By Grégoire Canlorbe, American Renaissance, October 30, 2020:

       

Frank Kemp Salter is an Australian academic and researcher. Most of his career was at the Max Planck Research Centre for Human Ethology, in Andechs, Germany. He is best known for writings on ethnicity and ethnic interests. He studies political phenomena using conventional methods and the theories of behavioral biology. He has written about hierarchy (Emotions in Command, 1995), indoctrination (Ethnic Conflict and Indoctrination, 1998, edited with I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt), ethnic altruism and conflict (Welfare, Ethnicity and Altruism, 2002, Risky Transactions: Trust, Kinship and Ethnicity, 2004), and genetic interests (On Genetic Interests, 2003). In a review, Jared Taylor called On Genetic Interests “a vitally important contribution to our understanding of the significance of race and ethnicity in human affairs.” Dr. Salter has also been an adviser to Australia’s populist One Nation Party.

Grégoire Canlorbe: You write about the biological underpinnings of the obedience to one’s superiors in a hierarchy, especially in a bureaucracy. Please tell us more about this.

Frank Salter: In writing Emotions in Command, I observed command-giving in many organizations, from the military, to courts and parliaments, to nightclub doormen and theatrical rehearsals. The methods and observational categories were very much in the ethological tradition of Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt, whom I later joined as a colleague at his Max Planck Research Centre.

I expected to find dominance, and did, but I also found friendly behavior. Effective leaders take care to soften commands and bind subordinates to them through generosity and fairness. In doing this, they are helped by what I called the “dominance infrastructure,” this being the organization’s set of rules backed by inducements and punishments. My observations confirmed part of Max Weber’s theory of bureaucracy: that it is a rule-governed hierarchy. Being rule governed, with obedience largely ensured by the dominance infrastructure, administrative positions can be filled by a wide range of personalities. Domineering behavior or brilliant leadership have negative and positive effects respectively, but are not required for the organization to function.

       

It was the discovery of the affiliative component of hierarchy that led me to search for an “affiliative infrastructure.” That search led me to study ethnic ties, which can bind large populations. I wanted to know if there such a thing as an “ethnic infrastructure”?

Grégoire Canlorbe: A popular claim by J. Philippe Rushton is that there are racial differences in ethnocentrism, with the least genetically heterogeneous ethnic groups being the most ethnocentric. Do you agree?

Frank Salter: Philippe Rushton’s theory was not the basis of my research into ethnic kinship. Instead, it was William Hamilton’s theory of inclusive fitness, which is generally accepted in ethology and evolutionary biology. The theory states that kinship bonds promote the reproduction of shared genes. Hamilton extended his theory to ethnic groups. I’m not aware of the finding you describe (that variations in genetic homogeneity and the degree of genetic similarity predict the level of ethnocentrism), though it has a certain plausibility. What I am aware of is that the degree of genetic homogeneity is related to solidarity, a sense of social cohesion; or, to put it differently, conflict increases when society becomes more genetically diverse. That finding, which is compatible with Hamilton’s theory, has been repeated again and again. The work of the late Tatu Vanhanen is an excellent example.

Nonetheless it seems that a more diverse society can actually lead to greater ethnocentrism: not at the level of society taken as whole, but at the level of the different ethnic components of society. As you can see in the case of America especially (and this is a universal trend in the West), white majorities are now increasingly ethnocentric, but it clearly doesn’t compare to the very high ethnocentrism of black or Latino minorities. This is an issue the media and the universities don’t understand, and never talk about.

READ MORE...

Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, November 11, 2020:

Jared Taylor and Paul Kersey marvel at how blacks will welcome Kamala Harris. They also discuss new posthumous honors for Trayvon Martin, good sense in Sweden, racial preferences for a Covid vaccine, the decolonization of art, and more mush from Ibram Kendi.

INTERVIEW

Ruuben Kaalep: “The Intermarium has to be a voluntary alliance, not like the EU”

Visigrad Post, NOVEMBER 16, 2020

Reading Time: 11 minutes

Interview with Ruuben Kaalep, member of the Estonian Parliament and member of EKRE, the Conservative People’s Party of Estonia: “We need to be able to play on the global stage, and for that we need to put our forces together and support each other. But the Intermarium has to be a voluntary alliance, not like the EU.”

At the end of summer, Ruuben Kaalep came to Hungary at the invitation of the Hungarian nationalist party Mi Hazánk (Our Homeland). Ruuben Kaalep is one of the main advocates for the Intermarium project, a political and geostrategic plan aiming to regroup the Baltic countries, the Visegrád 4, Ukraine, Croatia, Slovenia, Belarus, Moldova, and Romania, forming a kind of a triangle between the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, and the Adriatic Sea.

Although this list changes from time to time, sometimes including other Balkan countries, the Scandinavian countries, or even Austria, the Intermarium’s aim stays the same: to coordinate cooperation among the countries of Central and Eastern Europe — with the notable exception of Russia — in order to protect the interests of the region.

