Escaping the Tar Pits of Racism

Joseph Kay and Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, November 4, 2011

A Joseph Kay essay with a reply from Jared Taylor.

In today’s hyper-PC, race-sensitive world, asserting that whites have higher IQs than blacks and that this is at least partially genetic is the equivalent of falling into the La Brae Tar Pits: there is no escape. Forget about marshalling scientific evidence or qualifying one’s remarks with “some experts believe . . . .” or “unpleasant as it is to admit, the evidence . . . .” The reputation-ruining stigma of racism is forever. Just ask Noble-Prize-winner James Watson or, more recently, Pat Buchannan.

Nevertheless, honesty about the higher intelligence of whites is possible without self-immolation. It is not IQ differences per se that generate outrage (most blacks probably know and accept this reality); the frenzy comes from whites linking low IQ to the idea of black inferiority. The problem is not acknowledging statistical differences but assuming that there is a racial hierarchy.

Thankfully, there is a scientifically valid escape from this trap. IQ differences need not imply superiority or inferiority. The Darwinian standard of “goodness” is surviving and passing one’s genes on to the next generation. High intelligence is just one of perhaps thousands of survival-relevant traits. What promotes survival is purely an empirical matter, independent of any moral values. Conceivably, a very high IQ could be a liability since it requires a large energy-consuming brain and a long gestation period. Larger brains may also bring multiple lethal neurological disorders. Indeed, some mothers carrying big-brained geniuses may spontaneously abort, and thus stop the mutation that caused the big brain. Meanwhile, mothers who easily and repeatedly give birth to small-brained dullards may produce dozens of surviving offspring.

A frank analysis might conclude that a high male sex drive, early female sexual maturation and a willingness to accept many sexual partners is a combination that historically far outperforms intelligence as a reproductive strategy. It is true that low population growth and investing more heavily in fewer children brings material wealth, but accumulated wealth is not survival. Though Japan and Germany are rich, high-IQ nations, they may ultimately vanish because of low reproduction rates.

Survival is what matters. Unlike various proto-humans, blacks have not gone extinct despite a low average IQ. Moreover, African behavior has shown itself to adapt to complex, fluid circumstances. Adaption includes behavior that many whites deplore, most notably a penchant for living off welfare and rampant illegitimacy. Africans also kill each other by the score, yet their populations increase. Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons are inferior to whites, but African blacks are not. Those proto-humans failed to survive, whereas blacks are flourishing.

According to UN population growth estimates, black Africans are now far out-breeding whites and Asians–the average fertility rate for Africa is 4.64 vs. 1.53 for Europe, and the European figure includes many high-fertility African and Muslims. Africans also readily adapt to varied climates and foods, even if some blacks succumb disproportionately to the cold or Big Mac-induced obesity. People of African extraction are also skilled at driving out whites–think of Zimbabwe or Detroit–while the reverse is unusual.

A black might reasonably say:

In the battle to dominate racial competitors, namely whites and Asians, we may not be the smartest as measured by IQ tests but we are out-breeding you and taking your land, and that is all that counts when calculating “good” and “bad.”

Our black chauvinist might also add that high IQ is a liability in the battle for survival. The high-IQ races are not replacing themselves, and even among blacks, high-IQ women have the lowest fertility. Yes, high IQ reduces mortality since smart people have fewer accidents, better health, less personal violence, and avoid dangerous sex etc., but this says nothing about overall proliferation, which is the Darwinian bottom line. If one needed proof of the uncertain relationship between brain power and survival, consider Ashkenazi Jews. On average, they are the smartest people on the planet, yet they struggle to avoid vanishing.

Imagine a society of 100 whites and 100 blacks. At Time 1, as a result of foolish decisions and bad habits, 25 percent of the blacks are dead while whites live into peaceful old age. Nevertheless, blacks can still be more successful in the Darwinian sense if at Time 2 nearly all whites lack progeny while the remaining black women average a half dozen children each (remember: only a single black male need survive to guarantee Darwinian success). This mini-society will soon be all black despite deadly violence and disease for the simple reason that whites, despite higher IQ and all that it brings, fail to reproduce. Can you imagine the last white standing claiming that his 140 IQ makes him superior to blacks? He would be the equivalent of the last saber tooth tiger.

Let us return to the question of how to escape from the tar pit of accusations of “racism.” Once we have set aside the question of better or worse, high IQ just means doing some things better than those with low IQs, things like inventing computers or building skyscrapers, i.e., Western civilization. Being smart is just one survival tool for some people (mainly whites and Asians), and like all advantageous traits, its value is temporary since survival demands constant adaptation. Those with narrow hips and long legs can usually run faster than pear-shaped folk, but in certain environments running speed may lose its long-term survival value.

Furthermore, the less intelligent easily exploit the advances made by high-IQ types so there is no innate or permanent advantage in being smart. Modern medicine and technology have come to Africa, too.

Though we may appreciate computers and skyscrapers, they do not necessarily ensure survival. Those engaged in the time-consuming, intellectually demanding tasks of building civilization may be too tired to breed, and thus leave their civilization to promiscuous party animals. Could Bill Gates survive in a world where only brute strength mattered? Again: the link between any one trait and Darwinian success is iffy at best, so it is inappropriate to celebrate high IQ as the preeminent virtue. Everything depends on producing children and, as we noted, high IQ is no guarantee of junior Watsons and Buchanans by the carload.

How can we use this reasoning to escape from the tar pits of racism? You are asked to explain why whites outperform blacks academically and you correctly believe this outcome largely reflects genetic differences in intelligence. In order to answer honestly but safely you say:

People who excel in school usually have higher IQs, but this is no different in principle from some people being genetically better able to avoid malaria or osteoporosis. Even if we acknowledge racial differences in IQ, the only measure of “goodness” is passing on our genes, and we are all equally proficient at this, as you can see by looking around. If blacks were “inferior” they wouldn’t be here. Case closed.

Put another way, society abounds with tasks, and some people are simply better at some tasks rather than others–not inherently better or worse. The only relevant fact is that there are a billion blacks but no surviving Neanderthals–and Neanderthals were almost certainly white.

I suspect some readers are unhappy to see intelligence (and the modern civilization it produces) reduced to just one of countless survival skills. But the aim here is not to inflate black self-esteem or disparage whites by minimizing the one ability–intelligence–in which whites clearly outperform blacks. Rather, the goal is to promote honest public discussion of intelligence as a factor in everything from crime to SAT scores. No social problems can be honestly approached without an understanding of the importance of group differences in IQ, and it is vital to refute the view that black failure can be attributed to everything but brains.

Today, it is nearly impossible to talk about brains because, as we have argued, the question of which is the “better” or “worse” race instantly poisons the discussion. The solution is to make average IQ differences a mere trait, no different in principle from lactose tolerance, that differs from group to group and that may or may not have survival value. Again–for the last time–blacks are not inferior to whites because of their lower average IQ any more than blacks are superior to whites because of their higher sex drive. Both traits may be useful for getting genes into the next generation, and in that sense are equal.

Jared Taylor replies:

As always, Mr. Kay has written a provocative and ingenious essay. Needless to say, I share his frustration at the barriers that prevent honest discussion of racial differences in rates of everything from school suspension to illegitimacy to prostate cancer. To assume, as dogma requires, that blacks and whites are biologically equivalent means that whites will forever be blamed for black failure, and that any policy that might actually help blacks will never be tried.

I admire Mr. Kay’s practical turn of mind: How can we drag the question of race and IQ out of the La Brea Tar Pits and make it fit for polite society? Since I have spent the last 25 years trying to do that–and have utterly failed–I am open to all suggestions, but I am not convinced Mr. Kay’s proposal will work. And the problem, of course, is whites rather than blacks.

As Mr. Kay notes, and as I have written elsewhere, most blacks shrug off the obvious fact of racial differences in intelligence. They think of IQ exactly as Mr. Kay suggests they should: as just one trait among many, and not necessarily a very desirable one. If a young black could trade 10 IQ points for NBA-class basketball talent, would he hesitate? (Some whites might not hesitate either.) If blacks ever worry that they are not as smart as whites, I’m sure they just remind themselves that they have “soul,” that they know how to party, that they dominate the NFL, and have better game with the ladies.

It is whites, and especially the whites who run the thought police, who are so enamored of intelligence–much as they deny it–that they cannot separate IQ from worth. They are the last people who would accept a Darwinian view of group differences, and agree that high testosterone is as good a route to reproductive success as high IQ. They are the people who play Mozart to babies in cribs and send their children to SAT cram courses. They think everyone is as obsessed with intelligence as they are, and that is why they assume–wrongly–that blacks will fly into a fury if you whisper the letters “IQ” in their ears. Despite their claims to admire such non-IQ traits as “compassion” and “spirituality,” they are constitutionally incapable of seeing intelligence as no different from resistance to malaria. They would spit fire if you gave them the “case closed” speech that Mr. Kay proposes.

This is not to say that Mr. Kay’s Darwinian analysis is wrong. It is 100 percent correct. All nature cares about is survival, and American blacks have found the perfect environment for proliferation. Where but in wealthy, guilt-ridden, white-run America could you possibly read a newspaper account of some murdered, low-g car thief who is survived by 12 children, all under age 10? As Mr. Kay points out, blacks have adapted perfectly to their new, nutrient-rich environment.

As all good Darwinians know, however, environments change, and whites, who are a crucial part of the black environment, have not always been such willing hosts. High-IQ Europeans brought African slaves from South America and the Caribbean and worked many of them to death. If Africans had been smarter they might have prevented that. Mr. Kay writes that blacks are good at displacing whites in places such as Detroit and Zimbabwe, but the picture was once very different. High-IQ whites pushed their way into southern Africa and took the best land for themselves. It was only after the devastating mid-20th-century denaturing of the white man that he became a pliant, dependable food source.

In evolutionary terms, the century that will have run from, say, 1950 to 2050, is a fantastic aberration that will never be repeated. Whites created a completely artificial environment in which low-g black car thieves really can have dozens of children, thus ensuring a steady decline in black IQ. Only whites could ever do something so insane, and either whites will recover from insanity or they will disappear. In either case, blacks will find themselves in a more conventional–and demanding–environment.

If whites do not wake up, there soon won’t be enough of them to pay for free school lunches and AIDS medicine. The Mexicans (and Asians) who will be calling the shots are not sentimental chumps. Blacks will have to fend for themselves in circumstances in which a few more IQ points would be useful after all.

The wonder is that not even the smartest black rabble-rousers realize this. Their faith in the productivity and generosity of whites is truly touching. They seem to think that even when we are a tiny minority we will still be handing out free lunches. Surely, they don’t think the Mexicans will feed them.

One of the big differences between blacks and whites is that most of the time blacks act in their own interests, but by supporting non-white immigration blacks are destroying the best ecological niche they could ever hope for. Their resentment must have got the better of them; in their frenzy to reduce the power of the white man, they have lost sight of the fact that when the white man no longer runs things the handouts will dry up.

But this is just a miscalculation of interests. If blacks could see the future clearly, they would help keep Mexicans out and encourage whites to have more children. It is whites, as usual, who do not give the slightest thought to their own interests, much less do anything to advance them.

Topics: ,

Share This

Joseph Kay
Joseph Kay is a retired academic who suffers from compulsive truth-telling disorder.
We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Anonymous

    Jared Taylor makes a good point about what will happen to blacks as the number of whites decline. One good example is Rhodesia. The life span of the average black in Rhodesia has plummeted. If people like Bono and Bob Geldof would only mind their own business the population of Africa would decline back to sustainable levels.

  • Elitist

    The notion that intelligence is value neutral is palpable nonsense.

    It is intrinsically better to be smart.

    Despite the suicidal generosity of whites toward blacks, they still for the most part occupy the lowest rungs of society. Being patronized is no substitute for being successful.

    The reason for the nonacceptance of racial difference is intelligence is because intelligence is not value neutral, but instead intrinsically valuable.

    When you say black people are less intelligent, you are in effect saying they are worth less.

    The closest thing to a practical solution is to patronize blacks within reason, to utter empty and sophistical euphemisms publicly (like the above nonsense about intelligence being value neutral) while at the same time behaving rationally.

    What I find terribly frightening as a former liberal race denier is the fact that most people these days (including self defined conservatives) are unable to speak frankly about racial differences in intelligence even to their own spouses, to the best friends, to their parents and children.

    This denial of the absolutely obvious is a kind of quasi-totalitarian thought control, and it truly is a majestic and horrifying reality to think that the white majority worldwide is capable of caring on this grotesque charade, day in and day out.

  • Survivalist

    One answer is to ignore the IQ issue – an unproven issue. Not because, each person is an individual who may have a high or low IQ no matter their race, but because the IQ issue is irrelevant to white interests. Both writers point out that IQ is irrelevant to white survival.

  • RandyB

    “To assume… that blacks and whites are biologically equivalent means … that any policy that might actually help blacks will never be tried.”

    I do wish AmRen would put more emphasis on doing what could be done to help blacks, given their position. Create an economy with jobs they CAN do, instead of giving them preferences in educational opportunities that they can’t. Craft policies that keep them out of the cycle of multi-generation welfare dependency. Protect them from murder, rape and robbery by each other.

    Let’s show we don’t HATE blacks, any more than we hate the retarded.

