← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · persephone
Thread ID: 4634 | Posts: 15 | Started: 2003-01-27
2003-01-27 08:25 | User Profile
The following is from [url=http://neoeugenics.home.attbi.com/]http://neoeugenics.home.attbi.com/[/url]
Humans are very much like our primate ancestors. Unfortunately, with our larger intelligent brains, we have acquired the ability to foresee our deaths as soon as we are able to understand life, at a very young age. With this horror, we have instead of facing life with knowledge that we have a brief time to live -- a time to be made the most of -- we have turned back to our primitive instincts and succumbed to religion, false beliefs, and submission to dominance by others.
The answer to this dilemma during most of this century, has been to try and change human culture, assuming it is infinitely malleable, leading to the agony of communism and the short comings of egalitarian democracies. And in the rest of the world, despotism reigns under numerous doctrines, with little hope for the people subjected to the state's propaganda. This web page is dedicated to putting forth the view that to change the human condition we must change the innate nature of humans, that is, we must encourage the breeding of people with a higher intellect, people better able to understand what motivates them and who can eventually revolt against the subjugation by the state or the controlling elite.
It is my contention that this can be done by focusing on innate human traits we want to promote through a better understanding of behavior genetics. But to promote eugenics as a secular religion, it becomes necessary to begin with a political agenda to bring it about. Much of what I advocate, in keeping with the understanding that evolution occurs at the genetic, individual and group levels, has to do with advancing both individual eugenics and group eugenics. That is, it appears that eugenics can only be advanced in a world where nations are free to advance their own interests without interference.
Anyone who is familiar with the United Nations, NATO, the European Economic Union, and the New World Order knows that we are on the brink of giving up national sovereignty for a world totalitarianism, where a central committee will dictate to the masses how to think and behave. We see this happening now in Afghanistan, where the United States has decided that it can attack any nation that harbors terrorists, of course forgetting that terrorism is how states often come into existance and/or change. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. I advocate only two viable options for eugenics: a return to nationalism, where competing nations will experiment with various social and scientific agendas to raise their peoples to higher levels of intelligence, followed by other traits the population desires to promote; and/or, to increase group solidarity and practice eugenics without borders. The second one has been practiced by Jews for thousands of years, but it can be a dangerous road to follow for it invariably leads to group conflict in the nations where Jews dominate. Much of my writing has to do therefore not with the technology of eugenics but with human nature and how we react as competing groups.
Some have asked why I do not consider libertarianism in my scope of possible means for raising humans to higher levels. I do not discount it outright, especially since I personally have a very strong libertarian affinity. However, it appears that libertarianism is not attractive to most people except a few intellectuals, and I therefore prefer to focus on political systems that I feel have a potential for success. I hope libertarianism all the best, but I just do not see it as intricately bound to human nature as is the cohesiveness we find in national ethnic identity.
Eugenics is here to stay, and the only question now is how severely will political forces try to stamp it out and what group or nation will be the victor in the end. But a more highly evolved human will be the result and this process will continue unabated into the future. Nietzsche's supermen are right around the corner waiting for their creator to begin the task. We are their creator, they are our children.
Finally, you may ask why so many of my articles are intertwined with the Jewish approach to eugenics and why I use them over and over again to make numerous points about human behavior AND about the need for nationalism. First, Jews are one of the few identifiable groups (actually, the the Ashkenazi Jews specifically) who have practiced eugenics with tenacious success that has raised their intelligence to a remarkably high level, along with increasing group cohesiveness leading to extreme ethnocentrism or xenophobia. Several issues arise from this achievement. First, because of the form of their genetic selection process, they have primarily developed their verbal skills, making them uniquely adept at manipulation, deception, propaganda, academics, the media, etc. This would not normally be a problem, except that they have managed with this verbal skill to control politics and national policy, while those with other skills have built the technological foundations of great nations in Europe and America. That is, the Jewish contribution may not have been very great or even negative, as their accumulation of far greater wealth than any other ethnic group has to do with their abilities in manipulation of other people through the power of words rather than through constructing or building industry. Skilled craftsmen and technicians are as important as lawyers, politicians, academics or journalists; but the rewards have gone to the elite who have the power of the word over the skill of the craftsmen.
