A Troublesome Inheritance: A Conversation with Nicholas Wade

Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, October 31, 2014

Eugenics, the future of genetic research, and academic closemindedness.

Direct download is available here.

Topics: , , , ,

Share This

Jared Taylor
Jared Taylor is the editor of American Renaissance and the author of White Identity: Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century.
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.
  • Yves Vannes

    Dr. Mr. Taylor, I both admire and appreciate the work that you do. Your careful, rational and even handed approach will come to be appreciated but not in our age. We live in an age of blunt instruments. In the eyes of both the progressive and the so called conservative movement you and the many people who contribute to Amren and similar organizations may as well be advocating cannibalism. Mr. Wade is the perfect example of this: a long and distinguished career at the NYT and he is now a non-person – if not outright vilified.

    Our immediate future is not one of rational dialogue but of civil war – a long generational struggle. After the devastation, those who survive will hopefully make an attempt to understand why things fell apart. Your work and many like you will shed a light on just how tone deaf and irrational our own age had become.

    Most people probably have an innate understanding of biological differences in the behavior of the races but they file it in a place where they keep thoughts and ideas that they assume would be embarrassing if they were made public. So we sleepwalk into civil war. I say civil war and not a race war for I believe the final phase will be a civil war among whites.

    It will begin in the southwest when Aztlan after an election victory raises the Mexican flag over a city hall : local violence will develop into a regional war.
    Blacks will take advantage of this and begin to riot and loot – except this time they will do so in White neighborhoods. This will unleash a mimetic blood lust that will equal the horrors of the 20th Century. The final phase will be a regional war among Whites: Southeast vs. Northeast; Texas/Midwest/Rockies vs. West Coast. The destruction will be widespread and beyond our imaginations.

    If you think I exaggerate simply examine how the left is waging this year’s political campaign: knowing they are bound to lose they are seeding more Fergusons. Ironically, they will lose to opponents who see race the way leftist themselves do – with a small degree of difference in how to approach the inability of Sun People to achieve parity with Asians and Whites. History is full of wars that everyone in the know knew would never happen.

    • LHathaway

      I’m sorry, I felt embarrassed for Mr. Taylor a couple of times during this interview. Normally, I take Mr. Taylor at his word that he’s interested in ‘fairness’ and racial consciousness for whites (something aggressively promoted for people of color but forbidden for white men). Mr. Taylor is very knowledgeable and perceptive but here, at a couple of points, he’s not fighting racism but trying to promote it. Embarrassing.

      Mr. Wade outs himself as a conservative here? That would be fine with me, I tend to be conservative too.

      • antiquesunlight

        I didn’t get that impression from Jared at all. What struck you as promoting racism?

        • LHathaway

          One point where Mr. Taylor was quite eager to compare African tribesmen with North Asians and another similar occurrence during the interview.

          • JohnEngelman

            I thought he was drawing a contrast.

          • LHathaway

            It felt kind of lecherous and embarrassing to me. Other than that moment, it was two giants having an interesting and informative conversation.

          • antiquesunlight

            How is pointing out the radical differences between African tribesmen and North Asians racist?

          • RationaliseThis

            Never defend yourself of the label or racism by using logic. This is an attack to label, smear and destroy you.

            First of all attack back immediately as if you’ve been accused of child molestation: punch the accuser in the face by saying they are a low life for making such an accusation without basis.

            Immediately after the first punch hit them with a second punch exposing their own racial hypocrisy. Be prepared. To a White Nationalist accepting the word ‘racist’ might just truthfully accepting ones identity. However to the unfortunate Libtard weened on a life time of no logic and reason but too much TV, movies and fiction (think “to kill a mocking bird”, “the help”, etc.) you are a rapist ogre who lynches innocent people. Thus isn’t about logic. If you can talk logically to these people then congratulations you’ve discovered a unicorn.

            It does behove us to continue to use logic and reason I instead of moral aggression, as Jared Taylor does, to maintain the moral high ground and what we love about our civilisation and also to engage with intelligent people of all races.