  • John Engelman

    The inverse relationship between IQ and prolificacy is an historical anomaly that seems to be coming to an end. This is because it is requiring an ever higher IQ to earn enough money to raise children properly. Moreover, those who are able to raise their children have become decreasingly willing to support a welfare system that nurtures the illegitimacy of the less intelligent. Each of these changes has been accelerating during the past generation. There is little reason to suppose either will be reversed.

    In their book “The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution,” Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending argue that civilization breeds more intelligent people. During the five thousand years of urban living the more intelligent men have become successful merchants, government officials, writers, artists, and so on. These have made better incomes than manual laborers. They have been better able to support larger numbers of children who survived and reproduced.

    Elites have been particularly able to survive famines. Famine has been a limiting factor throughout written history.

    http://www.amren.com/ar/2009/05/index.html

    The growth in the world’s population seems to be slowing the growth in the per capita gross domestic product throughout the world. Population growth may soon reverse economic growth. Those with higher IQs will be better able to negotiate economies of steadily diminishing resources and opportunities.

  • Uilliam

    Joseph Kay assumes that everything will remain constant. That Whites will simply remain docile and compliant to their own replacement. Once Whites understand that it this is a fight for survival, we’ll see how benevolent they truly are, won’t we?

  • Netzach

    Problem: Within modern technological society high IQ is very useful for high individual status and contributing to society. However, high IQ is not much good for breeding more high IQ, or within certain very strict cultural-ethical standards, struggling against lower-IQ groups outside or inside your nations.

    Solution: Eugenics. The last round was a failure, and its culmination in Nazi Germany was unmitigated disaster. Today, both psychometrics and genetics have advanced to vast extent, so we have no need to use such crude and inevitably brutal tools as our forebears. Especially the bioengineering is taking ever-accelerating leaps forward. If the academia takes the question of race, IQ and eugenics seriously – let alone if it puts its full force on it – then only the sky’s the limit. Understanding is the first step towards control, after all. Human brain is a pretty finely tuned computer, so I don’t know how much it can be improved upon by purely biological methods. However, repairing flaws is always easier than making something better, be those flaws genetics or mechanical. Improving Jewish IQ is far greater challenge than making black IQ equal white.

    Possible? Yes. Likely? As it is most certainly risky, and as it insults the sensibilities of so many, it’s not likely at all. Myself, I don’t claim this is a good option, but I’d like people to consider if there are any good options at all.

  • NBJ

    I can only speak for myself, but my beef with the whole IQ debate is the fact that year after year, decade after decade, educational “experts” wring their hands and bemoan the achievement gap between Whites and minorties. They have tried throwing millions of dollars at the problem, tried endless programs, blamed and finger pointed until there is nobody else to blame, with little to no success. So in their effort to raise up minorities, they have dumbed down public education, as I’ve heard more than one teacher confirm, to the point that it’s ridiculous and almost pointless. As our pal Sureesh likes to point out, Whites are considered slackers, but does that really surprise anyone considering what a joke our educational system has become?

    Take the school in Chicago for example that did away with Honors classes because there were not enough minorties in those classes, and they wanted to “include” them. Does anyone here doubt those classes have become a farce? I’ve heard older folks who graduated collage years ago, only to go back 20 or so years later for whatever reason, and have been shocked at what passes for college classes these days. They claim most degrees are not worth the paper they are written on.

    Stop destroying education and just consider the possibility there might be another reason for the achievement gap, such as IQ differences, and most of all, stop taking away from White children in an endless effort raise up minorities.

  • Peejay in Frisco

    Intelligence has more than one dimension. It is not a matter of degree, but of kind,too. Blacks are a little more sharp than other races when it comes to assessing the motivations of others.

  • Anonymous

    There were some very interesting and correct points interspersed with some anthropological oversights here. For one thing, some of the suppositions made about athletics are incorrect and whites are actually physically stronger than blacks, not the other way around. Sprinting speed is a result of a form of endurance, not great strength. Sprinting power is at odds with immense strength. Experiments have shown that world class powerlifters and olympic style weightlifters come out of the blocks much faster and go much faster for a short distance than the world class sprinters. There is much evidence that blacks are getting preferential treatment in football and basketball and all black international basketball teams have gotten trounced by all white teams from other countries. See the Caste Football website.

    In other words, there are misconceptions about some of the other so-called attributes of blacks. There is an anti-white preference for blacks in sports that is not at all based on ability and the people at Caste Football have exposed this quite well.

    I also differ with the claim that “we” whites have made all of this possible. I am always leery of this collectivist habit of saying “we” when in fact there is not a consensus. I would say that there are many whites who do work against their own best interests and the best interests of their offspring and of the healthy whites who have a normal survival instinct that is matched with the ability to face reality. Those mentally ill whites exist because of the artificial environment that exists that has, in the past, made working against ones self interest possible and survivable. In other words, the whites who support this are mentally ill and are not healthy specimens worthy of survival according to Darwinian laws. It remains to be seen whether the healthy whites who know that this is a threat to their survival will act in accordance with the necessities of survival. Perhaps they will allow the mentally ill whites to destroy the entire race.

  • Anonymous

    There is no tar pit of racism. The tar pit is empowering your enemies to destroy you and your entire family!

  • Tom

    Amren’s final, penultimate argument/question to its critics must surely be “what would a world without white people be like?”. And of course, the answer is – look no further than the places where that world exists right now. The human rights hellhole of oil-wealthy Muslim states, the life-is-cheap excrescence that is Africa, the stolen-technology advances of the east. White achievement is the penultimate expression of human achievement in just about every field. This is undeniable. Keep pushing us out and watch the world die. It’s that simple.

  • McGillicuddy

    Alright AmRen, now you’re getting somewhere!

    However, as Mr. Taylor points out, the main thrust of Mr. Kay’s argument against black inferiority-their prodigious fertility-is open to an easy refutation, and is much too simple.

    Nor do I agree with his implication that any group should be trying to win a breeding war.

    Instead, he might have written a nationalist essay on ethnic/racial particularity and love. Plato and the evolutionary biologists agree, that love is the desire to perpetuate oneself, and to do so, ‘never in deformity, but in beauty.’ Life is the struggle to achieve this, procreation being the most common and most obvious route. But whichever ways one tries, most of the time, I think he will find more success in a society in which his race is dominant. The values of that society will likely be closer to his natural inborn values than any other, his talents will likely be more appreciated there than anywhere else because people tend to value what they are good at, and races tend to be good at different things. And so his idea of the good will have a better chance to survive.

    Is it not clear that blacks value athletic prowess more than any other race? That East Asians value law and order more than any other? Or that they are best in these respective areas? Or that their respective geniuses give the best expression of these respective virtues? A less intelligent group even, will have different geniuses; think of the primal beats of black music which has won the world. Music is far more instinctive any other art, and so it makes sense that a people closer to nature would produce the most popular music.

    I know this is all much less quantifiable than Mr. Kay’s line of argument, but if there are inborn racial differences, than my basic premise, if not my specific examples, almost certainly must be true.

    Mr. Taylor is right that the shallow egalitarian materialists who are the establishment would shriek in horror at our nuanced argument, but then, this world is their idea. We will direct our case at the majority, especially the young. Nationalism can be made to be far superior to egalitarian universalism both morally and idealistically, and I think that the majority of all peoples will see that one day.

  • Anonymous

    Whites should not worry if Mexicans take over. If Mexican tv is any indicator whites will have cushy jobs as tv anchors and telenovela stars receiving the adoration of the mestizo, Cholo, and Indian masses. Blacks and Asians should worry, about the only time you see blacks or Asians on Mexican tv is when they are being openly mocked for entertainment.

  • Kenelm Digby

    I really don’t know about all this ‘low black intelligence’ business.

    Look at the example of American politics – supposedly the most coldly calculating and rational of all arenas.

    Here we have the plain and simple case of the broad mass of Whites (who vastly outnumber blacks), being stitched-up and made into complete and utter fools by deft, intelligent black dominance of the Democratic Party. Put bluntly, the prime policy objective of the Democrats is black interest – and nothing else, in this way the totality of US political discourse is effectively run by blacks. Whites are left as dumbfounded, clueless, stitched-up dupes.

    And the only opposition party to the Democrats, the Republicans are scarcely any better. Whilst pretending to stand for Whites (just to get votes), their actual record is indistinguishable from the Democrats.

    All they care about is big business and the ultra wealthy.

  • Buridan

    As others have said above, intelligence is not value neutral.

    And it has special prestige in our society because everybody is ranked in school, and because intelligence contributes much to social position. In Europe three centuries ago intelligence was valued, but much less than now. Anyway, individual features counted much less. To be of a “good family”, important in its sphere, and a family of virtuous women, counted much more than now. There were few schools, and little social mobility. An illiterate peasant had not much opinion about his intelligence, and his social position was not due to his intelligence or lack of it.

    If you want intelligence not to be valued high, you have to go back to a traditionnal society, where social positions are inherited, and where science and technique are relatively simple and do not improve. Even Blacks are going to value intelligence. Put a black boy in a classroom of twenty Whites, he will not be so happy. Nobody appreciates to be on the very bottom of society. Not only do you earn less, you are valued less, by the others, by yourself. Naturally you can try to find success and pleasures on other fields, but on this very important field, you feel inferior.

    Apart from that, it is only in the XXth century that intelligence has not been a fundamental reproductive asset : intelligence lead to technical improvement, and technical improvement lead to conquest and high densities : in 1900 Black Africa was a desert, compared to Europe, India, China.

  • Lorin

    My concern is that the white race will never wake up. In conversations with other people about race, I have been accused of racism for simply telling them about the black and Hispanic college professors that call for the total elimination of the white race. Even when I show them the video and reports, they still claim that I’m wrong.

    I point at events such as the Wichita and Knoxville horrors, flash mobs, black on white rape statistics to no avail. Their standard response is to immediately start talking about how great they are in football and basketball.

  • sbuffalonative

    “Since I have spent the last 25 years trying to do that—and have utterly failed—I am open to all suggestions”

    I found this statement disheartening. I don’t want to believe that Mr. Taylor sees AR and all his work being a pointless endeavor. I hope this is only a momentary laps and not a prelude to defeat.

    Mr. Kay makes the basic argument that the way to get our message through is to admit our differences but not see them as superior or inferior.

    Many of us have posted and then been banned from websites for comments we made all the while strictly adhering to the rules.

    Many of us have tried this tactic of admitting blacks are, say, better at sports than whites (something blacks believe to be true). However, this is still considered a ‘racist’ comment.

    The problem is that stating facts is now considered ‘racists’. We’re at the point where scientific research is rejected if it yields uncomfortable and politically incorrect results.

    This is the new dark age of science. Today, it’s not the Catholic Church suppressing challenges to their dogma but the ‘anti-racists’ who suppress facts and free speech.

  • Henry

    Randy B, great comment. Amren is one of the few sites I’ll link to friends in order to introduce them to racial realist ideals without having a sudden PC spasm backlash at the thought their looking at something racist.

    This article portrays blacks a little bit to parasitically. Say what you will about this situation, but mention that black plight and standard of living is worse today, far worse, than the segregation they faced as a social group 60+ years ago. (not counting slavery, of course, which any white race oriented mind should tell you was a travesty for both sides.) The black population during the 50′s for instance had had better lifestyles, rates of family retention and education quality relative to anything today. They only lacked “social equality”, and when they got it look what it gave them: Welfare, crime, thuggery, immorality, and drugs.

    If the western world crashes and burns and Hispanic and Asian nations are left to carry on the torch of civilization, we can only hope they will learn from our mistakes and avoid the multicultural hellholes we’ve created.

  • Integration Anxiety

    To this poster who claims that talking candidly about race gets you in trouble with liberal friends. You are wasting your time. If somebody already has preconceived notions about any topic, much less as something as sensitive as race, they have their minds made up. Although I have most certainly changed in my opinions from ten to 15 yrs ago.

    What changes? The anger spurred the change for the average White person. The double speak coming from politicians and “community activists” claiming that White racists are keeping blacks & browns down. It’s all a blame game. They know kind- hearted Whites will go against their better judgements and give, give and give. They have the media wrapped around their fingers.

    Ultimately, though, this article makes for a good read and should make people question the future for their children and grandkids. I believe that ALL races will more than likely face annihilation and eradication. If we as a species, are reduced to ashes one day, does it really matter who is standing last?

    All throughout history White man has been on the cutting edge of civilizations and new sources of technology to expedite the accomplishments for mankind. I have no doubt there were great ideas by blacks about modern day societies here in the Western hemisphere but not on the same volume as Whites per se. Arabs have contributed to modern day medicines, mathematics, vocabulary and language, alphabet, but again, Whites have built and maintained Cathedrals, museums, hospitals, stadiums, learning centers, libraries which have stood the test of time as well. Yet history books are being re-written everyday all over the West to show things that took place, but not from how we learned it. Our kids are being shown propaganda and we have no say in the schooling? We are told to “butt” out. I don’t think so. I have a daughter who is two years old and my wife and I will go through hell or high water to make sure she gets a quality education. As this article points out, higher IQ has a drawback in the sense that those who have one do not reproduce nearly as much. Maybe because they see the writing on the wall about the upcoming takeover of 3rd worlders, and they don’t want to subject their offspring to it. Some of the most diabolical people throughout history have been shown to have a high IQ. These are the truly dangerous ones because they know exactly how to manipulate people, places and things to get what they seek out. Many are Whites. Many call themselves conservatives, but that is a fraud. Many are psychopaths and sociopaths. Many are an even bigger threat to White society than common street criminals of black and mestizo extraction. Trust no one. But paranoia is counterproductive.

