Darwin’s Duel with Descartes

Bo Winegard and Ben Winegard, Evolutionary Psychology, May 23, 2014

{snip}

Wade’s book is, first and foremost, a courageous but flawed attempt to grapple with a politically divisive but scientifically important topic: recent and regional human evolution. To our knowledge, it is the first of its kind: A mainstream book written by a respectable scientific journalist about racial variation in cognition and temperament. Ranging from provocative speculations to cautious equivocations, A Troublesome Inheritance is an entertaining, informative, but inconsistent challenge to orthodoxy. Whatever its shortcomings, it is essential reading for anyone who applies evolutionary principles to human behavior.

{snip}

The second half of Wade’s book illustrates some of its flaws. Wade’s hypotheses about the social and institutional effects of racial variation are, of course, perfectly legitimate scientific hypotheses; however, they are undeniably bold, and they confront the heavily fortified garrison of selective dualism that dominates mainstream academic and intellectual discourse. Convincing others that the mainstream position is not only incorrect but also worth challenging probably requires a more impressive armamentarium than Wade provides. The book would have been stronger if Wade had more slowly and carefully built his argument that there are important racial variations in cognitive and temperamental traits before speculating about their role in human history. As it is, Wade’s book is fairly impressionistic, which makes it enjoyable to read, but not as rigorous as it probably needed to be.

As noted above, Wade is strangely dismissive of research about the effect of IQ differences among human groups on economic, institutional, and cultural variables (see pp. 189-193). Although the research on IQ differences is controversial and is far from definitive, it is nevertheless more copious and rigorous than research on any of the putative temperamental differences Wade adduces to explain institutional differences among human groups (Jensen, 1998; Lynn 2006; Rushton and Jensen, 2005; but see Nisbett et al., 2012). It is possible that Wade didn’t want this contentious issue to overshadow the rest of his  book, but this contradicts his explicit goal of speaking candidly about human variation and its effects on social institutions. Furthermore, some of Wade’s own speculations are likely to be equally contentious and controversial. Whatever the reason, Wade is selectively skeptical of data that find a relation between institutional quality, work productivity, GDP, economic freedom, and IQ (Gottfredson, 1997; Lynn and Vanhanen, 2012). This puts him at odds with what has become a productive research paradigm (Rindermann, 2013). Of course, future research is needed to fully tease out the relative contributions of IQ and other temperamental traits on social institutions, productivity, and GDP (Stolarski, Zajenkowski, and Meisenberg, 2013). Wade may turn out right, but the current data suggest that his dismissal of the explanatory power of IQ is premature.

{snip}

It is understandable that many academics and intellectuals are trepidatious about frankly addressing the possibility that groups vary on socially valued traits such as athleticism, self-control, or intelligence. However, the tendency of some intellectuals to denounce those who study such topics–to besmirch their reputations with accusations of racism–is inexcusable. We cannot possibly allay all concerns about this topic, but we do believe that:

1) It would be remarkable if groups did not vary on some socially valued traits.

2) It does not promote the interests of society or of science to deny such variation simply because it makes some people uncomfortable.

3) It is important for academics to study group differences and to educate responsibly the public about what they mean (see Haidt, 2009).

{snip}

Wade has written a fascinating, challenging, and provocative book with a simple message: Evolution is recent, regional, and it doesn’t stop at the human neck. For many decades now, social scientists have protected themselves from this nearly inescapable implication by adhering to a form of selective dualism. Wade should be applauded for challenging this flawed but convenient stopgap. A Troublesome Inheritance is not a perfect book. We wish it had been a bit more systematic and rigorous, and we fear that Wade’s fascinating speculations will be too easily swept away by streams of outrage and indignation because he failed to provide stronger scaffolding. Nevertheless, his book should encourage public conversation about the important and complicated topic of racial variation. The celebration of human diversity should go hand in hand with the honest and rigorous study of such diversity.

Topics: , ,

Share This

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.
  • Tom Thumb

    The only thing “troublesome” is coming up with another dumb concept clothed in quasi-intellectual double talk to discredit the findings of the book.

    • JohnEngelman

      Intellectuals who are not independently wealthy know that what Nicholas Wade says is true, just as they know that what Charles Murray says is true. Nevertheless, they need to express several doubts in order to keep their jobs, and their invitations to the right dinner parties.