For its supporters, the project is the best way to preserve the way of life, security, and independence of the CEE countries, by “freeing them from Western domination and protecting them from Russian imperialism.”

The Intermarium project is not a new idea, although its revival gained visibility after the Maïdan revolution and the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, which the advocates of the Intermarium perceived as new Russian aggression necessitating regional cooperation to avoid such a thing in the future.

One hundred years ago, the post-WW1 reborn Polish state was dreaming of rebuilding the great Polish empire connecting the Baltic and the Black Seas, known as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, able to contain Russia. This Międzymorze — “between-seas” — project of the Polish elites also included countries such as Hungary, Yugoslavia, Finland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania, making it the first modern project to bring together the CEE countries. Placed between Russia and the West, cutting off the Balkans from the rest of Europe, this geopolitical project always had many critics in both Russia and the West. Nowadays, if the Intermarium is mostly a little-known, pan-nationalist project, advocated mainly by Ukrainian, Balt, Croatian, and Polish political groups, the Three Seas Initiative can be seen as an implementation of Intermarium’s basic idea.

Intermarium has bigger ambitions than the announced goals of the Three Seas Initiative (gathering Baltic countries, the V4, Austria, Slovenia, Croatia, Romania, and Bulgaria) which is built on an energy and transportation cooperation scheme aiming to guarantee energy independence of the CEE countries from Russia while being financed by the USA. For the advocates of the Intermarium project, the future of the region should lie on the rejection of three main enemies: Russia, NATO, and communism.

Ferenc Almássy met with Ruuben Kaalep while he was in Hungary in order to discuss his advocacy of the Intermarium project.

In red, a version of the Intermarium, gathering Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Belorussia, Ukraine, Moldova, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia and Slovenia.

Ferenc Almássy: You are member of the Estonian Parliament, but you are, can we say, a nationalist? Can you accept this epithet?

Ruuben Kaalep: Absolutely. A nationalist is what I am. It’s the main thing for me.

Ferenc Almássy: So how is it possible that in Estonia, nationalists are part of a governmental coalition?

READ MORE...

The government imposed freeze on economic activity, otherwise known as lockdown, is shrinking the employment market to the extent that ...

Plunge in foreign-born workers as Covid destroys jobs
Unemployment surges to 4.8pc while redundancies soar by 181,000 in the three months to September

The number of foreign-born workers employed in the UK fell by almost 600,000 in the past year as Covid laid waste to the jobs market and sparked an exodus of migrants.

There are now 765,000 fewer people of working age born abroad in Britain than there were a year ago, with a bigger fall in those from the EU than those from the rest of the world.

... The fall in workers from the EU14 - nations such as France and Germany - in the UK is similar to the drop seen during the financial crisis.

However, a far greater share of those from the EU8, which covers more workers from Eastern European nations including Poland, have been affected.

... The UK’s reliance on foreign employees acts as a “safety valve”, said Martin Beck at Oxford Economics, sucking in workers when the economy is doing well, and shedding them again in downturns.

“It keeps the unemployment rate down - people are losing their jobs but are not adding to the unemployment rolls. It is a stabilising force for the jobs market. It is bad to lose those jobs, but the fiscal cost is not being borne by the UK taxpayer,” he said.

It means unemployment is unlikely to rise as high as 7pc by the end of the year, or to meet the gloomier predictions of 10pc or more in 2021, he said, because the fall in foreign-born workers over the past year has already reduced the workforce by as much as 2pc.

“I would expect those people to come back if things do recover quickly and get back to normal, Brexit permitting,” said Mr Beck.

Overall, firms laid off 181,000 people between July and September, pushing the total to 314,000.  Experimental figures also suggested an extra 33,000 employees shed from company payrolls in October, signalling 782,000 fewer people in work compared to pre-pandemic March.

European leaders to call for greater emphasis on far right terror groups.

New hate laws promised.

So no sooner does the British political scene gain a new party in Laurence Fox’s Reclaim, not Nigel Farage has relaunched The Brexit Party as an opponent of Covid-19 lock-down strategy.  Doesn’t sound like he has thought this out to me.  What, after all, happens if by December 1st the r-rate is down below 1 and the economy is opened up again?  Or has been Farage been reading Delingpole at Breitbart yesterday and concluded that the Great Reset is upon us?

Here is Farage’s stated reasoning:

The institutions and policies that require change are formidable ... The House of Lords, the BBC, the way we vote, law and order, immigration. Badly run, wasteful quangos are in abundance. The Home Office is not fit for purpose. This Government has taken cronyism to a whole new level. Waste of taxpayers’ hard-earned cash is off the scale.

But the single most pressing issue is the Government’s woeful response to coronavirus. The “strategy” has been to terrify the nation into submission, coupled with a barrage of lockdowns, rules, regulations and threats. It is all about playing for time, in the hope that a vaccine miraculously comes along.