  • olewhitelady

    There have always been more stupid people than smart people. Yet, the smartest have always ruled the world. If some brawny but brain-deprived tough took over, he always had intelligent advisors. If he didn’t, he didn’t last long as ruler. (The very smartest people are usually men, as well, which is another reason they still rule in a world where they wouldn’t have to physically subdue women to maintain power).

    Most blacks know good and well that whites are smarter on the average. The race hustlers who get a forum say what’s good for their pocketbooks. The notion of intellectual equality is all just a big pretense, and virtually everyone on the planet knows it. Western polite society demands that its members go through the motions of this pretense with a certain protocol that’s little different from rules regarding etiquette at a formal dinner. For instance, folks are allowed to use the term “people of color”, but not “colored people”. It’s all what the social dictators decide is acceptable, and most people follow along with the same urgency used by closet commies saluting the Reich.

    I totally disagree with Kay’s contention that the less smart races can simply outbreed us and take over. As I stated earlier, the rabble has always held the greatest numbers. And evolution, from what we can surmise, has always favored the smartest humanoids. Neanderthals didn’t become extinct; they were subsumed within Cro-Magnon populations and exist within many of us today. Less intelligent ethnic groups tend to become overwhelmed and die out in large numbers. How many pureblood Native Americans are there? A great number alive today have genes from other groups. Africa is, in my opinion, on the verge of a catastrophe that will someday decimate the black population there. The same situation is rife in Haiti and growing in Western urban areas.

    And, as for Mexico, who are its leaders? White people of Spanish ancestry.

  • Blaak Obongo

    “Look at the example of American politics–supposedly the most coldly calculating and rational of all arenas.”

    I hope you’re kidding.

    Our enemies in the media and academia have succeeded in planting the widespread presumption that there is no sin more detestable than “Racism.” And so, in order to get elected, American politicians believe they must bow to the great god of “Anti-racism” as frequently and as publicly as possible.

    A politician who made a low-key but direct appeal to aware Whites might do very well. But none of them are willing to risk their legislative careers on such an experiment–especially with the sure and certain knowledge that the media elite would be waging a ferocious guerilla war against them every inch of the way.

    That’s as coldly calculating and rational as it gets.

  • Bo

    The continuing and insoluble fascination with demographic IQ differentials tells us that we might be asking the wrong question. Especially now that it has become clear that multiculturalism has given way to multi-racialism in every way that matters, and multi-racialism demands that each demographic take care of its own.

    A better question would be to ask how can we enhance the educational prowess of young diverse white American students? That’s a white-centric question that we should focus on. As an example, on the West Coast we see dozens of storefront after-school tutoring facilities for young Asian American students sponsored by Asian Americans and paid for by Asian American parents.

    If all the effort that has gone into the question of demographic IQ differentials had gone into engaging in discussions and planning and establishing after-school tutoring for white American students, we might see more energetic and more successful white students, decently educated for success.

    The question before us should always be: Is It Good For The Diverse White American Peoples? And that question is utterly eclipsed by an almost fetishistic attachment to the white-black IQ question. Let’s do things to advance white student success across the board, not fritter away vital energy by re-examining the contours of IQ differentials.

  • Irish

    Michael Levin addressed the issue of whether intelligence and other traits are “better” some years ago in the pages of AR.

    http://www.amren.com/ar/1999/02/index.html

  • Anonymous

    What both Kay and Taylor miss is the fact that low IQ (as measured by IQ tests) does not condone criminal behavior of blacks. Attempts to justify a high crime rate in terms of IQ would be seen an condescending that there would be few takers for such an argument on either side of the debate.

    Criminal and aggressive behavior may have to do with factors which are hormonal and not directly related to IQ.

    Other races with low IQs do not display the propensity for crime or promiscuity as do blacks (assuming all other factors are the same).

    For example, the Dravidians in South India, not particularly known for their high IQ (albeit admittedly higher than that of blacks), have some of the most stable societies in Asia, with a very low crime rate and practically zero out-of-wedlock children, which would put many Western societies to shame.

  • Anonymous

    9 — Peejay in Frisco wrote at 8:04 PM on November 4:

    Intelligence has more than one dimension. It is not a matter of degree, but of kind,too. Blacks are a little more sharp than other races when it comes to assessing the motivations of others.

    ——————————-

    Really? How so? From all I can see is that they are of all one mind, blame racism and Whitey for EVERYTHING! How is that even considered as being “assessing the motivations of others”? They are not anywhere near “assessing” anything whatsoever, let alone the motivations of others.

  • Bebe

    4 — RandyB wrote at 6:34 PM on November 4:

    “To assume… that blacks and whites are biologically equivalent means … that any policy that might actually help blacks will never be tried.”

    I do wish AmRen would put more emphasis on doing what could be done to help blacks, given their position. Create an economy with jobs they CAN do, instead of giving them preferences in educational opportunities that they can’t. Craft policies that keep them out of the cycle of multi-generation welfare dependency. Protect them from murder, rape and robbery by each other.

    Let’s show we don’t HATE blacks, any more than we hate the retarded.

    __________

    Oh, stop it, please. Where did you get those “ideas” from? I am so weary and suspicious of those who use the word “hate” as if we are suppose to love those who are in reality, destroying our own race and our own civilizations. So according to you, we should never “hate” our enemies? If that is the case, then tell me why all this love that has been bestowed upon them by Whitey has never worked? Why do we fight ANY war if we love our enemies? What is the point of it all?

  • Tom S.

    #4 – Randy B – I do wish AmRen would put more emphasis on doing what could be done to help blacks, given their position. Create an economy with jobs they CAN do, instead of giving them preferences in educational opportunities that they can’t. Craft policies that keep them out of the cycle of multi-generation welfare dependency. Protect them from murder, rape and robbery by each other. Let’s show we don’t HATE blacks, any more than we hate the retarded.

    Are you serious! Have you also gone to the NAACP or Laraza ( the race ) sites to ask them to put more emphasis on helping Whites? Go try it and tell us how that worked out! Hate to burst your bubble there Randy, but I personally don’t come to this site to exchange ideas on how to help blacks, I come here to keep my sanity! It mystifies me how people like you continually think that its just a given that White people are obligated to help people of other races. They’ve already got countless organizations that “help” them already – thats the problem! They’ve gotten so used to Whites “helping” them the world over that they can’t function on their own. Is that helping them? And just look where all this help has gotten us Randy – flashmobs, skyrocketing rapes, assaults, robberies, theft and murder targeting Whites, the destruction of countless White communities and cities throughout the world and the near bankruptcy of our country.

    No Randy I don’t hate blacks – I wish them well, I just don’t feel this obligation to help a people that refuse to help themselves, show no gratitude and are openly hostile to me, my culture and “my people”!

  • Silvio Silver

    What I find terribly frightening as a former liberal race denier is the fact that most people these days (including self defined conservatives) are unable to speak frankly about racial differences in intelligence even to their own spouses, to the best friends, to their parents and children.

    You call yourself an ex-liberal but you’re a good example of the ‘all or nothing’ attitude towards intelligence that Jared Taylor mentions. You flatly state that you believe less intelligent people are intrinsically “worth less” (meaning “have less worth,” not literally “worthless.)

    But is that really true? Are less intelligent people actually worth less, and should that be the attitude of the more intelligent towards them?

    I think it doubtful.

    Don’t we all have a mother or a father, or an uncle or aunt, or a brother or a sister, or a spouse or a best friend who is fairly obviously less intelligent? Are they “worth less” in our eyes because of this? Are we inclined to treat them as such, in particular, favoring more intelligent strangers over them?

    Hardly. They’re “worth” as much to us as they ever were before we had the slightest awareness of the hereditary factors in play. The suggestion that one’s mother be “worth less” to one because she is demonstrably dimmer is ridiculous, and one would be justifiably angered by it.

    Of course, if one comes to believe that intelligence is the great be all and end all in life then, yes, it’s reasonable to be frightened by the prospects of what might result from ‘everybody’ attaching similar importance to it.

    But there’s no reason to insist that the hereditary factors of intelligence must assume overwhelming importance in people’s minds. In fact, it’s not only possible but rather straightforward to note hereditary intelligence’s role in individual life outcomes and national achievement and then proceed to shrug it off as “no big deal.” Even if I’m the only one to do this (and I know it’s not so) it still demonstrates the possibility of such an attitude.

    Hereditary intelligence is important (and merits being treated as important) for three main reasons.

    The first is that by appreciating its reality we can formulate policies designed to increase the average intelligence of a society (any society, white, black, whatever).

    The second is that we can more effectively channel people into activities commensurate with their abilities and which they are more likely to find satifsying, rather than waste time and money insisting on identical outcomes across the board (which, nowadays, demand certain segments achieve what is beyond their capability).

    Thirdly, understanding and accepting hereditary factors means accepting the racial disparities that are a natural part of life. It can be understood and accepted that in multiracial societies the various racial groups will not perform identically and the disparities in performance can be attributed to their true cause rather than to “racism.” White liberals should be relieved by this, but too often, as Taylor says, they are horrified.

    It’s for this reason that I believe white liberals can be called ‘liberal white supremacists.’ They believe that blacks really are so inferior to whites that the poor things (blacks) could only possibly be traumatized by the realization, therefore they must be protected against it all costs. (And what costs!)

    That said, liberals are not cautious without any reason whatsoever. Hereditarians and racialists themselves are prone to discuss hereditary factors in ways that suggest the ‘news’ is devastatingly unwelcome. “As hard as it may be to accept…” they’re often heard to say. Or, when trying to ingratiate themselves, “As much as we might wish it weren’t so we must…” In this view, race is hard to discuss because racialists themselves insist it’s hard to discuss. It’s racialists who insist that intelligence is of life-and-death importance. Naturally, those who are influenced by such racialists adopt this attitude themselves and the notion that “race is hard” (inherently hard) is perpetuated.

    None of this need be so.

    The question racialists ought to ask themselves is what solution they propose to racial issues. Must race mean permanent antagonism, or should any antagonism that arises be restricted specifically to sorting racial issues out (and dealing with inevitable obstructionists) and then proceeding to live in (or seeking to create a condition of) peace with other groups? The answer one gives to this question goes a very long way to determining what sort of approach one takes to race. The former invites cooperation and goodwill; the latter, spite, bitterness and almost endless bloodshed.

    Silvio Silver

  • Bardon

    IQ doesn’t matter ? Tell this to some 5 M of Israelis who have successfully beaten & are still beating ca. 200 M Arabs and 1.3 B Muslims.

    The “breeding strategy”- to call it that- is an anomaly taken as the norm. Remove the White guilt suicidal ideology & everything comes to the right place. Here in Central & Eastern Europe, although we’re inundated with US TV series preaching diversity etc.- virtually no one takes it seriously.

  • WR the elder

    To #3 Survivalist: You are completely wrong that the IQ issue is irrelevant to white interests. It is a fact, acknowledged by both the “far right” (us) and the left, that blacks as a group do poorly on g loaded occupations. There are damn few black engineers, lawyers, doctors, scientists, mathematicians, college professors, or high level managers and business owners. This failure is constantly being shoved under our noses as “proof” of white racism (or “institutional racism”) precisely because the left refuses to consider the likelihood that there are, in fact, intrinsic average differences in IQ across the races. We will never be able to counter the charges that blacks are held back by evil white racists unless we get the rest of the country to accept the facts about IQ.

    But I must also say to #2, Elitist, that you seem to have missed the point. Certainly to you and to me intelligence seems to be intrinsically good, not value neutral, because you and I want to live in the sort of civilization that can only be created by smart people. But nature doesn’t give a damn. With evolution what works, works. Period. We can see innumerable examples in the natural world of organisms that have succeeded very well not by being smart, but by breeding rapidly. In fact “being smart” is one of the least frequently used survival strategies in the natural world. An oyster will do better by producing a few thousand more eggs than by raising its IQ. The oak tree in my yard has no brains at all but ensures the survival of its kind by producing more acorns than the squirrels can eat. The smarter sort of mammals tend to be the large predators such as wolves, bears, and big cats. What they have in common with white people is diminishing habitat and danger of going extinct.

    Right now whites and the Asians in the more advanced Asian countries have the lowest birth rates. African blacks have the highest birth rates. Here in the United States blacks have lower fertility rates than Africans do but higher fertility rates than American whites. Mestizos have the highest fertility rates in the United States. Within 30 years or so California will be majority mestizo, with less than a quarter of its population white. I don’t doubt that when that happens the economy and general level of civilization will more closely match that of Mexico and Guatemala today than California from the 1960s. But the fact remains that the territory will be occupied by the Darwinian victors, and the political offices will go to them them as well.

  • Phil

    This article is rather two dimensional. First of all, let us take the most diverse place in the world: California:

    http://goo.gl/jkcSB

    How is is that black reproduce so incredibly low there?

    Could it be that they cannot stand competition from (slightly) higher IQ races such as Mestizos?

    Could it be that the current birth rate in Africa is dependent on foreign aid to sustain itself, and that it is about to collapse form a Malthusian logic that is just beginning to manifest itself in the HIV epidemic there?

    As always, everything in the universe is in constant flux, and what is in decline today could reverse tomorrow.

    The very fact that blacks live parasitically off European Civilization is rather telling, and hardly suggests that they will have long term survival rates as Asian society overtakes European.

