I frequently find myself in the ironic position of defending a theory with which I disagree:  Kevin MacDonald’s theory of Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy.  This is because, although I think it isn’t correct, his theory is coherent, important and continually attacked through misrepresentation—usually by mis-defining “group evolutionary strategy”.  In other words, they disagree with his theory by refusing to address it.  By contrast I differ as to its degree of relevance to Jewish history.  Specifically, I disagree with this statement of MacDonald’s: “Fundamental to Jewish group integrity over historical time have been social controls and ideologies that depend ultimately on human abilities to monitor and enforce group goals, to create ideological structures that rationalize group aims both to group members and to outsiders, and to indoctrinate group members to identify with the group and its aims.”  I don’t disagree this group evolutionary strategy has played a significant role in the evolution of Jewry but I do not believe it is fundamental to Jewish group (particularly genetic) integrity over historical time.  My working hypothesis is that group cohesion is sufficiently valuable as a defense of individual genetic interest that it exists among all in their environment of evolutionary adaptation and a primary mode of group conflict is, not so much in direct competition for resources, but in the very genetic expression of group genetic interests.  In other words, we’re seeing a battle carried out over the expression of genetic self-interest.  This is much as a host and parasite struggle over whether the host is to express his own genetic self-interest or the interest of the parasite’s genes.  The fundamental reason Jews thrived in European populations is because they were genetically dominant over those populations and hence their group phenotypes won the struggle for expression in the resulting human ecologies.  This contrasts with their fate among populations with comparable or greater genetic dominance to Jews, such as in the Middle East and Africa.  This also explains how Jews have continued to behave self-destructively with respect to immigration, civil rights and other movements benefiting, at the expense of Jews, those populations.

There is a useful chart of the BNP’s local authority election results on its website, from which we can construe a few facts about them and the mountain they are climbing.  I think the present tense in that latter regard is entirely justified now, btw.  The climb, wherever it takes them, has properly begun.

The first thing to make perfectly clear is that it is a climb in three parts.  A base camp must be established in each local authority ward and Westminster constituency.  There must then follow a period of steady progress - hard graft with the object of familiarisation of the terraine and consolidation of further gains.  Finally, when all is ready and the electoral conditions are right, one may strike out for the summit.

What the BNP’s figures tell us is that besides the 32 mountaineers who planted the Cross of St.George on their particular summits on Thursday there are a further 225 in the middle phase of the local authority ascent.  They are comprised of about 75 second places and double that number of thirds.  And that, of course, does not include the twenty councillors the Party has in areas where no election took place this time, nor all those in the middle-phase in those areas.

READ MORE...

This time tomorrow we political Brits will be glued to the telly for the pundits’ reading of the exit polls in the 2006 English local authority elections.  Now, it happens that none of these great and wise experts predicted Mr Blair’s 2005 General Election majority with much accuracy.  But one blogger of no consequence and with no reputation to lose alighted on a figure of 52.  It turned out to be not the worst of pure guesses - being 14 seats astray - and beat all the highly-paid pros.

So tomorrow’s poll is another chance for some psephological fame.  Accordingly, I am resolutely refusing to rest on my oracular laurels, and eschewing all temptation to be modest and unassuming.  Brash and boastful is much more fun.

Here, then, is my prediction, guaranteed 100% accurate and stuff the rest, for the lead item on Friday morning’s news:-

READ MORE...

Thanks to R Berkeley for this link to a Pravda article by Stojgniev O’Donnell.  Not unnaturally, the author’s standpoint is in some ways Russia-centric.  But the opening paragraph certainly caught my attention.  Here are a few highlights:-

Russian Christians now admit that the concept of human rights and liberties as advocated by America and the West has no application in contemporary Russia . That country is drowning in vices directly linked to the West’s concept of inherent rights and liberties: abortion; homosexuality; dissolution of traditional marriage; pornography; slavery, prostitution, and exploitation of the oppressed, etc. The Russian Orthodox now understand that such American “values” are, in fact, vices which harm every human society as a collective. Such American “rights” have not brought happiness. They represent the deviance of the cult of the individual. From my Third World perspective, I am amazed that some Americans continue to argue that America’s virtue is that it protects such “rights” (=vices).

... We are now witnessing the demise of America. For decades, America successfully marketed its “values” throughout the world (accompanied often by hefty cash subsidies for corrupt, subservient regimes). The aims of the American ideology were no less ambitious than those of Soviet communism, and the Americans were victorious over the Soviets, for a couple of years anyway.

... America is dying. I assure those Americans who still feel secure about a regular pay check, their job perks, vacations, company cars and cell phones, annual bonuses, benefits, government entitlements, U.S. dollar-based investments and accounts, etc etc., that their lifestyle is crumbling. There is no longer any right or logic in America’s prosperity.

... The American Middle Class has outlived its period of historical relevance and soon will be replaced, by Hispanics, India’s Indians, and Chinese. Those groups have no qualms about bearing and rearing children.

It is the twenty-first century. America is rat-infested history. America will fall, overrun by fatwah-inspired Muslims; wild, dispossessed, self-identified Apache or Aztec guerillas; looting, reparations-deluded African-Americans; indignant Eskimos; flaming cross-dressers and advocates of every sort of politically correct nonsense. History doesn’t last forever, and anyway, America had a couple of good centuries before it turned to cr*p.

This video animation constructed from Mordechai Vanunu’s famous sixty photographs is worth a look while pondering Iranian ambitions.

Thanks to Troy for the link.

Since I am not a Christian nor a liberal nor a Ugandan immigrant nor sound asleep it is difficult for me to assess the utility of today’s sermonising by Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York.  He is, alas, the second most powerful figure in the Anglican Church, and living proof of the Communion’s exciting, go-ahead committment to ... vibrancy, of course.  So when he adumbrates upon the nature of my Englishness and cautions me to vote for a mainstream political mugger in Thursday’s local authority election, should I obediently sit up and take notice.  Does anyone, in fact, obediently sit up and take notice?

Well, according to BBC News this is what he said:-

Referring to parties like the British National Party, Dr John Sentamu said they espoused the “politics of fear”.

Dr Sentamu, who was born in Uganda, described Britain as “a country of immigrants” and ... told BBC Radio Four’s Sunday programme: “This country has been one of the most welcoming, most accommodating.

I want to suggest if it lost that because people simply say ‘we’re going to put a barbed wire around a number of things in order for us to feel safe’, that is not actual security, that’s fear - and any politics which plays on people’s fears in the long run, give it a bit of time, it will fail”.

READ MORE...

What makes us free? According to liberals it is our liberation from whatever might impede individual choice.

But this is a definition which takes us in odd directions. Take, for instance, the views of Jessica Brinton, who recently wrote an article on the young women of Tokyo (“Maid in Japan”, Herald Sun, not online).

The article was intended as “a snapshot of a culture where radical fashion, sexual bravura and cultural weirdness are finally beginning to liberate its women.”

So what is the evidence that young Tokyo women are being liberated? First, there is a changing attitude to work,

READ MORE...

What gives us a sense of wellbeing? The results of some Australian research might surprise you.

A study was released last October which compared the wellbeing of Australians according to the electorate they live in. 23,000 Australians were interviewed for the survey which was a joint project of Deakin University and Australian Unity, a large insurance company.

In which electorates did people report the highest level of wellbeing? The decisive factor was not money. In fact, the electorate with the lowest taxable income, Wide Bay in Queensland, scored the highest level of personal wellbeing.

So what did count? The report highlighted three factors which, according to political orthodoxy, ought not to matter.

READ MORE...