      • a multiracial individual

        I would like to believe your view. However, there are probably thousands of tenured professors in this country that know that human biological diversity is real, yet they still are not willing to discuss it. Why not? These people cannot be fired for speaking about these issues. I suspect that a disturbingly large percentage of them are “true believers.”

        • Tom Thumb

          Sir, don’t ever look in the direction of academia for any show of intestinal fortitude.

        • JohnEngelman

          Professor Arthur Jensen of Berkeley had his classes disrupted. He received death threats. He sometimes required police protection.

          Professor J. Philippe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario faced efforts by Canadian politicians to get him fired, even though he had tenure.

          Most professors would rather not have to endure that.

          Also they want to have an easy time getting their books and essays published.

        • IstvanIN

          They can always find a way to fire you. Even if it means lying.

        • Jesse_from_Sweden

          Tenure only means you can’t get fired without a good reason, it doesn’t mean that your career, funding and life in general is immune to being disrupted or destroyed.

      • Drew

        Yes, one wonders if persons of retirement age in Russia who lived their best professional years under the Soviet system would see in this circumstance of “race comment games” in America a replication of the safeguard strategies variously used within discussions of a number of topics finessed under that regime–e.g., code words, standard obliquities, cliche qualifiers, etc etc. For possible example, my impression is that discussions of subsconscious mental activity vis a vis condemnation of Freudianism often required verbal acrobatics ?

  • Tarczan

    It seems to me they were trying to agree with the book without stating such.

    • APaige

      I usually have to wait until the race is not biological defense collapses on itself. But 19 words into this article: “scientifically important topic: recent and regional human evolution.”

    • Medizin

      Just doing a bit of dancing around to save their jobs.

      Bo – Department of Psychology – Florida State University
      Ben – Department of Psychological Sciences – University of Missouri

    • Jesse_from_Sweden

      To me it seems that they criticized the book for being a bit too “popular-themed”, which isn’t very strange since it was meant for the masses and not for the academics in the right fields.

      Just looking at the text above with it’s “impressive armamentarium” and “adduces to explain”, shows that the authors of this article are whining about it not containing the amount of snobbery, fancy words and tons of references (Gottfredson, 1997; Lynn and Vanhanen, 2012) like they are used to.
      Which isn’t very strange, it isn’t a scientific article nor a book designed to really prove anything, but merely to bring these issues into the general populace for discussion. And that means making the book an easy read for those that don’t read post-doctoral thesises (thesisis? thesis’?`) on a regular basis.

      And they whine about Wade jumping to conclusion and taking up practical examples that aren’t proven, only implied.
      Of course he does, that helps people to understand how these things apply to themselves and the world in general.

  • David Ashton

    Much depends on the intellectual capacities of the elites of a community and their influence over the rest of the population. All these historical and cultural interactions are quite complex to evaluate.

  • Nancy Thomas

    IQ itself is proof of the differences. Wade is solid.

  • revilo evola

    I am not happy with the depth of analysis. and obvious confusion that manifests within this particular “study”. For instance, Cartesian dualism is but one type of dualism; an earlier “type” of dualism, Aristotelian hylomorphism, may have more to offer, and in fact should be a starting ground for any discussion of the mind-body dilemma. Whatever, strict materialism (biological or otherwise) can never offer real understanding of race, which is a spiritual, or formal, manifestation of human types.

    Be that as it may, the modern drive to deny race has reached absurd proportions. You can tell from reading this, and other articles, that the cat is out of the bag, and consequently the dam is about to break. We are back to the future. Anthropologically, three major racial groupings manifest: White, Yellow, and Black. The first two have demonstrated the ability to create and preserve civilization, albeit civilizations of different quality. The latter is, and has always been, savage, not being capable of either maintaining or preserving higher culture. Therefore, their introduction into civilization will always result in futility and heartache.

    The first two groups can learn to live symbiotically, under the right conditions. The Black race can never live harmoniously with higher races. All this was common knowledge up until about the end of the Second World War, but for other reasons has been forgotten. Yet there is another twist. A fourth race exists, and this race complicates matters to the point that there may never be a good solution to overall racial harmony.

    This fourth group has never produced civilization, but have instead attached themselves to whatever existing order they happen to find themselves–up until now, a Western White order. Whether they will be capable of infiltrating the Yellow order, remains to be seen.