  • TomSwift

    “but by supporting non-white immigration blacks are destroying the best ecological niche they could ever hope for.”

    I would argue that only the black-elite favor mass-immigration. The rank and file generally understand this. We have the same problem with the white-elite.

  • Sincerely Concerned

    Steve Williams on Tiger Woods:

    http://goo.gl/wJiPY

    While this was a stupid remark to be made to an at least partially black man, I cannot understand why both in the headline and at least twice in the article it is referred to as “racist”. Would someone please define this word to me, other than the mainstream media?

    The word racist is getting really, really worn out.

  • Anonymous

    Great essay! This is what I read AR for! Unfortunately most whites will view this as “hate speech” and say that we (who read AR) are all racists. I wish these same whites would go to ANY black-run city ANYWHERE in the world and see how much fun it is.

    “In evolutionary terms, the century that will have run from, say, 1950 to 2050, is a fantastic aberration that will never be repeated. Whites created a completely artificial environment in which low-g black car thieves really can have dozens of children, thus ensuring a steady decline in black IQ. Only whites could ever do something so insane, and either whites will recover from insanity or they will disappear. In either case, blacks will find themselves in a more conventional—and demanding—environment.”

    This is the most wonderful little paragraph. Oh I wish whites could understand it. Unfortunately we (whites in general) are so totally insane that we will, indeed, disappear. The successful whites living in NYC and Los Angeles will end up fleeing when they find their states, and the national government, under black and Mexican control. They will move to Austria probably. There will be a small remaining contingent in Idaho and Montana, and some future black Democratic president will send in the army to put them in their rightful place, much like Robert Mugabe is doing today in Zimbabwe.

    “If whites do not wake up, there soon won’t be enough of them to pay for free school lunches and AIDS medicine. The Mexicans (and Asians) who will be calling the shots are not sentimental chumps. ”

    Brilliant and true! Asians are really not sentimental chumps. They will end welfare etc, they will bring back some unofficial segregation, they will bring back unofficial slavery in the form of work camps or whatever.

  • Anonymous

    I think we need to look at other things, not just IQ. Whites in general are up there in IQ, although possibly not as high as Orientals. However, I think we’re the most imaginative and inventive race. After all, just about the whole of modern technology came from Whites. Think of all those old photos you’ve seen of young White guys standing around tinkering with a car. That’s White inventiveness in a nutshell.

    I’ll add one more thing. Who has more respect for other forms of life than Whites? Yes, we still have work to do, but who is going around the world trying to save wildlife? Whites. Which countries even have laws against animal cruelty? White countries. I won’t even mention what happens to dogs and cats in China. It pains me to think about it.

    Well, you get the picture. There’s more to this debate than just IQ.

  • Robert Binion

    Perhaps, larger brains are more easily stricken, rather numbed by the placebo of illusion. I grow tired of wishful thinking. Ain’t Garbo, yet want to be alone.

  • white advocate – Canada

    Maybe Taylor hasn’t failed. Maybe it has been the failure of us true believers. Have we done enough to support the broader white movement? Depending on our resources and depending on our ability to come out of the closet (where, with whom), have each of us strived to make some extra effort? Looking back, do you regret not having made some white efforts at past opportunities?

  • La Santa Hermandad

    The Baltimore Sun reported a shooting at an Asian “Carry Out” restaurant in apparently a predominantly Black Section of Baltimore. A Black former city bus driver was fatally shot several times in the chest while trying to fight off one of three Black thugs with guns who had come in to rob the place. The victim was a regular customer at the restaurant. This incident was the third fatal shooting incident at the eatery in the last two years. The “youth” who fired the fatal shots was surrendered to the police by his parents. The victim’s wife turned out to be a relative of one of the thugs who has been involved in one of the previous shootings. You can’t make up this stuff.

    The irony is that the city is moving to close the establishment. I couldn’t grasp the logic there. It certainly is a testimony to the low IQ of the city government. Maybe they should just close Baltimore.

  • Sylvie

    “In evolutionary terms, the century that will have run from, say, 1950 to 2050, is a fantastic aberration that will never be repeated. Whites created a completely artificial environment in which low-g black car thieves really can have dozens of children, thus ensuring a steady decline in black IQ. Only whites could ever do something so insane, and either whites will recover from insanity or they will disappear. In either case, blacks will find themselves in a more conventional—and demanding—environment.”

    This insane-artificial environment referred to in the above paragraph was created by high IQ whites.

    “If blacks ever worry that they are not as smart as whites, I’m sure they just remind themselves that they have “soul”

    Very true J.T, very true. Whilst high IQ white person is sitting at home reading ‘The Cantos of Ezra Pound’ by lamplight, the blacks over the way are havin’ a block party. It’s been made clear to me more than a few times in my life by some of my ‘darker-shaded bretheren’ that I have no ‘soul’ and that my tastes in ohh, everything are ‘white’ and by that they mean ‘square’. I have enjoyed replying ‘you bet!’ to their attempts at trying to embarass me by trying to make me feel like a Fred McMurray cardigan-waring white stiff.

  • Indrid Cold

    There is a race hierarchy on this planet and Whites and Asians are at the top while Africans are at the bottom. I doubt that any person of any other race would choose to be African for the so called benefits that could be gained. The reason Africans have evolved with physical advantages is because they choose to remain in the inhospitable environment of sub-Saharan Africa while others of higher IQ crossed north in search of less chaotic more hospitable surroundings. Meanwhile the Africans that stayed behind developed the “skill” of exhaustion hunting, where groups of Africans would chase game for days until it collapsed from exhaustion. This was the best solution they could come up with since their limited mental capacity did not allow for the conception of traps or use of tools. They are now and have been for millennia a simple minded hominid.

  • bernie

    “In evolutionary terms, the century that will have run from, say, 1950 to 2050, is a fantastic aberration that will never be repeated. Whites created a completely artificial environment in which low-g black car thieves really can have dozens of children, thus ensuring a steady decline in black IQ. Only whites could ever do something so insane, and either whites will recover from insanity or they will disappear. In either case, blacks will find themselves in a more conventional—and demanding—environment.”

    This gives me some hope as it is the best thing for civilization. Those areas of the planet that have no or few blacks will inherit the mantle of civilization. The U.S. and Western Europe have so many blacks that all is likely in permanent decline.

  • je suis paganisme

    Long ago, Whites had many children, and many White men, such as Daniel Boone, Simon Kenton, and Liver-eating Johnson, became veritable demons to the Indians. White men knew the two f’s–f’ing and fighting.

    The problem, as I see it, is that we have become separated from the land (reality). There is too much artificiality and plasticity. Many people are fat; most men have no muscle-tone; physical work is considered lower-class.

    We have created a regimented, predictable, feminine environment (in which females are becoming supreme).

    White men thrive on challenge.

  • Thomas

    What I want to know is, where is the White Rage? Is it because of flouride in the water? Estrogenic compounds in modern processed foods? Guilt and shame from a Marxist education? Stripped of their culture, there is no culture to defend? Fear of being “beat down” as racists, bigots, etc? An aging, shrinking, white population? No children to defend against the enroaching hordes, no need to expand boundaries for more living space? A simple, intelligent calculation that the situation is hopeless? Or is it simply, “All of the above!” Anyone have any ideas??

  • Survivalist

    “We will never be able to counter the charges that blacks are held back by evil white racists unless we get the rest of the country to accept the facts about IQ”.

    If you’re trying to counter the argument that blacks are held back by evil white racists I hardly think the answer is to proclaim blacks have low IQ’s! You would be promoting evil white racism in an effort to show whites aren’t evil white racists. Also there’s an entire industry dedicated to the idea that IQ is a product of environment (something i’d have to say is at least partly true). At least one poster on here has claimed blacks have lower IQ’s (if/when this is true) because of their ignorance and racism.

    There’s no need to counter these charges. When you do you’re playing the very game they want you to. The black and colored experience is important. The white experience is irrelevant. You don’t ‘counter’ the charges. You speak up about your experience, feelings, and viewpoints as a white person thereby affirming the value of whiteness. I would say this is long overdue.

  • Harumphty Dumpty

    “Since I have spent the last 25 years trying to do that—and have utterly failed—I am open to all suggestions”

    Here’s a suggestion for the gentleman, and for other pro-Whites, on how to fight the anti-Whites and their program of White Genocide:

    Nobody is saying that Africa needs diversity.

    Nobody is saying that Asia needs diversity.

    They are already 100% diverse.

    People are only telling white children in white countries that they need diversity.

    White Countries will be 100% diverse when there are no white people left.

    Diversity is a code-word for white genocide.

    And,

    African countries for Africans.

    Asian countries for Asians.

    Israel for Jews or you’re an anti-semite!

    White countries for everyone or you’re a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionje­­ws!

    http://goo.gl/FgGn6

    http://goo.gl/0BJFE

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White

  • Anonymous

    what fails to recall is that Malthus is grinning at Africa. LIkewise, Malthus is about to return to Europe and the US as the LIberal Order is running out of free money.

    I do not see the alleged “tar pit” above. IF you allow liberal elites to toss you into its tarbit, you are foolish. The vast bulk of White Americans do not care for Blacks or Mexicans, and increasingly, Asians.

    In m personal experience with talking to relative strangers, like a long road trip I just did out to S. Dakota, wihout exception, the locals like the global south v. the global north evolution argument. They like it. Cognition first, emotion second. Let yur interlocutor experience the emotion and keep yourself calm

    The “tarpit” we will avoid by not bothering with elite opinion. Speaking of liberal elites, I had a chat with a Jewish tourist in the Badlands, S. Dakota. I helped him fix his motorscooter and gave him the lite version about race. Finally, after several hours he said, “sometimes we think you guys are right.”

    My experience is this: Whites love to hear the numbers…they want data, not Philosophy. It is not just IQ; it is also temperment and when I talk about black and brown volatility, impulsivity…they love it…my white interlocutors. Joe

    Anyway, Whites will always be around, and when we wise-up, our genetic hyper-altruism will come to our rescue…fighting for our people and dying if need be. Joe

  • RTB

    Since IQ can be assessed on an individual basis, what justification can there be for constantly emphasizing racial IQ differences rather than judging each individual based on his or her abilities? Why the concern for finding jobs that “low IQ blacks” can do, rather than jobs that low IQ people can do, even if a disproportionate percentage are black? Surely part of the reason is that while average white IQ’s may be higher than average black IQ’s, in absolute numbers, there are far more low IQ whites than blacks. And despite the general trend towards brighter parents having brighter kids, that is not uniformly true. Virtually every family has some beloved members who aren’t very bright. Few people, even whites, are willing to see their relatives denigrated as being of lesser value because they aren’t as intelligent, yet that is the aim of groups like AmRen.

    That’s partly why these absurd racial appeals keep failing. The vast majority of people understand that a racially based appeal to, say, eugenics will not remain confined to minority racial groups. The logic applies to any individual, regardless of race and will soon be applied more broadly.

    I’m afraid that groups like this and sites like this are mainly places that insecure whites come to gripe as they contend with the demographic changes affecting the country. Our civilization is not going to fall because, gasp, the “great and inherently unique white race” is a smaller part of the population. Rates of crime are not rising, they are falling, despite the recession and despite the industrious efforts of sites like this to chronicle individual incidents of crime. The vast majority of blacks do not hate nor desire the destruction of whites. Yes, there is still substantial mistrust, but after several hundred years of a tortured history, is that really surprising?

    The increasing tendency of Americans to see race as a secondary matter portends a better, less contentious future. There will, of course, be growing pains, as this site illustrates.

  • Detroit WASP

    1. Whites are too civilized for their own good.

    2. If and when whites die out, blacks will shortly follow because no one else is dumb enough feed and clothe them.

    3. Detroit is the near future but Japan is the distant future.

  • Anonymous

    It is interesting that many seem puzzled that most black people are not bothered by white people having, on average, higher average IQs. It is surely widely understood that Jews have, on average, far higher IQ’s than most non-Jews and that among those with very high IQ’s Jews are very disproportionately over represented. These facts apparently drove the Germans to fits, which gave us the holocaust, but the IQ deficit between Jews and non-Jewish whites doesn’t seem to faze non-Jewish whites very much today. In the same way, why should average IQ differences between blacks and whites faze blacks? A distinct minority of whites obsesses about racial IQ differences, perhaps chiefly because they provide a seemingly objective basis to devalue black people as a whole. Those determined to link expressed traits to race or ethnicity should tread carefully. All traits ultimately have a genetic component. If intelligence is unlikely to be evenly distributed across ethnic groups, is it also unlikely that other traits are as well. Is it not possible that people of, say, German heritage, are on average, more prone to xenophobia and extreme sociopathy than people from, say, West African heritage? Is the fact that serial killing is far more common in white than in black nations evidence of some intrinsic difference? And is it actually the case that race and crime in the US are so linked that genetics must explain it? During the days of lynch law, crowds of hundreds of whites would participate in the ritualized murder and dismemberment of black people and literally share out body parts as souvenirs. Children were brought and encouraged to participate. Such barbaric behavior today by blacks would no doubt be offered as proof of a lack of civilization. Are we to believe that whites have changed genetically in the past hundred years so that such behavior is now bred out of them as a group? The idea is absurd. The only way that any credible argument can be made that blacks are more prone to violence than whites is to choose an arbitrary date and refused to acknowledge the violence that whites have engaged in before that point.

