebears may have over corrected, even vastly. Where people manifest traits of prior generations so as to act criminally, as homicidal imperial supremacists, that’s another matter.

Until then, it is a general UN agreement that collective punishment is not valid….let alone for the historical misdeeds of regimes from prior generations.

Nevertheless, the vast wounds, the gaping chasms of genetic capital that many may vaguely perceive as family and loved ones lost, yearn over, if not feel acutely - these losses in our genetic capital will likely well up through our unconscious and conscious systemically and must be recognized.

That caveat having been issued, having absolved present generations, we will move on to correct the record of imperialist misdeeds of prior generations and attempted cover-ups by a more recent generation.

We will be addressing the notion that Hitler and the Nazis were acting in sheer defense and that they were making bonafide peace offerings, that the Allies were the true aggressors.

To get a more accurate and fair understanding of the sources of the conflict, we need to be fairly comprehensive about the history - will begin with the more recent history and work back into historical origins… reversing the usual Nazi sympathetic order of historical survey, from Versailles to the present, as if history started there.

Press image above or here for video, Part 4: If we take a historical perspective of ethnonationalists acting in good faith as opposed to that of the empires that were in control of Europe just prior to the World Wars, we can see that it was imperialism, not nationalism, that in fact spawned these wars. If we want to do justice to the homeostatic systemic correction that ethnonationalism affords against runaway liberal internationalism, we need to take advantage of interactive correctability through a more honest historical frame of reference, to locate where ethnonationalism lost homeostatic correctiive reference and became subject to imperial stasis.

That would mean beginning at least at the point where (Germanic) imperialism became a dominant paradigm in and through (central/eastern) Europe, a period issued in by Frederick The Great - when the Polish ethnostate was dissolved, Germanization imposed by the imperial Austro-Hungarian and German/Prussian partitions, while imperial Russia controlled the rest of it.

As far as ethnostatism goes in fact, Germany remained huge following Versailles, retaining a great deal of what is now western Poland, including Breslau (now Wroclaw) and East Prussia, which is now Kaliningrad and parts just south.

We’ll go into the roots of these ethnonational travails, including mistakes on the Polish side, but not focusing there for now, since that’s what you’ve been hearing in the PC of so called WN, in exaggerated form.

Typically disregarded is the Versailles committee’s valid reasoning for areas granted to Poland and of the Sudetenland retained for Czech by the Treaty of St. Germain.

Historical examination will show that Danzig and the Sudetenland (there in green) form a crucial historical frame of ethnonational borders.

Nazi Germany understood this, as Britain’s Daily Telegraph* wrote in 1939:

“Today we realise the truth of Bismarck’s saying that he who possesses the Bohemian chain dominates Europe.

Are we to realise soon the significance of Frederick the Great’s words, “Who rules over the mouth of the Vistula, rules over Poland better than the King of Poland himself”?

Herr Hitler received a birthday gift of the freedom of Danzig. It remains to be seen whether this will involve Danzig’s receiving the “freedom” of Herr Hitler”

Though historically disputed and shifting in demographics, Danzig was occupied by Germans at that time.

In fact, Danzig is ground zero both in the framrwork of World War II and historically, of German / Polish conflict, and international intervention. It is there we need to begin overcoming shallow and mistaken Hitler apologist talk that he just wanted Danzig back -as if it was simply German and rightfully theirs, given to those stubborn Poles, when if fact Poland was merely given a stake in a Danzig made neutral by Versailles for historical and logistical reasons.

Of course these were mere pesky contentions to Hitler, which would one day be made historically incidental when his Plan East was effectively concluded. For the time being, propaganda was necessary to justify this plan and get it underway.

Thus, with regard to allegations made by the Nazis of Polish abuse of German civilians within the the corridor, we absolutely cannot assume the veracity. Even cursory glance at footage of interwar Danzig does not indicate a beleaguered German population under anything like abject duress - on the contrary, it shows as remarkably comfortable and thriving population, commercial well being despite this being during the throes of world wide economic depression.

Whatever cruelties that did in fact come of Polish nationalism toward Germans did not come in a vacuum, as they were responses to having their people and nation subject to cruel repression under the Teutonic Order and Frederick the Great’s Prussia - anti Polinism and programs of Germanification.

Again, its important to note in the abstract, that for whatever grievances the Germans may have had in regard to the response of Polish nationalists in their newly reformed nation upon Versailles, Hitler and Nazism more than made up for it, through policies such as killing 10 times the number of Poles for any German killed by Polish partitions; and retaliations far worse in the overview of their war policy and practice against Poles and Poland - such as the murdering of Polish civilians in the Warsaw ghetto uprising - in far greater number than civilians were killed in the Dresden fire bombing a year later, speaking of more than making up for grievances.

But before we re-animate a German - Polish conflict, as we are ethnonationalists of good will - before adopting the appearance of being motivated to attribute retroactive guilt then - let us reinvoke principle once again.

One of the main reasons why we are confronted with having to deal with this issue of Nazism, so divisive and stigmatic of Whites, is because of PC guilt-tripping of Whites… and a direct backlash against that guilt tripping ...particularly by those among groups not of a perspective where Nazi Germany was directly antagonistic…

And again, there has been much pandering to counter that guilt tripping in order to gain audience and backing among American Whites in particular.

It is key therefore to invoke this antidote to guilt tripping to underscore first of all, that it is history, nobody alive should be made to suffer and pay with their lives and nationhood.

__________________________

* Correction, I had accidentally said, “Daily Mirror.” This quote is actually from a Daily Telegraph article, 5 May 1939.