    The uncanny ability of this fourth race to manipulate a given order for their own benefit results in a perverted reality for indigenous folk–White folk who tend to be both naive and unsuspecting. Subterfuge occurs by means of a pervasive infiltration of both media and academia, along with this group’s unique ability to control a given people’s commerce. Unfortunately, this high achieving group does not have the best interests of whatever host community they are living in, at heart. Also, there are many indigenous folk who are not unhappy to cooperate.

    To wrap: the denial of race is simply a denial of reality. And that is the definition of insanity. We live in an insane age.

    • Tully

      I agree the denial of racial differences is a denial of reality. A denial I suspect driven initially by carefully orchestrated political, cultural and academic revisionism which has now evolved into fear and loss of ones job. We’ve all seen what happens when someone utters a un PC/MC view and it goes public – the speaker pays a heavy price. Even wealthy and powerful people have to watch what they say now.

      Like you write this situation was forced on the West by this fourth group whom you speak of who hijacked white Western civilization, but the end results of this will not be to their liking. For the last two millennia they’ve depended on their host civilization to exist and so far only the whites have been amenable to their manipulation and have for the most part turned a blind eye to their constant economic predations.

      Yes many indigenous folk have no qualms helping them however it’s a two edged sword. Blacks hate their guts despite 60 years of social engineering; Muslims want to kill them despite opening up Europe and the U.S to them; Hispanics just want power and territory, however you can’t guilt trip them about the Holocaust or genocides of a people that are totally foreign to them and whom they nothing in common with. Asians, especially the Chinese are a very closed group suspicious of outsiders. And they don’t take kindly to those who would denigrate their culture and values the way the fourth group routinely does with Whites.

      Liberalism has also become a two edge sword for them. It’s white supporters are much more likely to help Muslims and Blacks while giving the evil eye towards Fourth groups Middle-East interests and financial manipulations on Wall Street which they hate with a vengeance. It won’t take much more before the children of the fourth group find college to be a hostile place, it will spell the beginning of the end of their control.

      In Europe, the fourth group is in it’s twilight as Muslims take over. Polls in France indicate 75% of them want to emigrate. Sweden is a nightmare, England and the other states are not far behind. The fourth group has no one to blame but themselves since they were and are at the forefront of this demographic shift.

      The point being is that they in their foolish attempts to engineer the crippling of white civilization they have created a Frankenstein of sorts. They’ve ruined their host nations and made them hostile. Their safe heavens are steadily shrinking, nor are they able to pull the wool over as many whites as they used to.

    • ShermanTMcCoy

      “To wrap: the denial of race is simply a denial of reality. And that is the definition of insanity. We live in an insane age.”

      Small wonder that so many require mind-altering substances in order to cope with this insane world.

  • HJ11

    The last sentence in the review shows how goofy the whole review is: “The celebration of human diversity should go hand in hand with the honest and rigorous study of such diversity.”

    Such a squishy, emotionally loaded sentence has no place in any purported scientific, semi or quasi scientific review of the subject of evolution and genes.

    “The celebration of human diversity…” Please!

    • IstvanIN

      Personally I’d be happy with a white-bread world.

      • HJ11

        I agree. But to get there we have to have more White babies. I’m doing the best I can, which is better than most.

        • IstvanIN

          That and hopefully MERS will help.

          • Kenner

            MERS, SARS, Ebola….
            MERS, SARS, Ebola….
            —It’s like a soothing mantra.

        • ShermanTMcCoy

          5 kids and 8 grandkids, and counting. . .

          • HJ11

            Keep going. A man is never too old to have children.

        • JohnEngelman

          We don’t need more white babies. We need more high IQ babies, and fewer babies on the left end of the bell curve.

          • HJ11

            Nope. We need more White babies to fill all slots open in society from janitor to bank president. White all the way from top to bottom!

          • JohnEngelman

            We need high IQ Jews and Orientals to take cognitively demanding careers.

          • me

            Ahem….

      • ShermanTMcCoy

        Nothing wrong with German rye, or a thousand other varieties of European breads. Like I said, I love diversity. White diversity!

      • JohnEngelman

        I prefer whole grain bread.

        • Wholly Unconvinced

          But only if its kosher and topped with fresh cat, right Engelman?