Second, Jews have been at the forefront of promoting multiculturalism, diversity, globalism, etc., while trying to block nationalism, while at the same time embracing Zionism. This faction of Jews, leftover from the days of Communism have maintained their presence in academics, the media and politics and are the primary stumbling block to other ethnic groups trying to form their own cohesive nationhood based on their genetic similarity, just like the Jews have done in Israel. My objection to Jewish influence in America therefore is strictly political and aimed at the Jewish left, not the empirical Jewish right, and their are many of them who reject multiculturalism and genetic assimilation of incompatible peoples. These Jews I embrace, the few that there are on the side of eugenics and human advancement.
And from the East, I also see an emerging nationalism. It may be that the eugenic program I envision will take place in countries like Japan, Korea, China, Singapore, India, etc. They may be able to overcome the individualism and lack of solidarity found in the Christian West. Christianity may only be the expression of a people who are creative and intelligent, but lack Nietzsche's concept of "the will to power" necessary to turn against destructive sentimentality found in the West. We have much to learn about what is genetic, and what is cultural. But if Christian morality is made up of a genetic weakness then a new species of human will have to come from the East, or from a hybridization of East and West. This issue will be taken up in detail as we learn more about what contributes to each civilizations inability to apply eugenics effectively. But competition between groups for intellectual superiority will be the driving force of eugenics -- and nationalism is the formula for this friendly competition. May the most determined, and empirically driven race win.
The above is from [url=http://neoeugenics.home.attbi.com/]http://neoeugenics.home.attbi.com/[/url]
2003-01-28 11:57 | User Profile
Edward O. Wilson in his "On Human Nature" proposed to replace traditional religions with his "Scientific Materialism." Wilson claimed that the narrative from the Big Bang to our own times is much more inspiring than the Creation story in Genesis, and that unlike other world religions is completely consistent with the empirical method.
The problem with Wilson's scientific approach is that it just isn't, well, scientific. It fails to take fully into account the empirical fact of man's genetically determined need for something beyond empirical fact - man's thirst for something transcendent and reachable only by faith. It thus fails the test of any successful religion - to fill man's need for the transcendent. Scientific Materialism might work for extremely intelligent Ivy League professors like Wilson, but it will certainly fail to inspire, unite, and give meaning to the remaining six billion of us.
The author appears to attempt to address that problem by adding an (albeit unexpressed) belief in some transcendent meaning of Race, improving the Race via eugenics in "friendly" competition with other groups. But that's just Nazism (and why the competition should, or even could, remain "friendly" is not explained).
I see nothing original here.
I join Wintermute in welcoming you to OD.
Walter
2003-01-28 13:02 | User Profile
May the most determined, and empirically driven race win.
God I hope not or our lily white butts are toast.
The example of the Jews should actually serve as a warning against eugenics. They may be reasonably intelligent on average but at what price? Jews have bred themselves into a race of middle managers; a success perhaps if one has very narrow goals and can live with the side effects.
Eugenics should come with a huge label that reads:
"WARNING, this product may cause: Increased instances of neuroticism and outright insanity, increased susceptibility to disease, physical decrepitude, the loss of a worker class and reduction to parasitism."
2003-01-29 00:11 | User Profile
The book,"Applied Eugenics",is the best practical guide ever written on the subject.The author also considers strong marriages to be an integral part of any realistic eugenics program.
"Applied Eugenics",by Paul Popenoe and Roswell Hill Johnson. The MacMillan Co.,revised edition,1933.
2003-01-29 02:12 | User Profile
I have some interest in eugenics, as you can see from my avatar, a striking portrait of Lothrop Stoddard.
He was quite a good writer. So was Alfred Edward Wiggam, author of "The New Decalogue of Science" and "The Next Age of Man", among others. But these men had an almost childlike belief in bureacracy. This is revealed in the account of a day at the eugenics courts in Germany that Stoddard included in "Into the Darkness", his account of Germany at war. Wiggam thanks John Dewey in the acknowledgements of "Decalogue", and seems to have a great faith in state planning.
One need not be a Rushbaugh conservative or LewRockwell libertarian to see that the state wasn't all it was cracked up to be. Imagine if what had happened to Russia had instead happenned to the Russians themselves, to their genetic code.