  • UnclePen

    43 — Harumphty Dumpty wrote at 2:45 PM on November 6:

    Here’s a suggestion for the gentleman, and for other pro-Whites, on how to fight the anti-Whites and their program of White Genocide

    (The gentleman you refer to who made the remark is Jared Taylor btw, and not Mr. Kay).

    If all of us could express our positions as articulately and vividly as Jared Taylor does, would that enable us to breach the mainstream?

    I don’t think so anymore. The advertising industry learned by the 1950s something that the anti-Whites already knew: facts and clear reasoning don’t move masses of people.

    The advertising industry switched to methods that worked, and have worked very well indeed.

    Their older methods that did not work are still employed by us.

    Bob Whitaker at the site you linked has excellent ideas and is doing excellent work on delivering our most fundamental fact to mainstream audiences.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White

    (No! I don’t mean that that little refrain is “our most fundamental fact”! It’s just a helper fact and a handy signature!)

  • Anonymous

    Evolutionary success only depends on one thing — leaving offspring that survive. The individual, population, race, or species that leaves more offspring wins over those who don’t. Currently, Africans are the most superior race in terms of evolutionary success. They have even managed to get Whites to pay for their massive breeding — ie., “Save Africa” and welfare.

    But evolutionary success is a different subject from individual or socital quality of life for humans. Humans with high IQ produce higher quality of life. But today, high IQ does not = greater reproduction.

    In the past, when life was tough, high IQ people tended to leave more offspring. Today, high IQ races (Whites & Asians) are leving less offspring. Also, within each race, low-IQ individuals are reproducing faster than high-IQ individuals.

  • eugenicist

    In order to escape the ‘tar pits’ you have to understand why they exist, and how to use them to your advantage: http://goo.gl/Bwk0v

  • PC

    The same Harumpty Dumpty also writes elsewhere:

    Jared Taylor shares a lamentation with Joseph Kays, “Escaping the Tar Pits of Racism”:

    Since I have spent the last 25 years trying to do that—and have utterly failed—I am open to all suggestions…

    If all of us could express our positions as articulately and vividly as Jared Taylor expresses his, would that enable us to breach the mainstream?

    I don’t think so anymore. The advertising industry learned by the 1950s something that the anti-Whites who were planning White Genocide already knew: facts and clear reasoning don’t move masses of people.

    The advertising industry switched to methods that worked, and have worked very well indeed.

    Their older methods that did not work are still employed by us.

  • Anonymous

    1) If the white West, with its medical and aid interventions which have saved millions of black Africans were to have never existed or continues to function, then IQ becomes more important. Given that rampant disease would inhibit population growth, agricultural output would decline to the point of creating “starving masses”, violent tribal wars would continue unabated, the population would decrease naturally and dramatically. I am a Malthusian in this regard. Without the West, the population would simply decline due to lack of economic productivity and the benefits that flow from high tech investments and intelligent behaviors.

    2) The West, with its environmental awareness and concern for quality of life and understanding that population stability is necessary for that quality of life, self-limited the numbers of children it would have (Doesn’t anyone remember the Zero Population Growth ethic?). This wise use of resources was intentional and anticipated declines in the quality of life if it was not pursued. The West did this at a time (60′s and 70′s) that population growth in Africa and other IQ impoverished areas was not self-limiting and when that growth did not pose a threat to Western stability.

    Thus, in most noteworthy respects, the white West has done it to itself. One reason, humanitarian by nature, was essentially one great guilt trip by the white West because of an ongoing angst over colonialism and the supposed evils of that time, it was payback for the past, and the West cloaked itself in Mea Culpa’s to the point of creating the population growth threat it now faces. The other reason because of higher IQ, acknowledges that unlimited population growth can impinge on the stability, enjoyment, and worthiness of a life well lived, versus merely pursuing an existence.

    We must cease being the guilt laden people that “progressives” say we must be because “who are we to deserve so much…”, withdraw from having to save the world from itself, admitting we cannot and that the world should be allowed to be what it inherently is, not what we are driven to make it. And we must continue to create a stable environment for future generations by understanding that internal population growth is equally threatening.

    Look in our own backyard, did going from 200 million in population (1960′s), to the present 310 million add to our economic stability, tax base, social cohesiveness or merely balkanize our society? Most of that population growth exists because of high legal and illegal immigration rates. Those increases have done little to add to our economic stability, has only degraded our environment, and added population which benefitted this country in only a modest way. Without that increase, we would not be in the social or financial straits we are in now.

  • Tim in Indiana

    To assume, as dogma requires, that blacks and whites are biologically equivalent means that whites will forever be blamed for black failure, and that any policy that might actually help blacks will never be tried

    That’s the whole explanation in a nutshell. Those in power will never admit the IQ difference between the races, no matter how compelling the evidence, because that would mean that their gravy train would dry up. It would mean that whites would be let “off the hook” for all the problems of blacks, and they can’t have that!

    The vast majority of whites go along with it because it seems to be working. The economy keeps growing, everyone has plenty to eat, there are usually jobs available for most of those who truly want one, etc. Sure, crime has skyrocketed, but whites can flee the most degraded areas and build up a decent life for themselves. Only when it seems to stop working will the majority of whites finally wake up and rebel.

  • Jupiter7

    Jared Tayor

    You are completely wasting your time with the IQ test score issue. I could care less if blacks are worse off if Whites are not around…what I do care about is the fact Native Born White Americans will most definitely be worse off if they are race-replaced by non-whites regardless off IQ score. Your response once again provides more evidence for my claim that discussion of race and IQ score will push the racial interests of Native Born White Americans off the debating radar screen. You are attempting to appeal to blacks a racial group that is very enthusiastic about rapidly approaching White racial minority status.

    Jared, you are an intelligent man and therefore you must be aware that there are people out there who have a very deep grasp of the statistical and conceptual issues involved in IQ and race research and who also have a diametrically opposed point of view. So I am certain that when you have to debate these people that you fully realize that the debate will completely shift away from the race-replacement issue to an arcane psychometric debate and discussion. So here is my question:why do you want to shift the focus of the “debate”.

  • Harumphty Dumpty

    45 — PC:

    Thanks!

    The last part of the post you copied was:

    …Bob Whitaker has excellent ideas and is doing excellent work on delivering our most fundamental fact to mainstream audiences.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

    (No, I don’t mean that that little refrain is “our most fundamental fact”! It’s just a helper fact and a handy signature!)

    Since you appear to have some interest, I’ll link the defensive response that james Edwards made to the criticism leveled at him by the ADL regarding his interview of Pat Buchanan, a response that I’ve rewritten entirely in the aggressive pro-White style taught to us by Bob Whitaker. See my post at November 4, 2011 – 5:18 am:

    http://goo.gl/ORD9F

    I greatly admire james Edwards and highly recommend his wonderful book, “Racism, Schmacism,” but instead of using an aggressive and effective pro-White terminology to launch his own charges against the enemy in his response to the ADL, he remained entangled in the charges and terminology of the enemy! That’s been our futile style up to the present day! We seem unable to tear ourselves loose from repeating the anti-Whites’ most effective verbal weapon, the r-word, over and over and over, to the absolute ecstatic delight of our anti-White enemies! Amren even repeats the r-word in the title of this article!*

    A well-known pro-White activist who speaks to various groups has been delighted at the groups’ much more active engagement with his content since he discovered Whitaker’s methods, just as many of us who only post have been delighted by the power the methods have given us in heated discussions on youtube and elsewhere.

    But I’ve received very little feedback on either the site I just linked or on this one to my posts written in that mode to a pro-White audience, and I’d welcome any comment on how they are striking you.

    *At the link, I discuss the r-word at greater length in posts at November 4, 2011 – 2:57 pm, and November 7, 2011 – 4:33 am.

  • Harumphty Dumpty

    Here are the two posts I just linked in which I discuss the r-word:

    “…‘[the r-word]’…is exclusively reserved for use as a weapon against historic White European founded nations.”

    Yes, and in their long push for White Genocide, anti-Whites have loaded the r-word with their own ideological baggage so successfully that any attempt by us to use the word at all is a futile attack on one of the anti-Whites’ most fortified positions. By even just repeating the word, which I try to not do, we pro-Whites affirm and deepen its central lie that racial feeling is a learned pathology rather than an innate biological trait that evolved to protect the survival of racial groups.

    So F.R., while I believe I understand your worthy intention, I disagree that…”the terms ‘racist’ and ‘anti-Semite’ should be considered as honorable appellations.”

    I don’t believe we can do with the r-word anything comparable to what Blacks have been allowed to do with the n-word, turning it into a cudgel and emblem of their power as they now speak it in every other sentence but we can speak it publicly only under risk of severe social punishments.

    Can you imagine if you and I customarily greeted each other with, “Whas happenin, racist?”, but any non-white using the word in public would risk severe sanctions? Lol! All we need is control of the media, the schools, the churches, the government…uh, is anything left?

    Oh yeah, people’s minds. That’s why I want to replace the anti-Whites’ ruling terminology with our pro-White terminology of “anti-White,” “pro-White,” “White Genocide,” and “Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White,” by using the same method that the anti-Whites used to implant the r-word and its many relatives so successfully in the public mind.

    That method is constant repetition of our pro-White terms anywhere and everywhere as often as possible. I urge all pro-Whites to do that individually, and here’s a principal workshop from where some of us are doing that collectively and are constantly developing better methods of doing it:

    http://goo.gl/vyKfP

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White

    ———–

    (Re “Ant-racist is a code word for anti-White”)

    “The problem with this is that ‘anti-racist’ is not a term many people actually use.”

    That fact is a plus, since it means that unlike the r-word, “anti-racist” is not territory that has been occupied and fortified by the enemy. We try to breach the enemy’s defenses where the enemy is weak rather than where the enemy is strong.

    “Wouldn’t it be simpler and more accurate just to say ‘Racist is a code word for White’?”

    The r-word (and even to some degree the word, “White”), standing alone, is occupied enemy territory. We don’t fire guns that are unalterably pointed in our own direction. We fashion guns that will fire in their direction.

    We don’t use the r-word at all since anti-Whites have made that word an hypnotic trigger by screaming it into everyone’s ears for decades. It induces the anti-Whites’ pro White-Genocide trance.

    Pro-Whites have wrestled with the r-word for a long time and have almost always come out the losers. Bob Whitaker has solved the problem of the r-word: leave it alone, and when it’s thrown at you, launch your own attack back, using terminology and charges that turn your opponents’ attention away from their precious r-word and direct it to defending themselves against your terms and your charges. It works. DB is crazy about this stuff, because he’s experienced the huge change it’s produced when he addresses groups of various kinds.

  • Anonymous

    I was thinking about this yesterday. I believe we should completely ignore race and focus on IQ and behaviour alone. Never mention race at all. We all know race would follow behind IQ but it never needs to be mentioned. In fact if any liberal does mention it we can call THEM racists for bringing it up. Hoist them on their own petard.

    Liberal: “What do you mean we should stop foreign aid to low IQ countries because it’s a waste of resources?? Most of those countries are populated by blacks! That’s racist!”

    Realist: “Whoa whoa who said anything about blacks?? I was simply talking about IQ. YOU are obviously the racist for making that connection between blacks and IQ!”

  • Kenelm Digby

    RTB,

    The fact is that black pathologies are infinitely *worse* now then they were before the election of John F. Kennedy and all that flowed from that.

    The ‘growing pans’ you’re writing about have lasted for centuries – if that counts as babyhood I’d hate to see what time period you would call adulthood.

  • Anonymous

    To paraphrase a line from White Apocolypse (a book everyone should buy to help out the author), “We focus too much on quantity and not quality. Whites took over in areas where we were outnumbered because of our quality and not our quantity.”

  • Harumphty Dumpty

    53 — eugenicist:

    Your site is very interesting. I found this gem,

    “As Joseph Sobran said, public opinion is ‘what everyone thinks everyone else thinks.’”

    It sometimes seems to me that that is all that’s holding down a great eruption of publicly expressed racial feeling by Whites.

    That and the small fact that the first few isolated voices who say, “The emperor has no clothes,” will be crushed by retaliations. But once the eruption is general, we’ll have a new ball game.

    I wish I could recall who the East European was who said of life under his country’s Communist regime, “You know, if when the secret police had come in the night to drag off a tenant to never be seen again, if all of us in the building had simply met them with baseball bats, the game would have been over.”*

    I’ve made it plain where I’m presently placing my own hopes for breaking the stranglehold of the present system. Who knows for sure how the system will crumble. We must all find things that produce forward motion and do them.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White

    *Possibly not quite true, considering the course of the Hungarian Revolution in the 1950s, in which the Soviet Union sent in its military to quash the rebellion.

  • South African

    This is how I see it currently:

    America is huge. Give the liberals their homeland and let them practice what they preach and enjoy their utopian heaven. We will remain in our tar pits, quite happily.

    IQ – the bell shaped curve includes both high and low IQ individuals, and this is how nature must have intended it. There are leaders, and there are followers, everyone has a role to play.

    If society would just exist out of the gifted, a situation would possibly of a state of perpetual war due to jealousy between the gifted, and heavy competition around a limited amount of employment opportunities.