          • JohnEngelman

            Cat meat is not kosher.

    • ShermanTMcCoy

      I like diversity. Really. I work with people from all parts of Germany, including the former Communist part. I also work with Brits, Rumanians, Czechs, Poles, Russians, etc. All very interesting with their own points of views and differing cultures. The only people in the office who are difficult and constantly whining about their lives in Germany are the muslims. What the heck they are doing here in the first place is beyond my feeble comprehension.

      In any case, my European colleagues also value me and my opinions, for I also have my own ideas and point of view.

      • JohnEngelman

        Muslims are a problem. So are blacks.

  • M.

    It’s still an overall good review in my opinion. What I got from it, in a nutshell is:
    – It is legitimate to objectively study racial differences, which is very encouraging coming from such a mainstream journal;
    – Wade’s book shouldn’t be dismissed, but rather improved. In other words, he’s on to something.

  • IstvanIN

    Simple observation of societies throughout the world shows conclusively that their are huge differences between the races Blacks can not even maintain a functioning society, such as Rhodesia or Zimbabwe, handed to them on a silver platter.

    • John Ambrose

      Yellows can succeed at creating a first world society if they follow whitey’s lead. Blacks however can neither create nor duplicate the civilization of the Western World.

  • fgbrunner3

    In our age of rampant professional racism, A Troublesome Inheritance, by Nicholas Wade, is unlikely to have any effect on government policy.

  • Mike Smith

    Everyone here knows Wade is right. Let’s jump to the next logical discussion: What do racial differences mean for public policy? Here are my thoughts:

    -Stop trying to make dumb people smart (for example: sending everyone to college). Instead, create and protect jobs that dumb people can do.

    -Stop obsessing over the “achievement gap” in education. Instead, educate all children as much as they are able to be educated and steer them toward careers where they are likely to succeed.

    -Stop trying to “eliminate” poverty. Instead, guarantee the poor an adequate standard of living and minimize the damage they can do to themselves and others. This means replacing current welfare policies with a guaranteed minimum income coupled with health insurance vouchers, providing contraceptives at public expense (and the option of sterilization), putting them to work somehow (idleness is the devil’s playground), and strictly enforcing the law (especially against children—any violent tendencies should be nipped in the bud).

    -Stop importing poor minorities and create incentives for repatriation.

    -Stop obsessing over white racism. Instead, show poor minorities how easy it can be to improve their lives.

    -Stop the feminist war on marriage and child-rearing. White women from good families should pursue their highest calling: Passing on their genes and values to the next generation.

    • willbest

      Guaranteed minimum income is a horrible idea. Some people really are too stupid to manage their own money

      • It may well be the ideal welfare program for poor whites who aren’t out and outright miscreants or dope heads. I would not recommend it at all for Africanus Bellcurvius.

    • JohnEngelman

      We should end affirmative action. We should end Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and replace it with free abortion on demand.

      We should begin race profiling, and maintain it where it exists. The same goes for a stop and frisk policy by the police.

      We should end third world immigration, and deport illegal aliens.

      • IstvanIN

        NOTHING will work until all immigration and refugees are ended.

  • ShermanTMcCoy

    Living in Europe, I am hopeful that the nationalist populist parties are going to continue gaining ground. Seeing the EU broken up would be a wonderful thing, but I’m doubtful that will happen. Still . . .

    My wife (who is ethnically Russian/Ukrainian) seems to come closer each day to agreeing with me that there is no future for our children here in the moral vacuum of the anti-white West, and our best hope lies with President Putin in Russia. She fears the financial insecurity of Russia. I assume that when the retirement systems in Germany and the US have gone broke because of the imported parasites, she just may come around to my way of thinking much more quickly. In any case, I try to stay ready to move at a moment’s notice, for I believe that that is how things will play out. Overnight.

    • The Verdict of History

      I’ve been saying this since February.

      In Putinism we see an anti-materialist, anti-consumerist version of what European culture OUGHT to have embodied.

      He does not care about the crass, glitzy, porn-crazed lifestyle which the West boasts.

      He instead is trying to reestablish some appreciation for spirituality, heritage , rootedness and moral fiber among his people.

      As for standard of living, at least they are not importing third worldism to their country.

      Good luck to you both and the kids!