Elmer Pendell, who wrote "Sex vs. Civilization" in the 1960s, was a great researcher, whose book makes "The Bell Curve" almost redundant. But he too had great faith in the state. All we had to do, these 3 men said, was to empower the state to control breeding.
I am against dysgenics, and in the exposure of the dysgenics inherent in modernity, these men were pioneers.
Their solutions, however, left much to be desired.
2003-01-29 06:12 | User Profile
Originally posted by wintermute@Jan 29 2003, 00:57 ** In support of my ridiculous argument, it must be added that this strategy has worked very well indeed for housecats.
**
Your argument isn't ridiculous.
Have you read "The Mating Mind" - which is on Yggdrasil's reading list.
The thesis of that very interesing book is that much of that which we call human - poetry, art, music, kindness, generosity - were the result of "sexual" rather than "natural" selection. Our enormous brains are like peacock's tails, and they evolved not to help us "survive" in the sense of fleeing from predators but rather just because the female of our species found them attractive.
The author points out that our female beauty pageants are something of an aberrition. In most cultures, its the men who display and the women who choose. We need to institute male beauty pageants. We have this, of course, in sporting competitions, but we need to add an individual talent event.
But the main thrust of your argument is really interesting - that a rational eugenics plan would be based on our evolved taste for judging fitness via sexual display.
Walter
2003-01-29 13:12 | User Profile
Originally posted by wintermute@Jan 29 2003, 07:48 ** > But the main thrust of your argument is really interesting - that a rational eugenics plan would be based on our evolved taste for judging fitness via sexual display.
Well, when I wrote it, Richard McCollough's "Racial Compact" was in the back of my mind (see [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=Links]LINKS[/url] section). Though his site is extensive, fairminded, far-reaching, the clear emotional driver for his prodigious endeavor is nothing more complex than beauty. The physical beauty of Northern European types obviously moves him very deeply, and the many arguments he offers for his vision of 'racial rights', seperatism, etc., though convincing, are clearly driven by that one thought: they're so beautiful, what can I do to save them?
It reads exactly like a naturalist writing about elephants, or rare birds. I found it very touching. Something to be considered in conversion efforts.
Wintermute **
Yes, that's right. This is in keeping with Yggrasil's ideas on the subject.
The author of the Mating Mind states pithily that "altruism is a sexual ornament." That statement really hit me. We use altruistic displays as advertising for our sexual fitness (or that of our relatives). Altruism shouts "hey, I'm so fit that I can ignore my own interests and fight a foreign crusade for an alien race or favour affirmative action against my own children and not even break a sweat. Mate with me!"
Of course, the IP's whole pitch to us is based on this insight; i.e. MTV and the rest of the Jewish Media swill is aimed directly at our sense of a sort of perverted chivalry toward blacks and other non-whites. The fact that this altruism is a sexual display explains the IP emphasis on subverting the culture of our young, who are of course most immediately concerned with sexual displays in courtship.
Yggrasil would appear to agree with your contention that this essential insight should help us better direct our propaganda. We need to first stop the reinforcement for these racially suicidal altruistic displays. That suggests a greater use of sarcasm and derisive humor in our propaganda. We WN's tend to be wedded to logical argument, and this is probably not our best approach. We need to present white nationalism (indeed all rational nationalism) as associated with beauty and kindness, and the IP's onslaughts as ugly and resentful (which they are).
Unfortuantely, I have very little artistic talent. I certainly couldn't write a hit song or draw a funny cartoon, but I'm sure that there are those among us who can.
Note to Texas Dissident: This may be an interesting avenue to explore for Original Dissent - could we somehow perhaps have "IP Joke of the Week" or "WN Cartoon of the Month" or some other such place on the forum?
Walter
2003-01-29 13:28 | User Profile
Originally posted by persephone@Jan 27 2003, 02:25 **Eugenics is here to stay, and the only question now is how severely will political forces try to stamp it out and what group or nation will be the victor in the end. But a more highly evolved human will be the result and this process will continue unabated into the future. Nietzsche's supermen are right around the corner waiting for their creator to begin the task. We are their creator, they are our children.