    For jealousy plays a big role in the life of all nations, from the most developed down to the utmost primitive, according to a professor Helmut Schoeck (I quote from a masters dissertation of one De Kok in my possession).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmut_Schoeck

    This means that apart from high IQ, you also have a value driven society. That is, outstanding men who lead the way forward to the betterment of mankind (positive entities), not outstanding men that lead the way forward for the betterment of their own pockets and egos (negative entities), and the hell with the rest of mankind.

    For the whites that do not procreate – my suspicion is that today white society is not living according to a white value system but has been infiltrated by something much more sinister. Something that puts material possession and decay above the heathen values of heroism and dying for ones ideals, regardless if one will reach ones objectives by it or not.

  • Anonymous

    “…and make it fit for polite society” ?

    The analogy is often noted between the mental repressions regarding sex in Victorian times and the mental repressions regarding racial realities in our own time. Victorian sexologists proved far far less interesting than Janet, Charcot,Freud, (Mesmer?). The realities about race and racial

    delusions will be revealed not by the Rushtons, Jensens, Brands, Lynns of our age, but by the cinema of the immediate future (finding production freedom beyond American shores). Our reniassance will enter the US from offshore if from our own hands, no?

  • highduke

    People that integrates into society their own low-IQ autistic & mentally retarded individuals rather than institutionalizing them, will never restrict Blacks & Latinos because of low IQ and your high IQ has ZERO survival value because it didn’t keep corrupt clergy from brainwashing you with the same Protestant individualism & Catholic universalism for 1000 years that turned into Liberal Democracy when secularized by science. Your problem is historic lack of religious cohesion. IQ is a diversion.

  • Jason Robertson

    Again, many important & relevant comments to chew over.

    A few further simplified thoughts:

    (1) IQ is not everything, but it is most important. Better to have society in the hands of creative producers (science, arts, medicine, education, &c) than stupid parasites or brutish tyrants.

    (2) But intellectuals are prone to ideology rather than open-minded scientific objectivity; the wrong ideology, the greater the damage. (No need for examples!)

    (3) Stupid welfare-requiring problem-people should not be allowed increasingly to vastly outnumber intelligent productive problem-solvers. More doctors, fewer patients; more police, fewer criminals; &c.

    (4) Special problems arise if male sexuality among some groups produces multiplies “illegitimate” low-ability offspring, who then reproduce this behaviour in subsequent generations. See J. P. Rushton, but also his critics.

    (5) The IQ differences between races or nations are average measurements (based on a western norm and method). See Lynn & Vanhanen, & critics. So although black Africans have lower average scores than white Europeans, there are still many clever blacks, if not quite enough. Individuals should be judged on personal record, including social behavior – though racial crossing adds another dimension (see my earlier indexed posts).

    (6) Some blacks show an exemplary character, which whites should discreetly encourage within the black brotherhood, without accepting a reduction of white numbers or detrimental cultural mixture. E.g. Mr Shaun Bailey, an intelligent black person, has courageously defended in Britain the traditional (western-style) family against a welfare system that began as a safety net and has become a noose; “there is no shortage of teenage girls who become pregnant in order to receive housing”; family campaigners should challenge the “liberal intelligentsia” which is numerically small; pressure groups should be asked what they are doing to run out of clients; &c. See http://www.famyouth.org.uk

    (7) Whatever the truth about climate change, there are problems ahead over water, food and raw materials, demanding high-IQ preparation, driven by objective study plus an instinct for racial elite survival, not a neo-marxist ideological PC fanaticism. See e.g. John Glad, http://www.whatwemaybe.org

    & Jack Parsons, http://www.popolpress.com

    Even more valid in 2011!

    (8) UK readers, don’t forget the campaign to stop British overpopulation from future foreign high-fecundity mass-immigration, at

    http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/19658

  • Anonymous

    RTB,

    When we assign a ‘median value’ of a statistical measurement such as IQ (it could be a whole host of other Gaussian varying variables such as height, weight etc), it means the particular value of that variable a ‘random individual’ plucked from the population under consideration is more likely than not to possess.If we take two discrete populations for the purposes of our sampling and find that the median values of the variable differ markedly between both groups, then it is completely justified to talk of marked differences between those groups.

    Your attempted ‘point’ is really nothing more than sophistry.You state the (misleading) obvious, then try to pat yourself on the back for a point well made – it’s nothing of the sort.It’s like trying to claim that height differences between men and women are inconsequential because a very small number of 6′ 2″ and above women exist.

    On your point about Brazil, Brazil is a truly horrid, horrid society a place that would make most sheltered brought-up Americans flee in terror and horror in the blink of an eye.All favelas, drug gangs, murers, death squads etc.Hardly an example worth emulating – definitely not an Austria, Sweden, Switzerland or Finland.

  • Shawn

    Re #27 BeBe

    “I am so weary and suspicious of those who use the word “hate” as if we are suppose to love those who are in reality, destroying our own race and our own civilizations. So according to you, we should never “hate” our enemies”

  • Shawn (the female)

    Re: #27 BeBe

    ‘I am so weary and suspicious of those who use the word “hate” as if we are suppose to love those who are in reality, destroying our own race and our own civilizations’

    I understand your frustration, but we must stop and look at who our REAL enemies are. It’s not the blacks who are allowing the blacks to rise above their qualifications or their abilities and tell us what we can and cannot do. None of this black hero worship, black handouts, and white suppression would be happening if not for WHITES. The blacks can do so little on their own; they obviously couldn’t orchestrate and carry out this black takeover themselves.

    Your enemy is the DWL’s, the touchy-feely, brain dead, do-gooder WHITES.

  • Netzach

    RTB,

    “Since IQ can be assessed on an individual basis, what justification can there be for constantly emphasizing racial IQ differences rather than judging each individual based on his or her abilities?”

    In principle I don’t think you find many who disagree with the idea of level playing field. As far as I understand, AmRen goes on and on about racial IQ differences primarily due to the strong contemporary taboo on there being absolutely no hereditary differences in IQ and temperament – and for that matter its weaker but downright idiotic cousin of there being no such differences whatsoever, despite the effects of various environmental factors having been thoroughly proven.

    “That’s partly why these absurd racial appeals keep failing. The vast majority of people understand that a racially based appeal to, say, eugenics will not remain confined to minority racial groups. The logic applies to any individual, regardless of race and will soon be applied more broadly.”

    This really depends on what kind of eugenics you’re talking about. Forced sterilization, let alone Aktion T4 type of stuff, the kind that gave eugenics a well deserved and long-lasting bad name, sure. With genetic engineering progressing so well, we’re not all that far away from the point where designer babies become possible, and while improving humans is difficult, risky and ethically complicated, correcting flaws is less so in all three respects. Assume a free DNA analysis would be available for expecting mothers, and if the results indicate severe inherited diseases, exceptionally low IQ or very poor impulse control, a subsidized gene therapy would be offered. Actually, you could pay the underclass some relatively modest sum to take both the analysis and therapy; it’d pay itself back.

    I fully understand the suspicion of eugenics and am determined to hold onto some of it myself, but it’s not necessarily the monster it was when we had neither the tools or understanding for precision work. We need not flail around in dark with knives anymore. Then again, I suppose this kind of thinking is controversial even here.

    “Rates of crime are not rising, they are falling, despite the recession and despite the industrious efforts of sites like this to chronicle individual incidents of crime.”

    Things did indeed start improving in 90′s, after crack epidemic had waned and the bloodletting of past decades had decimated the ranks of young black men, sending many of them either into prison or grave. The police had also learned a thing or two about the judicious use of force; the government for its part about bread, circuses and affirmative action. The economy grew fairly briskly as well, allowing generous investments into those things. The ghettoes were never quiescent, but they had been pacified to some extent. They still are – the recent phenomenon of flash mobs nonwithstanding – but I do wonder how long that will last.

    The situation is paradoxical in the sense that black middle class, more reliant on public sector and with lower net wealth, has suffered from the recent economic downturn much worse than whites, but the blacks are still much more optimistic about future than whites. I’m not clairvoyant, and others may prefer some racial explanations, but I’d wager the reason is just brother Obama in the White House. Surely he’ll turn things around, for blacks at least? Well, most likely he won’t, even if eurozone doesn’t go into fullblown Chernobyl mode. If not, he may even lose to some Republican whitey. I’m not sure what will happen when the blacks lose that optimism and decide they’ve been somehow cheated again, but I suspect it’ll turn the hoods into powder kegs only waiting for a spark.

    “The vast majority of blacks do not hate nor desire the destruction of whites. Yes, there is still substantial mistrust, but after several hundred years of a tortured history, is that really surprising?”

    Hmm… Let me guess, you’re either middle class black or pretty much the only blacks you know belong to that group? If so, “substantial mistrust” is pretty apt description, but all descriptions I’ve heard about underclass are pretty much all about hatred. Both of these are huge generalisations, of course – middle class blacks, for example, include the racial activists who can rage on with the best, as well as professionals mightily tired of them and disgusted of ghetto culture.

    “The increasing tendency of Americans to see race as a secondary matter portends a better, less contentious future. There will, of course, be growing pains, as this site illustrates.”

    I wouldn’t take such tendency for granted, though. Not that I personally wouldn’t mind, as I’m mostly interested about race in regards to its woeful effects on cultural assimiliation and the set of taboos limiting open discussion. Still, if economy stays bad, government has to undertake austerity measures hitting blacks even worse, and they get seriously angry, maybe starting a race riot or three, then what? There’s always been a white undertow of magazines, sites and organizations like this, created during the first miserable decades of post-Civil Rights era, then maintained afterwards by the constant lower level crime and occasional atrocity by underclass blacks, and of course the mendacity of media. Unless you have some better counterarguments than “we just need more of the same” and “racists!” ready, they can grow rapidly.

  • Indianapolis AWG (Average White Guy)

    Think of the Eurosphere as the goose the lays the golden egg.

    When the goose is finally cooked and consumed by diversity’s folly, what will become of Africa? Who will send CARE packages? What will become of America’s welfare system? Who will fund EBT cards? Who will send relief to Haiti? Who will fund Africa’s anti-AIDS programs?

    I’m no irrational apocalyptic, but when White ingenuity is eradicated, the world will plunge into a new dark ages from which it will never recover.

    Oh, and what will happen to George Soros’ stock?

  • anonymous

    Did you read this drivel from the bozo below?

    Truly an alien among us…………. black lynchings were done because of white criminality? there were a reason for black lynchings 100 yrs ago……… google Scott Mandingo Strahan, or the knoxville horror or the wichita massacre…………

    these people are not like anyone I would be around.

    these preachings of the fool below makes me wonder why he would come to Ameren.com

    to save us from ourselves no doubt.

    — Anonymous wrote at 9:05 PM on November 6:

    It is interesting that many seem puzzled that most black people are not bothered by white people having, on average, higher average IQs. It is surely widely understood that Jews have, on average, far higher IQ’s than most non-Jews and that among those with very high IQ’s Jews are very disproportionately over represented. These facts apparently drove the Germans to fits, which gave us the holocaust, but the IQ deficit between Jews and non-Jewish whites doesn’t seem to faze non-Jewish whites very much today. In the same way, why should average IQ differences between blacks and whites faze blacks? A distinct minority of whites obsesses about racial IQ differences, perhaps chiefly because they provide a seemingly objective basis to devalue black people as a whole. Those determined to link expressed traits to race or ethnicity should tread carefully. All traits ultimately have a genetic component. If intelligence is unlikely to be evenly distributed across ethnic groups, is it also unlikely that other traits are as well. Is it not possible that people of, say, German heritage, are on average, more prone to xenophobia and extreme sociopathy than people from, say, West African heritage? Is the fact that serial killing is far more common in white than in black nations evidence of some intrinsic difference? And is it actually the case that race and crime in the US are so linked that genetics must explain it? During the days of lynch law, crowds of hundreds of whites would participate in the ritualized murder and dismemberment of black people and literally share out body parts as souvenirs. Children were brought and encouraged to participate. Such barbaric behavior today by blacks would no doubt be offered as proof of a lack of civilization. Are we to believe that whites have changed genetically in the past hundred years so that such behavior is now bred out of them as a group? The idea is absurd. The only way that any credible argument can be made that blacks are more prone to violence than whites is to choose an arbitrary date and refused to acknowledge the violence that whites have engaged in before that point.

  • The Conscious Brutha

    19 — Henry wrote at 9:20 AM on November 5:

    This article portrays blacks a little bit to parasitically. Say what you will about this situation, but mention that black plight and standard of living is worse today, far worse, than the segregation they faced as a social group 60+ years ago. (not counting slavery, of course, which any white race oriented mind should tell you was a travesty for both sides.) The black population during the 50’s for instance had had better lifestyles, rates of family retention and education quality relative to anything today. They only lacked “social equality”, and when they got it look what it gave them: Welfare, crime, thuggery, immorality, and drugs.

    —————————————————————–

    Henry, I would make a comment, but you have taken the words right out of my mouth! WHITE LIBERALISM HAS DONE NOTHING BUT DESTROYED THE BLACK FAMILY & THIS GREAT COUNTRY TOO — PERIOD!