      • ShermanTMcCoy

        Thanks, VoH!

        While I rather believe what you say, and also see President Putin as a man who sincerely cares about his people, it is also possible that he is promoting certain policies because they are appealing to the masses in Russia, rather than because he sincerely believes them. M., above certainly believes the latter, and then some. Or perhaps the truth lies somewhere in the middle. But that said, Putin is saying things I like and doing things of which I approve, and for that reason I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

        Sherm

    • MOAB

      Thank God For Pushkin Giving All His African Knowledge To Russia

    • M.

      There’s no “moral vacuum”. There’s very low birthrates which are being remedied with immigration through the push of big businesses on the right, and ‘humanitarians’ on the left, and also from governments in order to compete with China economically. And Russia is not escaping that low fertility problem, despite its religiosity and “morals”. Putin is already set on increasing immigration. For now, he’s starting with the Russian-speakers in the neighboring regions by granting them citizenship.

      Russians haven’t gone through their enlightenment years. So, like Arabs, they still live in the Middle Ages, and are easily manipulated. They went from monarchy to dictatorship to oligarchy. Putin is using the Church and religious sentiments and “standing up to gay” because he knows it works on his backward masses. And his backward masses do deserve a thug like Putin, or a mass muderer like Stalin. People deserve their rulers. Just like the Arabs, it will be either military-style, or God-style, until the masses lighten up.

      If the Europeans want less Muslims, then they should be more fertile. Western Europeans have the most generous benefits for having kids. Their governments are practically begging them to be more fertile. But the white man has gotten lazy, and he’ll pay the price. If they bring back the fertility rate to 4 child./woman, business and E.U. technocrats won’t even dream of letting so many immigrants in, because money has no color. Europe, the U.S. and Canada need a more positive workforce:pensioners ratio, which means more productivity to compete with China and other rising markets.

      In the coming decades, the Western populations need to increase by 600 millions overall for the last economic push, before stabilizing once and for all. And these 600 will either come from white people, or from imported people. Unless you want to live in a world where China is the superpower, because it’s well on its way of becoming one, and it’s mostly thanks to its huge workforce.

      It’s not anti-white. It’s not the Jews. It’s business, and geopolitics.

      • Humski

        You can’t possibly hope that people will start procreating because of ideological concerns. People weren’t making children because they were ‘energetic’, but because a child was not such a burden as it is nowadays – it was a benefit.

        In the countryside, children could work productively from age 7-8. In the cities, they could be employed at factories early on. Even more importantly, it was not the norm to converse with children, to spend much time on their education, or even to show affection for them past a certain early age. In other words, you didn’t have to change your lifestyle for the worse. It was perfectly selfish and materialistic to have children for the poor.

        To have a child nowadays means to chop off about two decades from the most productive and pleasant age in your life. To replace all you enjoy with unpleasant chores, and to become poorer rather than richer. A child doesn’t just drain your money, but your time and freedom. There are no obvious benefits, except squeezing out some money from the government through complex schemes. I don’t think even increasing retirement age would work, since it’s such delayed gratification, though it would fix the financial burden.

        It’s much easier for the elites and policy-makers to do something about the problem. Plenty of cheap Asian labour force wanted to move to the US in the early 20th century, but it didn’t happen because the elites were racially conscious. Why import Nigerians when you can import Ukrainians while paying only a little more? Why ‘create (rubbish) jobs’ when you can use automation? Why have 5 Indian servicemen for 10 self-service tills? These problems are much easier to address than increasing fertility rates. Furthermore, foreign labour force can be used without issuing citizenship and making migration permanent.

        • M.

          Fertility rates only began to drop that low in the 80’s throughout much of the Western world (and some Asian countries). In the 50’s-70’s, most families still had 4 children on average. And in that period, I don’t think parents made their kids work for them any more than they do now. Family values were actually stronger and parents used to spend time with their children.

          Plus, most people don’t have children only for material purposes, but also for spritual ones. Raising children is accomplishing something, preparing new generations, the future. It provides a sense of accomplishment. And the bond between a parent and their child is priceless. What would someone do with all that ‘free time’ and money in their life other than spend it on oneself. That’s just not fulfilling when you’re 60 and look back. At least not for most people.