            Remember, natural selection evolved us to win not to be logical or reasonable.

            Keep in mind that many media indoctrinated left liberals eventually realise they are really natural conservative libertarians and from there realise that Whites really are under attack by malevolence.

            We may, eventually win them over. There are push and pull factors in this, cant say I know how to do it.

          • Mark Reynolds

            Ahhh. And that’s the point. He didn’t. He said it made him FEEL uncomfortable.

          • antiquesunlight

            He wrote that “at a couple of points, he’s not fighting racism but trying to promote it.” That is a proposition, not a feeling.

          • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

            I wasn’t offended by what he said. I don’t see how anything he said is supposed to be racist. He just told facts. Don’t look for a needle in a haystack when you can just take the haystack.

          • jimmy

            are you single?

      • Gianni_Paolinzetti

        I actually agree. Jared seemed sort of amateurish here in some ways, at certain points just speculating himself way out onto limbs that he seemingly hadn’t constructed or thought through very well. Probably because he felt he was talking with an ally (for once) rather than a hostile counterpart who would test his every claim. I didn’t hear Jared promoting any form of racism, but I didn’t come away especially impressed with him the way I usually do.

        • Remnant

          Jared Taylor has spent the past twenty years fighting a one man battle. He and his magazine have been largely ignored by all mainstream outlets, and they have engaged with him only to mock, denounce or slander him.
          He is an excellent essayist and a brilliant public speaker. He has recently been expanding his repertoire into producing Youtube videos and, now, radio interviews. I applaud him for expanding into new areas and trying new media. There is a learning curve for him, as with anyone, in trying new things.
          I, for one, look forward to more “radio” broadcasts and interviews such as this one produced by Taylor.

      • mikekingjr

        What is wrong with promoting White realism?? Guess I don’t get you.

      • Danimalius

        If you are going to claim he is promoting racism and that this was “embarrassing,” I suggest backing up that claim.

      • Mark Reynolds

        He wrote that he “felt embarrassed for…” for what he perceived to be racism. He gives no evidence for the racism. I apologize for not being clear. Now go get em killer. He he.

    • Tim_in_Indiana

      If, Yves Vannes, what you say is true, then it will happen no matter what you, I or Mr. Taylor do. So why do you seem so worried?

      • Yves Vannes

        “So why do you seem so worried?”

        Because the worthwhile will be destroyed along with the worthless.

        • Sick of it

          The worthwhile shall be targeted first.

          • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

            The first to die in Red China were the best of the Chinese. Don’t let Cultural Marxism do that to you Westerners.

          • mikekingjr

            We’re not red china yet. Thank You, Baby Jesus.

          • But much the same thing is happening. The best are being sidelined, demoralized, and made non-effective. The worst are being raised up, rewarded, and made very effective. Not good for our country. Not good for our civilization. Chinese Nationalist Maiden is correct.

          • sammy

            worse in many ways

          • rentslave

            Red China will be over New Jersey as they plan to buy up all of the horse farms to turn them into factories for illegal aliens.This will be done as soon as Monmouth Park closes due to Roger Goodell bribing a federal judge not to allow Monmouth to take sports bets.

          • Alfredo Rossi

            Thanks for your support, I hope you know about jews being behind communism. I wish the best to east asians.

    • Sick of it

      Understanding is very important. Driving out or destroying the insane people on the other side of the issue, however, is necessary for our continued survival. Secession is, perhaps, the most realistic outcome along those lines.

    • Ultimate187

      Our immediate future is not one of rational dialogue but of civil war

      White Nationalism is more talk than action. Our opponents are the opposite. It’s obvious which side is making progress, and it’s not ours. The problem with all these books and esoteric discussions is that the average person doesn’t care about any of it. Convincing propaganda trumps a well reasoned argument all day, everyday. We should be appealing to emotions, not intellect. I’m not an author or a genius, but am 100% sure that I’m right about this.

      • George Costanza

        Whites are just more afraid of breaking the law.