    *Shaking my head in abject pity*

  • Anonymous

    The idea that racially motivated lynchings were a response to black crime is laughable on its face. The institutions of law enforcement were entirely in the hands of whites until a generation ago. Blacks were barred from serving on juries, the police, judges and prosecutors were all white. There was no need for mob violence and its associated barbarism in order for criminals to be punished. And the rule of law is supposed to be one of the great achievements of white civilization. No, the purpose of lynch law was not to punish crime. It was to use terror to sustain the system of apartheid that was practiced in America. The level of violence and widespread participation of thousands of otherwise upstanding citizens in the murder and mutilation of people who had not been found guilty of any crime illustrates how little substance there is to the claim that participation in violent crime is determined by race. Far from being limited to those accused of having committed crimes of violence, lynch law was also liberally applied to those who dared try to vote or encourage others to vote, those who declined to give way to whites on the streets and those who happened to be black and in the vicinity when the mob decided that killing one person was not enough. Lynch law was large scale criminal barbarism plain and simple. That the race realists insist that white crimes like these must be called something other than crime says all that needs saying about the objectivity of the race realist argument.

  • RTB

    I must point out to all those claiming that the white race alone understands the importance of protecting the environment that it was the activities of the white race that gave us global warming, the destruction of natural reefs, the destruction of thousand year old fisheries and corral reefs, the poisoning of the oceans with mercury and other heavy metals, the use of the oceans as a dumping ground for billions of tons of plastic, the practice of strip mining and, now, mountaintop mining that fouls water tables, etc. The list goes on. These practices were all the creations of whites. It is rich in the extreme for a group to almost single-handedly destroy the balance of the earth’s environment and then claim that other groups don’t understand the importance of protecting the environment.

    Does anyone truly doubt that if human civilization does experience a planetary crash, that it will be the result of some new excess by whites? Nuclear war, some man-made biological weapon perhaps? Low IQ blacks a threat to human civilization? The idea is rich. We need only look at the current challenges that most threaten humankind. They are almost the exclusive making of whites. It is as if the white nationalists wish to claim racial credit for every innovation but share out the responsibility for the consequences and excess with the rest of humanity.

  • white advocate – Canada

    #48 RTB. Since you don’t care about race, can we expect you to move to Detroit, or South Africa, or, gasp, Zimbabwe? All are places where whites have lost power to blacks. Check the AR archives to see what it’s like for the remaining whites.

    I note your attempt to equate a belief in racial IQ differences with a eugenics program that would weed out all inferior types including among whites. That’s really pushing the logic. So you would be opposed to Christianity because it ranks people as sinners. You would be opposed to the US military because it could try to conquer the world. You would be opposed to capitalism because it is merciless to economic losers. You would be opposed to Ivy League universities because lower ranked universities have an inferior stigma. I suppose you agree that we shouldn’t extol beauty because that makes plain looking people feel inferior. You are opposed to political parties because they impose a uniform party platform on all members. Your line of thinking leads in the direction of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and the fanatics of the French Revolution.

  • white advocate – Canada

    #76 RTB. When whites invented those technologies, it wasn’t known that there would be so much environmental damage. You’ll notice that non-whites are stampeding to enjoy the benefits of white technology, even when environmental consequences are now known. So what are we going to do about the environment now? We should be talking and doing more about it, but we are so preoccupied with the lousy economy and racial competition that the environment takes a back seat. As for racial differences in environmental concern, it has long been noted that whites predominate in the activist groups.

  • Anonymous

    After failing to make points about IQ, The Brazilian utopia etc, RTB twists and shimmies into new ground, which never really was the topic under discussion.

    The point is that black Africans made littele ‘environmental impact’.Perhaps so, but you must realise until the modern era black Africans were few in number – the environment, in te form of tropica disease made the big impact on them.

  • Anonymous

    75 — Anonymous wrote at 8:35 PM on November 7:

    “The idea that racially motivated lynchings were a response to black crime is laughable on its face. The institutions of law enforcement were entirely in the hands of whites until a generation ago.”

    > Your last sentence doesn’t provide proof of your first sentences claim. My mother served in the Washington DC Juvenile court during WW2 and she told some horrific stories about blacks raping and murdering whites then. Also, lots of race riots occurred all over the US during the war. The ones I have personally investigated like the Detroit riots started when blacks were attacking white women in the war industry plants where they all worked.

    ” Blacks were barred from serving on juries, the police, judges and prosecutors were all white. There was no need for mob violence and its associated barbarism in order for criminals to be punished. ”

    It was black mobs as I noted above, not white ones. Without white policing via vigilantism, the situations would have been far worse, as they are growing now because whites have allowed themselves to be intimidated and made to feel guilty by bombastic speeches such as this one you posted here.

    “And the rule of law is supposed to be one of the great achievements of white civilization. ”

    It has worked very well for those who are capable of being civilized. Others,especially blacks require harsh consistent parenting in the form of citizen policing that you are protesting. But whites would not have been doing it without cause, as history shows they were forced, as we see today we will be forced once again.

    “No, the purpose of lynch law was not to punish crime. It was to use terror to sustain the system of apartheid that was practiced in America.”

    Yes, the purpose WAS to punish crime, and the records show that in the South, one third of those lynched were white. But as stated above, blacks have proven that they require constant policing, or they become a menace to civilized society wherever in the world they are. The lesson is that apartheid is the only way. Nothing is wrong with apartheid except that it supposes blacks are any use in or around a white population at all.

    ” The level of violence and widespread participation of thousands of otherwise upstanding citizens in the murder and mutilation of people who had not been found guilty of any crime illustrates how little substance there is to the claim that participation in violent crime is determined by race.”

    No, it proves that these upstanding citizens performed a necessary if irksome job that had to be done. It’s shirking has led to a dangerous state of affairs wherever blacks are numerous, including and especially the U.S., But certainly South Africa and other African nations, and locations in Europe. As such it is not a crime and does not compare to the crimes its necessary practice was employed to defeat. Also, that was many decades ago. White America has allowed black Americans and other new arrivals to run over us and abuse us for decades as victims for any and all categories of crimes and outrages. It is time to put an end to this.

    ” Far from being limited to those accused of having committed crimes of violence, lynch law was also liberally applied to those who dared try to vote or encourage others to vote, those who declined to give way to whites on the streets and those who happened to be black and in the vicinity when the mob decided that killing one person was not enough. Lynch law was large scale criminal barbarism plain and simple. That the race realists insist that white crimes like these must be called something other than crime says all that needs saying about the objectivity of the race realist argument.”

    You’re wrong. Claims and assertions do not disqualify the race realist argument but rather re-enforce it. When blacks in African can kill whites that acted in incredible benevolence for over a century, lifting them out of tribal barbarism, to return to the same barbarism and misery, is all that needs to be said about blacks everywhere since they practice the same. There is nothing that black do to improve anything they touch. The problems blacks cause is enough of an argument for race realism and the overthrow of MLK mythologies and ending the black hole of endless investment of an ever retreating “black promise.”

    If it is so bad among whites, go live in Zimbabwe, or some other African paradise of your choice. We don’t need blacks to teach us about justice. We do fine among ourselves.

  • Anonymous

    66 — highduke wrote at 1:55 PM on November 7:

    “People that integrates into society their own low-IQ autistic & mentally retarded individuals rather than institutionalizing them, will never restrict Blacks & Latinos because of low IQ and your high IQ has ZERO survival value because it didn’t keep corrupt clergy from brainwashing you with the same Protestant individualism & Catholic universalism for 1000 years that turned into Liberal Democracy when secularized by science. Your problem is historic lack of religious cohesion. IQ is a diversion.”

    Once again you are making very little sense. But that is, I suspect, due to your low IQ. What a great example of a spastic, run-on sentence.

    Adapting to new and unique situations and the speed of problem solving is what IQ is about. The ability to crush a skull with a club is easily mitigated when the intended victim invents a distance weapon to kill the brute without suffering a scratch. Next problem? Do you understand what that means, “Highduke?”

    As for your mini-diatribe on religious brainwashing: It didn’t prevent scientific and technical advancement, although it retarded it. But that sect, cult like religious practices would have served the white race is a ridiculous proposal. In fact, you don’t make much sense and one is again left wondering why you bother posting your pointless non-sense?

    English may be your second language. It is possible that you have something of value to say. But you are chronically not putting it across, but projecting only an unintelligible, negative attitude.

  • Kind Soul

    @#75 Anonymous

    Blacks rule South Africa from 17 years, but ‘black on black’ mob justice are everyday occurance.

    South Africa: Police Ignored As Mob Justice Rules the Townships:

    http://allafrica.com/stories/201011150864.html

  • Jupiter7

    Since the case against importing Asians-who score the highest on IQ tests-into America is very very strong..the case against importing Mexicans into America is very strong also..regardless of IQ score. I mean just look how this thread has sidetracked into a mind-numbing-eyes-glaze-over discussion about psychometrics..pure mad calibrator nuttiness.

    Blacks have been violently assaulting Native Born White Americans across the nations on at least 40 occasions…do you really thnk you are going to have a policy wonk dicussion with them about scores on IQ tests and psychometrics? The long awaited race war has already started..what planet are you folks living on?

    Dorothy:”Toto,I don’t think we are in Kanasas anymore.”

  • Un-Indoctrinated

    To t he poster calling out Highduke. You make some good points about Colonial Whites and their invention of firearms to defeat the barbarians from a distance without getting physically harmed. I’ve always felt that the reason (or lack thereof) that Arab suicide bombers are blowing themselves up is because of a combination of three things, even though anyone with a thought-provoking bone in their bodies can see how unequal the playing fields are with this philosophy.

    (1) Islamic extremism. The most obvious one. Kill the infidels, etc…

    (2) Financial gain. I know there have been numerous accounts on this site that many extremists are not impoverished, but they are mainly the recruiters of the disenfranchised kids. They are the hypocrites, the War Pigs, as Black Sabbath once sang about. The poor or mentally unstable or both are the ones who ultimately pull off the attacks. Reports are plenty, especially from known terrorist sympathizer and splinter groups, that there is a large sum of money going to the survivors of the bombers. Who’s paying them? The rich recruiters and their masters.

    (3) The promise of 72 virgins in paradise.

    Of course in any army throughout history the objective has always been to defeat your enemies without damaging your troops and resources to an irreparable state. To blow yourself up kind of defeats the purpose because you are not there to bask in your victory. That may have an element to taking advantage of those to a low IQ.

  • Netzach

    RTB,

    “It is rich in the extreme for a group to almost single-handedly destroy the balance of the earth’s environment and then claim that other groups don’t understand the importance of protecting the environment.”

    Results = Morality, right? If whites subjugated most of the world once, it must be because they were the nastiest ones. If whites have damaged environment horribly, it must be because they don’t care about environment.

    You’re what I like to call quadraparaplegia ethicist (sounds better in my language, I admit). Someone who is paralyzed from neck down can do very little evil, and since causes so little harm, he must be morally superior, right? Nah. He just doesn’t have power to hurt others too much, no matter how nasty he is.

    Whites are the opposite of that. Especially during 19th century when it comes to international politics, and 20th century when it comes to environment. Power, power and lots more power. Of course those who have power do worse things than those who can’t. To quote Thucydides: “…you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” That is the cruel truth about international politics. When it comes to contemporary environmental attitudes, one might on the other hand say that the strong do what they must and the weak do what they can.

    “Does anyone truly doubt that if human civilization does experience a planetary crash, that it will be the result of some new excess by whites?”

    If such a thing happens, I indeed suspect someone born of modern civilization. These days that includes, of course, a lot more than Western nations. I wish you luck in spreading your message to East Asian sites. Of course, you won’t, since you won’t bother to learn Pinyin Chinese or Japanese, and moreover, you know they couldn’t possibly care less about your hectoring.

  • Anonymous

    @ 76 RTB.

    Clearly you are living in a European based country. Why don’t you leave it if is so bad. I love how you moan but really won’t take the steps to move to a place where you won’t be subjected to us evil people. Hey there is no chain around YOUR leg. I won’t stop you.

    May I also remind you that is Europeans that form the greatest cause for environmentalism.

    Yes there has been many inventions like atomic bombs that could threaten the world (even though it can be argued that they give us a greater advantage in warfare), but the way I see it you are using a computer and an internet that the “rest of humanity” didn’t make.

    I don’t go so low as too take pride for inventions of an individual within a group, but I will admit that this world wouldn’t be where it is now if it wasn’t for a group comprised of certain individuals who so far created nearly everything you see today (and don’t see the trends changing anytime soon).

  • GenX ANZAC

    The aspect that makes ‘racism’ a tar pit to me is in the double standards/ contradictions and paradoxes it creates.

    If racism was a linear concept, in that one action=one reaction then it wouldn’t be so hard to deal with.

    But no, racism is binary system with both positive and negatively charged outputs/inputs depending on what racial group the ‘pitcher and receiver’ belong to.

    Everything that is White and/or is racial has to be judged/seen/deemed to be negative and everything that is non-white and is racial has to be positive and never the twain shall meet.

    W=(-) B=(+).

    If I had to draw a diagram demonstrating how racism worked, it would probably look something like a picture of the yin/yang or the figure eight symbol on its side for infinity, with the flow of energy only able to flow in one direction.

    Output= W(-) / B(+),

    Input= B(+) / W(-).

    This is the standard approved model which officially equates to societies ‘love’, and if you reverse the polarity of this model making W(+), then you have societies model for ‘hate’.

    This means that our society or community at large really hates Whites and loves non-whites.

    ‘Racism’ as we know it is a blatantly anti White mechanism and it no doubt benefits all non whites, but I’d say blacks would be the greatest beneficiaries as the perfect antithesis group within a society which increasing rewards intellectual merit; although I think IQ levels really don’t come into the equation much at all either, as so called higher IQ non-white groups also reap the benefits of racism.