**
For what it's worth, Nietzsche explicitly rejected a "Darwinian" interpretation of his Uebermensch.
His requirement, for the type of man that Zarathustra wanted, was none other than the ability to "conceive reality as it is".
For though a genetic enhancement of the beautiful-but-stupid White folk might be welcome, their basic flaw is the premature termination of their intellectual maturation and of the concommitant ability to face the nihilistic abyss squarely - to conceive reality as it is in its intrinsic injustice and non-rationalizability, i.e., in its ultimate governance in human affairs by lies and violence, priests and warriors, ideologues and soldiers.
But Nietzsche invites us to grow up - to "overcome" our puerility. To be men rather than boys. To be the governors rather than the governed. To be victimizers rather than victims. To leave the consolation of treasures-in-heaven to the women and children, lest they become the treasures of other men.
2003-01-29 14:40 | User Profile
Walter: The author points out that our female beauty pageants are something of an aberrition. In most cultures, its the men who display and the women who choose. We need to institute male beauty pageants. We have this, of course, in sporting competitions, but we need to add an individual talent event. I'd suggest OUR male beauty pagents include the Forbes richest, the 'what car do you drive/where (how well) do you live' questions, "how well do you pay court, and protect, and 'feed'" (good restaurant or MckyD's?) and so on. MOST women are looking for a good provider MORE than a good sportsman... Although, as I write that i realize there is ALSO a huge contingent of women for whom physical (i.e., sports) fitness is a HUGE attractant.
I would guess one reason for our version of 'beauty' pagents is an oversupply of women, allowing for MEN to do the chosing and rejecting... So the women must compete. Expect CHINA won't be having any beauty pagents for their men soon -- they are having a problem with men KIDNAPPING women, even from their husbands, because there are so FEW women. Sex-linked abortion/female abandonment&infanticide seems to raise the value, but not the.. rights... of women...
2003-02-04 06:21 | User Profile
Originally posted by Avalanche@Jan 29 2003, 14:40 ** > Walter:ÃÂ The author points out that our female beauty pageants are something of an aberrition. In most cultures, its the men who display and the women who choose. We need to institute male beauty pageants. We have this, of course, in sporting competitions, but we need to add an individual talent event. I'd suggest OUR male beauty pagents include the Forbes richest, the 'what car do you drive/where (how well) do you live' questions, "how well do you pay court, and protect, and 'feed'" (good restaurant or MckyD's?) and so on. MOST women are looking for a good provider MORE than a good sportsman... Although, as I write that i realize there is ALSO a huge contingent of women for whom physical (i.e., sports) fitness is a HUGE attractant.
I would guess one reason for our version of 'beauty' pagents is an oversupply of women, allowing for MEN to do the chosing and rejecting... So the women must compete. Expect CHINA won't be having any beauty pagents for their men soon -- they are having a problem with men KIDNAPPING women, even from their husbands, because there are so FEW women. Sex-linked abortion/female abandonment&infanticide seems to raise the value, but not the.. rights... of women... **
I read an article a few years back (New York Times, I think) that the girl shortage in China due to the widespread practice of sex-selected abortion is driving the growing slave trade in China for kidnapped Vietnamese girls. The slavers lure Vietnames village girls to Hanoi with promises of lucrative factory work, and then kidnap them, spirit them across the border into southern China, and sell them at auction. The pretty ones become wives, the not-so-pretty ones are forced into prostitution.
Horrible.
The Vietnamese government is understandably PO'd about whole thing. BTW, Vietnam has taken stringent measures against sex-selected abortions - good for them.
As an aside, my work over the past 15 years has brought me into contact with the so-called "Overseas Chinese," who play a role in Asia something like the Jews in Central Europe 70 years ago (or America today) or the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire 100 years ago. They enjoy a vastly disproportionate share of the local economies and unbelievable political power. In the Philippines they are about 2% of the population and control something like 60% of the economy (don't quote me on that, I'll try to check the exact figures which may even be more stark). I'll bet the Overseas Chinese are up to their necks in the slave trade.
This is off topic, but I'm convinced that the Vietnamese conflict of 30 years ago cannot be rightly understood without taking into account the interests of the Overseas Chinese. Note well that the first thing the Vietnamese Communists did when they took power was to move against the Overseas Chinese in the north of the courty, which sparked an incursion by the PRC. Our hapless press and diplomatic corps does not appear to have ever made the connection.