...

The Government has dug itself into a hole and, rather than admit its mistakes, it continues to excavate. Ministers have lost touch with a nation divided between the terrified and the furious. The debate over how to respond to Covid is becoming even more toxic than that over Brexit.

Lockdowns don’t work: in fact, they cause more harm than good ...

Here is Delingpole taking a tilt at Carl Schwab’s WEC machinations:

Build Back Better. This is the slogan of the New World Order – aka the Great Reset.

You hear it often these days intoned — in the manner of dutiful Stepford Wives — by everyone from UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the Prince of Wales to Canadian blackface artiste Justin Trudeau and, inevitably, Joe Biden who has adopted it as his campaign slogan.

About the only leader you won’t hear using it is Donald Trump because he recognises its true significance. Build Back Better is the code phrase for one of the most terrifying and dangerous, globally co-ordinated assaults on liberty and prosperity in the history of mankind. If the plan succeeds, the world you inhabit will be unrecognisable, your children will have no prospects and your life will barely be worth living. Build Back Better means totalitarian rule by a global, technocratic elite – as constrictive and immiserating as life under fascism or communism. This hideous New World Order is the Great Reset.

... Big Government takes care of everything, only not on a national scale this time, but a global one. It will be managed by a technocratic elite over whom you will have no democratic control.

Jobs and high minimum wages will be guaranteed; shale gas will be replaced by solar; businesses — in return for massive bailouts from the government — will agree to be run more like communist worker co-operatives; car lanes on freeways will be replaced by cycle lanes; companies are no longer driven by profit by ‘public interest’ and goals like sustainability. Oh — and you needn’t worry about your mortgage repayments any more — because private property will be abolished.

(And yes, they’re serious about abolishing ownership. Here’s their website boasting about their plans back in 2016.)

“Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city – or should I say, “our city”. I don’t own anything. I don’t own a car. I don’t own a house. I don’t own any appliances or any clothes.

“It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much.”

Farage has spent the last few days reporting on the Trump campaign, but is he preparing his political party for a Biden victory?  Or does he really think that opposing a 30-day partial lock-down is a cause for with political legs?

... living in the home of the British people.

In his announcement of the new national lock-down this evening, which comes into force this Thursday, Boris Johnson informed us that there is a reasonable chance of a Covid-19 vaccine for a UK-wide inoculation programme during the first quarter of next year.  Never let it be said, however, that black lives do not matter.

People could be prioritised for a coronavirus vaccine depending on their sex, ethnicity and wealth under proposals being discussed by the government.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), the body charged with devising the UK’s vaccine strategy, is considering the best way to decide who is most at risk from becoming seriously ill from COVID-19.neptune

It may even use an algorithm developed by academics at Oxford University which factors in a wide range of variables including “age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, smoking status, body mass index, pre-existing medical conditions and current medications”.

...

According to Public Health England (PHE), twice as many working age men diagnosed with Covid have died compared to women; mortality rates in the poorest areas are double those in the wealthiest; and BAME communities have between a 10 and 50 per cent higher risk of death even once age, sex and social deprivation are taken into account.

Low skilled workers have a death rate almost four times that of professionals. For security guards - the hardest hit of all in the first wave - recorded deaths were almost twice that of men working in social care.

I do not care what happens to other peoples in places that are not my own people’s place.  I do not care what sadness or joy they find in life, for that life is their life, and my care is for the life of my people.

There are, however, educated, white, middle-class people who are paid to care and demand that we care too.

Ellen Ackroyd, a field manager for the aid organisation Help Refugees/Choose Love, based in Calais, said: “In Calais, these people face daily violent evictions from their makeshift shelters and there is a total lack of information about their legal rights.

“At the same time, people seeking protection in the UK can only do so once on UK soil yet no safe and legal routes are made available for this purpose.

“So long as the hostile and exclusionary treatment of people seeking protection continues, people will continue to attempt these dangerous journeys, which no one should ever have to undertake.”

Beth Gardiner-Smith, the chief executive of Safe Passage, one of a number of humanitarian groups that have long called for safe and legal routes for asylum seekers, said: “Nobody should have to risk their life to reach safety and today’s tragic news is the direct consequence of a lack of safe alternatives for those seeking sanctuary.

“Just this year, the government closed the Dubs route designed to give children safe passage to the UK. And now the only legal route left available to children – family reunion – will end in less than 10 weeks’ time unless the government acts now.

“Rather than speculating about ever more inhumane ways to push back and prevent refugees seeking asylum, the government should act now to protect family reunion and expand safe and legal routes for refugees.”

Mariam Kemple Hardy, the head of campaigns at Refugee Action, said: “No one wants to see people make dangerous crossings but the government’s hostile rhetoric does nothing to help. It must stop trying to look tough and urgently create more safe and legal routes for people to seek sanctuary in the UK.”

It goes without saying, of course, that these educated, white, middle-class people are not paid to care about us; and they don’t.