        • SlizzardAjeosshi

          Unfortunately even unjust laws.

          Dura lex sed lex, that pretty much sums up a good chunk of Western civilization

          • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

            Extreme obedience is a flaw of the White race as much as it is a flaw of the Chinese people. I hope we can correct our deficiencies.

          • Veni Vidi Vici

            Disagree, Extreme Obedience is more of an East Asian trait, example North Korea. Pathological altruism is the double edge of sword of the White Race.

          • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

            Whites are extremely afraid of breaking laws. I don’t see how that isn’t “extreme obedience.” Compare with Blacks. They’re the other extreme.

          • Veni Vidi Vici

            The USA was founded on the premise that the government should for the most part leave us alone. We have become more socialist due to the increasing ( mostly Latino population )and a democratic party that panders to them.

          • RationaliseThis

            Read “The evolutionary psychology of politics r/K” by anonymous conservative. He says it is an inevitable result of surplus production. Instead of being K type Conservative Wolves with a tight command structure and high investment parenting to work limited resources we become like rabbits seeking to reproduce rapidly on the free resources about. (Note liberals favouring of sexual freedom which is controlled only by contraception, they also dislike sports and competition as a way of resolving things which Conservatives see as natural) . To avoid competition with the superior K types the r type liberal uses deception: bringing in unassimilable immigrants, asking them to not fit in to preoccupy the time of conservatives, creating diversionary fights. Liberals are motivated by hatred of conservatives, not love of Hispanics and Blacks. That’s why they are illogical and can’t be debated with.

          • antiquesunlight

            I disagree. We have a healthy respect for law and order. That is a good thing. I don’t think we have any business becoming less law abiding. It seems to me that we ought not to sink towards the level of negroes just because we are surrounded by them.

          • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

            I was using Blacks for comparison. They’re the complete opposite of a law-abiding race. My point was that one needs to seek a balance. Blacks are at one extreme, Whites at another. I’m not saying: “Start doing illegal and immoral stuff, people!” I’m just saying that sometimes it’s better not to listen to one’s government, and to stand up more for one’s freedom.

            Let’s use Sweden as example. The majority of Swedes seem to be OK with their anti-White government. If the Swedish government and media say the Swedes are morally responsible for Black slavery, then Swedes believe it and don’t start an uprising against the government. In a similar way, if the Chinese government tells the Chinese people about this or that outrageous reform, then the Chinese believe in their govenment and don’t start an uprising.

            This point is important to be grasped, I’m not suggesting that Whites should sink to the level of Negroes. I’m suggesting that it’s maladaptive to always obey, just like it’s maladaptive to always ignore. There’s a whole lot in between that. In the same way, it’s sometimes adaptive to be aggressive, and it’s sometimes adaptive to be non-aggressive. I hope I’ve explained my ideas well. I’m a bit tired now, so excuse me if my explanation is a bit below standard.

            EDIT: SlizzardAjeosshi summarised it well: “Indeed we need to find to find a compromise between rule of law, civility and self-destructive passivity.”

          • antiquesunlight

            I think you underestimate us. I don’t see excess obedience as our defect at all. I think it’s more complicated than that. Something I really love about white people is that we are simultaneously rebellious and principled. Our issue is less one of blind obedience and more one of complacency and misunderstanding. There are a lot of white protesters, for example. The problem is that they protest for the wrong side! We are brainwashed from birth to think that white people mercilessly oppress angelic minorities at every level of society. People like us have to be very diligent about combating misinformation. Amateurish as it might be, I’m fairly active on Facebook because through it I can reach my liberal friends easily. Whenever they post some stupid nonsense about Ferguson, for example, I argue with them. When they post some silliness about black people being helpless angels, I confront them with crime statistics. There has to be a paradigm shift in the West. I think white people are waking up and that, when we finally do, things will change. My fear is that it’s too little too late.

          • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

            Interesting comment, I must say. To be fair, I recognised from the start that Whites do have some rebellious nature. I perceived that it was just not rebellious enough. From what I understand, you are saying that this rebelliousness is channeled in the wrong direction and you are saying that there is not a deficiency in rebelliousness. This is what makes your post interesting, because saying that White rebelliousness is channeled in the wrong direction appears to be a legitimate objection to my point that Whites might not be rebellious enough. If this rebelliousness is channeled in the wrong direction, then it might be hard to tell whether there is enough rebelliousness.

            I got the impression that Whites do not have enough rebelliousness because they are doing too little to overcome their racial problems. You say that this is because they are channeling their rebellious energies in the wrong direction, and that it therefore appears as if they are not rebellious enough. I think that it is, at this point in the argument, hard to see who is right or wrong. I might be right that Whites are not rebellious enough, while you might be righ that they are just channelling it in the wrong direction so that it only appears as if they are not rebellious enough.

            Moreover, I think that it is important to acknowledge that channeling rebelliousness in the wrong direction does not negate either a sufficiency or deficiency of rebelliousness. It is difficult to prove that Whites are rebellious enough, and it is difficult to prove its opposite. I am just considering right now whether there is way to find out who is right. What makes it difficult to prove who is right is that there is a certain relativity in the concept of rebelliousness. Relativity does not render the concept of rebelliousness illegitimate, and it does also not render our difference in views illegitimate.

            I think we do agree that Negroes are more rebellious than Whites and Asians. I am also willing to grant that Asians are a bit less rebellious than Whites, but I think the difference is negligible. I know that some might disagree with me there, but why I say it is negligible is that I think the rebelliousness of Asians is almost the same – if not the same – as that of Whites. A good reason to disagree with me would be to say that Asians have more authoritarian governments. I do not deny that, and I would agree. Therefore, I am willing to grant that Asians are a bit less rebellious than Whites.

            However, I am careful so as not to exaggerate the difference, and that is why I believe that the difference in rebelliousness is negligible. It is my opinion that Asians are not rebellious enough, and since I believe the difference in rebelliousness between Whites and Asians is negligible, it is my opinion that Whites are also not rebellious enough. I might be wrong, but in any case, I don’t believe that I’m that far from the truth. A bit more rebelliousness wouldn’t hurt, but it mustn’t be exaggerated so as not to become irresponsible like Negroes. OK, I hope I’m reasonable. But it’s late now, I’m off to bed.

          • RationaliseThis

            We already are sinking, the mass media: racially correct movies, music video clips, politically correct fiction read in schools is far more powerful than logic and reason and has replaced parenting as far as providing an initial culture to our of children goes.

          • SlizzardAjeosshi

            Indeed we need to find to find a compromise between rule of law, civility and self-destructive passivity.

            White people are wolves, North East Asian are tigers, neither of us deserve to be lorded over by chimps and sheep

          • notyranny

            Brevity is the Sout of Wit and your comment is both. Well put!

      • mikekingjr

        I try to make reasonable yet impassioned arguments to young Whites who seem salvageable yet ignorant of the differences between Our White Race and negroes. It’s the best I can do right now, planting seeds. Change begins with reasoned speech which inspires strong emotional response which leads to direct action. Hope I’m still around when the REAL fun begins. My toy box is well stocked.

        • Garrett Brown

          It isn’t just Negroes.

          • mikekingjr

            Of course not. I do not preach to young negroes. I avoid them like I would avoid the black plague.

        • guest

          I don’t very much agree. Change begins, if at all, when people realize that inside themselves they are fooling themselves and/or are being fooled by others. It is a growth process and usually develops by nurturing insight–not by trying to implant it. Insight with relevance to this matter, usually means insight into what is missing from mass media and prime time Tee Vee, that nonetheless exists in many parts of our society, if in unacknowledged and hence “subconscious” awareness.

          • mikekingjr

            Fail to see how you differ with my opinion. Change begins by changing my own thinking, and passing that on to others willing to listen and absorb. Not sure where you are coming from. All due respect.