    This of course has the desired effect of redistributing wealth, power, influence, status or ‘privilege’ away from one group W(-) and it then hands it over to the other group B(+).

    How Whites get to be labelled the ‘racists’ in this paradigm, when we try to stand up for ourselves, although others in ‘the outer group’ get to avoid the same defamatory label all together when they do as we do, is beyond me.

    The fact that there is a socially enforced mechanism put into place, which is supposed to bring about equality which is built on discrimination and which is racist itself at its own core, is enough of a contradiction as to drive anyone insane.

    Or in other words, racism is presented as a anti-hate mechanism, which paradoxically has hatred (of Whites) within its own core, yet if a White person tries to challenge this contradiction, they themselves are accused of being ‘the hater’, by of course the ‘anti hater’ who by definition hates Whites.

    If you look at humanity as a whole, with seven billion of us now inhabiting this planet, yet not a single one of us seven billion people was here as recently as 130 years ago, with us getting to be here for 80 years on average (give or take 20years), meaning that humanity replaces itself with a similar regularity as do our bodies cells, which are completely replaced every two weeks.

    The introduction of this ‘racism’ concept into our collective mindset is the equivalent of introducing a virus into some computing software, with the function being the termination of the White race’s cells replicating.

    I sincerely hope this quagmire is of our own doing and that there is no external group pushing this agenda (the difference between suicide and genocide), there is no doubt that the corporate world globalists have jumped on this anti-white bandwagon as to reach out to the world for cheaper labour and a larger marketplace as to maximise their own quarterly profit margins, but I wouldn’t give any of them the creative credit for this.

    If this mental trap (or tar pit) of thinking that “hating Whites (even if I too am White) means that I am good” is just a ‘good intention’ that has gone to the boundary of its own excesses, then at least there is some hope that it can be turned around and we can have this virus removed.

    As if we racists are right, surely the good intentioned projections, self deceptions and omissions (lies) of the left can’t hold up forever, and the bow would eventually have to break.

    Or are we just in the beginning of this millennium’s ‘dark ages’.

    For if we are right, and we remain to be ignored then everyone loses.

    Then I pray that we are wrong, but my I know in my head, heart and belly that we are not wrong.

  • Anonymous

    76 — RTB wrote at 8:46 PM on November 7

    ————————-

    Your whole post reeks of jealousy and out and out stupidity on your part.

    Give it up and go somewhere else to post your anti-White spew.

  • Anonymous

    — Anonymous wrote at 9:05 PM on November 6:

    It is interesting that many seem puzzled that most black people are not bothered by white people having, on average, higher average IQs. It is surely widely understood that Jews have, on average, far higher IQ’s than most non-Jews and that among those with very high IQ’s Jews are very disproportionately over represented. These facts apparently drove the Germans to fits, which gave us the holocaust, but the IQ deficit between Jews and non-Jewish whites doesn’t seem to faze non-Jewish whites very much today. In the same way, why should average IQ differences between blacks and whites faze blacks? A distinct minority of whites obsesses about racial IQ differences, perhaps chiefly because they provide a seemingly objective basis to devalue black people as a whole. Those determined to link expressed traits to race or ethnicity should tread carefully. All traits ultimately have a genetic component. If intelligence is unlikely to be evenly distributed across ethnic groups, is it also unlikely that other traits are as well. — Anonymous wrote at 9:05 PM on November 6:

    It is interesting that many seem puzzled that most black people are not bothered by white people having, on average, higher average IQs. It is surely widely understood that Jews have, on average, far higher IQ’s than most non-Jews and that among those with very high IQ’s Jews are very disproportionately over represented. These facts apparently drove the Germans to fits, which gave us the holocaust, but the IQ deficit between Jews and non-Jewish whites doesn’t seem to faze non-Jewish whites very much today. In the same way, why should average IQ differences between blacks and whites faze blacks? A distinct minority of whites obsesses about racial IQ differences, perhaps chiefly because they provide a seemingly objective basis to devalue black people as a whole. Those determined to link expressed traits to race or ethnicity should tread carefully. All traits ultimately have a genetic component. If intelligence is unlikely to be evenly distributed across ethnic groups, is it also unlikely that other traits are as well. Is it not possible that people of, say, German heritage, are on average, more prone to xenophobia and extreme sociopathy than people from, say, West African heritage? Is the fact that serial killing is far more common in white than in black nations evidence of some intrinsic difference? And is it actually the case that race and crime in the US are so linked that genetics must explain it? During the days of lynch law, crowds of hundreds of whites would participate in the ritualized murder and dismemberment of black people and literally share out body parts as souvenirs. Children were brought and encouraged to participate. Such barbaric behavior today by blacks would no doubt be offered as proof of a lack of civilization. Are we to believe that whites have changed genetically in the past hundred years so that such behavior is now bred out of them as a group? The idea is absurd. The only way that any credible argument can be made that blacks are more prone to violence than whites is to choose an arbitrary date and refused to acknowledge the violence that whites have engaged in before that point. And is it actually the case that race and crime in the US are so linked that genetics must explain it? During the days of lynch law, crowds of hundreds of whites would participate in the ritualized murder and dismemberment of black people and literally share out body parts as souvenirs. Children were brought and encouraged to participate. Such barbaric behavior today by blacks would no doubt be offered as proof of a lack of civilization. Are we to believe that whites have changed genetically in the past hundred years so that such behavior is now bred out of them as a group? The idea is absurd. The only way that any credible argument can be made that blacks are more prone to violence than whites is to choose an arbitrary date and refused to acknowledge the violence that whites have engaged in before that point.

    _______________________

    What are you talking about? Even Einstein was a fraud and stole from the ethnic Germans. Your whole post is full of myths and out and out propaganda.

    As for this sentence, you are way off.

    “Is it not possible that people of, say, German heritage, are on average, more prone to xenophobia and extreme sociopathy than people from, say, West African heritage? Is the fact that serial killing is far more common in white than in black nations evidence of some intrinsic difference?”

    ———————————————–

    Another pro-jewish, pro-black rant. I might add, another anti-German and anti-White rant. Maybe you really NEED to check out who those so-called White serial killers are…Also check out even here on Amren the numbers of BLACK serial killers. It just might surprise you and burst your little bubble.

  • Bebe

    70 — Shawn (the female) wrote at 3:16 PM on November 7:

    Re: #27 BeBe

    ‘I am so weary and suspicious of those who use the word “hate” as if we are suppose to love those who are in reality, destroying our own race and our own civilizations’

    I understand your frustration, but we must stop and look at who our REAL enemies are. It’s not the blacks who are allowing the blacks to rise above their qualifications or their abilities and tell us what we can and cannot do. None of this black hero worship, black handouts, and white suppression would be happening if not for WHITES. The blacks can do so little on their own; they obviously couldn’t orchestrate and carry out this black takeover themselves.

    Your enemy is the DWL’s, the touchy-feely, brain dead, do-gooder WHITES.

    ———————————————-

    Another thing I am weary and suspicious of, Shawn, is the use of that term White, as an all inclusive term to lump all of us into one race of people, which we are not.

    Please define that word, White? I believe this was discussed on one of the Amren articles a few days ago.

  • Anonymous

    #89, your comment was unreadable. Learn to use paragraphs to break up your writing instead presenting your screeds as one long rant.

    Is it not possible that people of, say, German heritage, are on average, more prone to xenophobia and extreme sociopathy than people from, say, West African heritage? Is the fact that serial killing is far more common in white than in black nations evidence of some intrinsic difference?

    I don’t know about serial killings in West African nations (because I don’t care). But I do know that here in the United States, blacks are overrepresented as murderers, rapists and, yes, serial killers. But you’d never know this because the media do a fine job covering up black-on-White murders.

    African Americans and Serial Killing in the Media The Myth and the Reality

    Anthony Walsh

    Two of the stereotypes surrounding serial killers are that they are almost always White males and that African American males are barely represented in their ranks. In a sample of 413 serial killers operating in the United States from 1945 to mid-2004, it was found that 90 were African American. Relative to the African American proportion of the population across that time period, African Americans were overrepresented in the ranks of serial killers by a factor of about two.

    http://hsx.sagepub.com/content/9/4/271.abstract

  • Anonymous

    I must point out to all those claiming that the white race alone understands the importance of protecting the environment that it was the activities of the white race that gave us global warming…

    Laughable! It is whites and only whites who are interested in cleaning up the environment. Environmental laws in the US are the most draconian anywhere on the planet. Do you believe the US is more polluted than China or India? Or do you believe that whites are the ones that cause the massive air, water and land pollution in those countries? Why has the FDA cautioned about eating fish from Chinese waters, warning that it is full of heavy metals such as mercury?

    The massive garbage patch in the Pacific Ocean is made up of Asian trash even though you think whites are responsible. I defy you to point out one place in the United States that is as polluted as any one of these photos of “amazing” pollution from China:

    http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/

    Would you dare to scold the Chinese or Indians the same way you scold Whites? Oh, that’s right! Only whites are polluters. Non-whites are peace loving, earth worshiping victims of white oppression.

    It is rich in the extreme for a group to almost single-handedly destroy the balance of the earth’s environment and then claim that other groups don’t understand the importance of protecting the environment.

    Earth in the Balance? Algore? Is that you?

    Congratulations. You have written the most ridiculous, “rich”, laughable post seen here in a long time.

  • XIXth

    Great article and subsequent response from Mr. Taylor. As Mr. Taylor says, the article is correct on its conclusion, but misses the fundamental premise that blacks are only successful because of white pathology. Only if we reverse this pathology will whites survive.

    I contend that the begining of white national pathology go back much further than 1950. Indeed, the only reason America succeeded in advancing across the Continent as a white nation was because it kept true to an older European tradition, whilst the other white nations increasingly turned to a more “liberal” and sentimental doctrine. America kept to policy of rigid segregation, separation, and the advancement of American communities while Europe either kept to a separate but equal settlement policy in a few areas like the British with Canada, South Africa, and Australasia, or a civilizational universality such as the Spanish in the New World, the French in North Africa, or a pure commercial supremacy idea as the British in India.

    By 1900, America had reached its goal of Manifest Destiny, while Europe trudged through with its policy of Imperial Destiny. America had a country of overwhelming white communities throughout the deserts and forests, and from coast to coast of America. Similarly, the British were successfully doing the same thing in Australia and Canada. But in South Africa, in Algeria, and elsewhere, the Imperialists were seeding the future with their “white man’s burden” which reached its fruition in 1950.

    Amazingly, despite its early absolute support for an Empire of Liberty and Manifest Destiny of an Anglo-Saxon white America, it actually turned 180 degrees from this policy, and went further liberal than the Europeans in pushing through a policy of “white man’s burdern” on steroids. As a result, the European Empires were liquidated and what remained of any sense of white solidarity, European supremacy, and Western Civilizational uniquiness was abandoned.

    Now those former European possessions are on permanent life support, and in the US, the non-white enclaves are in similar life support. Yet, because of Western largess, the Third world population continues to explode. According to estimates ranging from Oxfarm to WHO to Red Cross, without White largess, Black Africa within five years would degenerate into mass famine, hunger, and desease leading to the quick death of hundreds of millions of blacks within a decade and hundreds of millions in the next decade. Indeed, without white largess, the question is, could Black Africa even exist outside of perhaps fifty million or so subsistence farmers and small townsmen.

    Looking back now, it appears, that had the European colonials treated Black Africa with same segregated militancy and Manifest Destiny as early American colonials, the present day nations of Mauratania, Senegal, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Congo, Gabon, Angola, Mozambique, South Africa, Namibia, Botswana, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Kenya, etc would either be under white rule and probably be white majority states.

    Given, how those tenous colonial holdings were lost, and now how even America is being lost, what has killed the white nations, is a complete abandonment of their traditional values, religious beliefs, and sense of self-identity. In its place is a greedy, commercialize new-empire in which all white identity is nuetered of natural impulses and characteristics and culture aside from vulgar consumption and IQ levels. Having lost all of the aforementioned appendeges and on verge of even losing its footholds in North America, as a result of that change, the article clearly shows what needs to occurr if white nations are not to disappear.

  • Anonymous

    I was about to say what Jared Taylor said better: dysgenics requires the generosity of the genetically superior. Eventually highly evolved white – and even black – liberals with high IQs will get tired of lying in public about the paleolithic behavior and performance of the urban underclass. 
     
    Already a few blacks, like Bill Cosby, are beginning to tell the truth. When civilized whites notice that nothing bad happens to those blacks, they will look at each other nervously, and begin to stop lying in public. Then, they will tell the truth too.  Finally, they will act on the truth, not only in their personal lives – they have always done that – but politically.
     
    An additional factor is that it is requiring more intelligence to earn a decent income.

  • Anonymous

    I was about to say what Jared Taylor said better: dysgenetics requires the generosity of the genetically superior. This generosity will not last long enough to reverse the evolution toward  higher intelligence. Aid to Families with Dependent Children is being phased out. It is requiring more intelligence to earn a decent income. Employers are coming to rely more on mental aptitude tests in making employment decisions. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NCRQ2FVGAMBTMUFZRGPXDBCTMQ tropic

    Humanity is like a grafted fruit tree- the root stock is hardier and faster growing than the graft, and if it is not periodically pruned back and otherwise controlled it will overwhelm the graft and the tree will revert to it’s wild form.  It will be a fine looking specimen but totally useless.  We need to find a way to protect the graft.