          As for today’s benefits systems for having children, they are quite encouraging in my opinion, especially in Western Europe. I wouldn’t call them complex schemes. Add to that the good medical care, the education. One is very privileged to have a child in the First World.

          “Why import Nigerians when you can import Ukrainians while paying only a
          little more? Why ‘create (rubbish) jobs’ when you can use automation?
          Why have 5 Indian servicemen for 10 self-service tills?”

          In a mainly capitalistic economy, that’s not for the State to answer, but for private companies to do so. State encourages the creation of jobs through indirect means, but it’s the private companies that create the actual jobs and ‘decide’ which positions are creation, and how to go by doing that. And for now, business leaders are pushing for more fertility/immigration. I gave an example of that in my other response comment to ShermanTMcCoy here. And whatever business wants, the State will want, in one way or another. And it will be the case for a while. So it does look that the Western population will grow in the coming decades, with or without white people.

          As for atheists being more homophobic, I didn’t find that statistic on the WVS website, or anywhere else. But it doesn’t really matter, since I didn’t state any correlation between their religiosity and their homophobia. They are what they are. I never really liked the Russians anyway.

        • ShermanTMcCoy

          Hey Hum, you didn’t mention the worst thing about having children, so I will.

          Every day that passes, although I enjoy seeing how they grow, and amazed by the inventiveness of their little forming minds, I die a little, too. Because they become a little less like little children everyday. Those hugs and kisses from my little girl that for now are only for me, will day be for her husband. My little boy will one day leave for good, and that pain is not one I am anticipating with eagerness.

          I love playing games with them, teaching them everything I have learned in life, playing our musical instruments together at night, and so many other things. But I shed so many tears and lose a lot of sleep worrying over them in this sick, sick world.

          All the best,

          Sherm

      • ShermanTMcCoy

        Thank you for your point of view, M. Just a couple of observations, if I may.

        Whoever is behind the push for more immigration from third world countries, and no matter their motivations, the results have been disastrous for the local populations, financially and socially. The raising of children in a multi-culti society is a dicey proposition. I am very interested in protecting my children from this brave, new world.

        That said, many of the Germans I know still think that having more than one child is anti-social, and actually shun those with larger families. When I see such a family, I greet them with a smile and warm handshake, and congratulate the parents. But as you correctly imply, the future working population will not be able to support all the pensioners in the future, so the white man has shot himself in the foot, indeed. But the imported muslims have been a net loss, rather than a join for the retirement systems, as they are net takers.

        It might not be explicitly anti-white, but the effects certainly are.

        • M.

          I don’t understand why people shun those with large families. If it weren’t for large families, there wouldn’t be such a thing as a Western civilization. Developed countries like the U.S., Canada, Australia, or New Zealand would’ve been today hellholes run by the indigenous if it weren’t for white people having large families.

          I don’t consider myself a conservative person, but being fertile is one conservative principle I value. At least when it comes to white people.

          A country like Canada for example bases its immigration policies entirely on the demands of its market and businessmen. It chooses people entirely based on their skills and degrees.

          Here’s an excerpt of Gordon Nixon’s speech, the CEO of RBC Financial Group, October 12 2005, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada:
          —————————————————————————————-
          “Immigration has historically been critical to Canada’s growth, yet
          there has seldom been a time in our history when it has been so
          important.

          Our competitive advantage can’t be driven by the resource industry, and is no longer dominated by capital assets like plants, equipment and machinery.

          It is being driven by human capital.

          But Canada is a small nation. Our national birth rate just hit an historic low, and our workforce is aging. Clearly, if we are to succeed at home and abroad, we’re going to have to import talented people to make up the gap. We are already facing a skills shortfall in many parts of Canada and in the years ahead, we will be counting on immigration for all of the net growth in our labour force.

          But there’s going to be a global war for talent. Countries like Italy, Spain and Germany are seeing birthrates fall as dramatically as ours, and a workforce going gray as quickly as ours. We’ll be going head-to-head with them for talent, as well as with powerhouses like China and India, who are literally pouring investments into higher education, technology and innovation.

          For every one engineer graduating in the United States, there are three graduating in China. And many Chinese immigrants are now moving back to China, because they see better opportunities at home than here.

          In Halifax, this situation poses a serious economic risk: you face a
          shrinking workforce, a smaller business-economic base, and a declining tax base. There is no question that this will have a significant economic impact on the rest of Nova Scotia, and on all of Atlantic Canada—a point clearly raised in the GHP strategy.