Walter
2003-02-05 01:06 | User Profile
Imagine if what had happened to Russia had instead happenned to the Russians themselves, to their genetic code.
It DID happen to the genetic code of the Russians. Not only did the JudeBolsheviks force miscegenation on the general Aryan populace (the slant eyed Tatars and brethren peoples of Siberia and the Swarthy Yeti's of the Caucasus sure like those golden haired blue eyed Russki, Ukrainian and Baltic Gals!) but the most genetically gifted stratum of Russian Society was disproportionately destroyed by the rampaging JudeoKommisars. The portion of the native Balto-Russo-Ukranian peoples that wasn't gulagged or into miscegenated into oblivion ââ¬â the genetically challenged elements for the most part - was left to breed the next generation. This is a point that many of our people miss - that even if some supreme cosmic force vaporized the non Aryan nations of the Earth, we would quite probably dysgenically breed ourselves into a cataclysmic disaster. Take particular note of how Elmer Pendell skirts the Race issue. Dysgenic Intraracial breeding is just as dangerous as mating with bubble lipped simians and pie faced chili con fido connoisseurs - it just represents the scenic route to the same ultimate destination.
2003-02-05 06:18 | User Profile
Originally posted by wintermute@Feb 4 2003, 08:26 ** Well, 'hapless' is not the word I would use to describe our press corps. **
I've also gotten to know a couple of famous journalists in my travels (who shall remain anonymous here). Both were regular faces on television. Neither of them spoke the language of the country they covered, and had only a superficial grasp on the local history and culture. I was thinking of them when I used the word "hapless." These folks really were hapless. They had to rely on interpretors to talk to people, for Pete's sake. They were easy marks for intelligence services.
From my experience, journalists are not there to report the news objectively. Rather, their function is to report the news within the context of the larger storyline that is handed down from on high. The Serbs are bad, and the Bosnian Muslims are good. Russia plays Goliath to Chechnya's David. If the facts contradict that, they are spun and often simply ignored.
A case in point are the HORRIFIC "ransom" videos Russian television showed of Chechen terrorists torturing Russian prisoners - cutting off their fingers, beating them, shooting them while screaming "Allah Akbar.") Madrussian will confirm that these videos played a major role in garnering Russian public support for Putin's return to Chechnya in August 2000, but the western media refused even to mention them (actually, I researched this once and found a single reference in passing to them in a small BBC report). That's not objective reporting.
Our media are actually controlled very closely - much more so than I had ever imagined before living abroad.
Walter
2003-02-05 14:44 | User Profile
Take particular note of how Elmer Pendell skirts the Race issue
He didn't skirt it in "Sex vs. Civ"- he basically laid out the data on intelligence and race that made up the infamous chapter in the Bell Curve.
If he didn't explicitly argue against interracial mating, he probably didn't think he had to. :blink:
2003-02-05 20:05 | User Profile
Here's one I go to a lot.
[url=http://home.att.net/~dysgenics/lev.htm]http://home.att.net/~dysgenics/lev.htm[/url]
Yes, I know Levin is a Jew, but he's my kind of Jew.
2003-02-06 02:36 | User Profile
The Levin piece was quite good Ed, except for the obligatory 'Jews are much smarter and moral than even Aryans' spiel, for which Levin suspiciously fails to adduce any compelling evidence. The IQ contests pitting select nordics with slight jewish admixture (the Jews) against a host of swarthy Indochinks, flips, wogs, and camel jockeys (the Aryans) don't count. And the predictable whining about boot lipped nigras understandably showing a lack of gratitude for being used by Hymie as a battering ram against western civilization is also standard 'pro white jew' infiltration schtick. Do you smell the Gefilte fish, Ed?
PS How's the Job market in your neck of the woods? What sort of work is available to a white man who wants to live in a white town somewhere in Jersey (The Garden State, where there's a Rosenbloom on every corner)? And just whose shade of white are you using when you say the place is 98.5% white? Rabbi Levin's? I mean no disrespect. If the place is as you describe it, I would consider it an honor and a privilege to live there.