          The Canadian government has set a target of welcoming 300,000 new immigrants to our shores each year. Right now, new Canadians make up about 70 per cent of the growth in the Canadian labour force. But by 2011, they will account for all the growth in our workforce.

          Halifax alone has set an aggressive target of attracting 2,800 newcomers annually, and, more importantly, keeping 70 per cent of them here.”

          http://www(dot)rbc(dot)com/newsroom/20051012nixon(dot)html
          —————————————————————————————–

          In other terms, the next generations of workers and innovators in the West will come either from us, or from immigrants. And unless the fertility rate is raised to a satisfying number (at least 3 child./woman), the good old West will get browner.
          https://www(dot)cia(dot)gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html

          So the best thing in my opinion a white nationalist could do is to have 5 kids, and other courage other fellow whites to do the same. That’s how our ancestors conquered our lands, and that’s how we shall reconquer them.

    • Humski

      Why Russia and not Poland? Arguments for Poland:
      – More religious and traditional – and staunchly anti-Communist;
      – Dramatically lower violent crime rates;
      – No real organised ethnic crime which severely limits small-scale business in Moscow;
      – Lower everyday corruption and lower high-level corruption;
      – A more robust and stable economy with no risk of isolation;
      – More well-off than Russia outside Moscow, more even income distribution;

      – A much smaller non-white population (Moscow since 2004 has become as ‘diverse’ as London).

      Russia’s advantage is that you can get rich faster, but it’s a constant struggle for survival. It is also very immoral, as you can see from abortion rates, corruption, drug addiction, gang crime, alcoholism, etc. The anti-gay sentiment is more connected to prison culture and the desire to attack some group than religion. They even use words from the prison slang when discussing gays (‘petukh’, ‘opustit’, etc.)

      • ShermanTMcCoy

        Very thoughtful comments, Humski. I spent a year in Warsaw, and it was quite nice, as I recall back in the late nineties. However, Poland has one major flaw, IMHO, and several lesser problems, as far as I am concerned. First, Poland is a member of the EU, which I eschew. Second, Russian is my third language, and although Polish is similar, I’m not hot on learning yet another language. Third, Russians are not particular loved in Poland (obviously), and my wife is Russian/Ukrainian. Finally, as my wife was a citizen of the former Soviet Union, it would be considerably easier for her to apply for a Russian passport.

        But I think you are spot on with most of your observations and they will indeed go into my decision tree.

        Thanks!

        Sherm

    • jeffaral

      Russia is the most corrupt country on earth, Putin the most arrogant oligarch ever. Russia throughout history has only produced despotism, whether you call it Bolshevism, Tsarism, Orthodoxy.Putism. It’s a damned backward hellhole country.

      • ShermanTMcCoy

        Since you are a particularly good poster and a fine fellow race realist, I am just going to say that 1) Putin is the only world leader I know who stands against the NWO and is hated by the Zionists above all others., 2) I am an Orthodox believer and we are not all corrupt, though there are plenty of priests in Russia who are, and need to “get religion”, and 3) that the country is a mixed bag, but perhaps the last best hope for whites on this earth.

        Now, we’ll have to just agree to disagree, but that doesn’t mean I don’t wish you the very best, and hope you’d wish me the same. I am an ex-cold warrior with 12 years in the military, but that time is over for me. America is no longer my country, but a place where white people are vilified and persecuted. I want to live where whites are valued.

  • Paul Lycurgues

    surprisingly well-balanced review.

  • MOAB

    Errrrbody Came From KUSH no such name Africanas that’s Greek Darwin’s Theory was true for Anglo Saxon’s but not for Pre Adamite. Ab Original People Of Earth Like Me Wich Pre Dates Adam & Eve Sucks For All The Assholes Out There With Calcified Pineal Glands. NO 3RD EYE

  • MOAB

    Funny how years ago race wasn’t a factor until white colonialism was introduced shortly after spain regained its independence from Africa Oh Thank Heaven For 7/11 from 711-1492 the vast majority of Europe was under Moore Control Til this day the Majority Of Royal Crest in Europe are Adorned with Black Faces I Repeat Black Faces Running of the bulls signifies just that Time Period Ya Dig