          • Garrett Brown

            We’ve been attempting to support this style of waking up for quite a while, hoping that Whites come to their senses. It isn’t working.

          • Usually Much Calmer

            Only it is.

          • Garrett Brown

            According to what significant population in America?

          • Usually Much Calmer

            I see naked statements of racial realism online and in real life proliferate. In the past 3-4 months, these even pass without comment.
            Your experiences may be different, but I see the tide turning.

          • Garrett Brown

            Those statements are cool and all, but are they changing the country? No. So again, how is what we’re doing now working when this country is getting worse and worse.

          • Usually Much Calmer

            They are change. This stuff doesn’t happen overnight, Garrett.

          • Garrett Brown

            Those comments have been happening since the beginning of time. Nothing is changing in Amrerica.

          • Usually Much Calmer

            They may have been happening since the beginning of time, but their rate, their candor, and the response. . . are changing.

            Don’t think about events, think about patterns and rates of change and rates of rates of change. Higher order phenomenon.

          • Garrett Brown

            I see more men talking like women and women dressing like men than I do Whites becoming realists. You are very optimistic.

          • Usually Much Calmer

            You may. I don’t see that as a problem in the same way that many paleoconservatives or neoractionaries do.

            There will always be dimorphism between the sexes because they have different jobs to do in procreation (and vive la difference! species that reproduce asexually are not very robust).

            But if the environment men and women live in is changing men and women will change. We rely less on brute strength for survival than we have in the past and we live in a highly developed social and technological world. Some of the differences between men and women will atrophy.

            Not optimistic; realistic.

          • Garrett Brown

            Those people vote for what is destroying this country. Since you can’t realize that I have a hard time taking any advice from you seriously.

          • Usually Much Calmer

            Plenty of hands are involved in the formation of this crisis. I’m not sure the country will be destroyed.

            What advice you take is your call to make, Garrett. I have no interest in tricking or cajoling you into my point of view. Thank you for engaging with me.

          • Garrett Brown

            America is gone bud, you need to realize that.

          • Usually Much Calmer

            You may be right.

          • Beowald

            As a data point, until about five months ago, I did not question the dominant paradigm of racial equality. I knew about Wade from his earlier works, Before the Dawn and The Faith Instinct. When Troublesome Inheritance came out, I started reading reviews. Then I found this site and the work of Jared Taylor. One idea led to another, and now there is one more white man who is beginning to see race as a realist.

            From my perspective, the America I grew up in and loved has been gone for decades. In that sense, I understand Mr. Brown’s point. On the other hand, there is still much of value to preserve here. It seems to me worth trying to preserve what remains, if only for my children’s sake. If my people (how strange and new it feels to write that!) are to be swept away, then I would choose this as our epitaph:

            “Death closes all; but something ere the end,
            Some work of noble note, may yet be done,
            Not unbecoming men that strove with Gods.”

          • Usually Much Calmer

            Thank you for sharing your experience. The problem is that the plural of anecdote is not data. I had a similar conversion to yours but neither you nor I nor Mr. Brown nor anyone else really knows whether conversions like ours are happening fast enough to matter in the larger social dynamic. Time will tell. In the meantime, you and I must, like Ulysses, be a part of all we meet and drink delight in battle.

            Happy Thanksgiving, Beowald!

      • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

        I’m not White, but I support White Nationalism. About 70% of persuasion is emotion. I might have the figure wrong, but it’s high. Only a low percentage of persuasion is rationality. So there you have your answer. You must not neglect either of them, and focus the most on emotion. I hope that White Nationalism will succeed in the West, and that a similar kind of nationalism will rise in China, replacing the quasi-communist government.

        I appreciate Wade’s efforts for the sake of scientific objectivity. He is a man who goes for the truth and nothing else. I understand that he does not want to be “racist,” but I just do not get why Westerners are so afraid of that word. Racial prejudice is utterly normal. I used to think that American society was racist, but now I know you guys aren’t ” racist” enough.

        • Exiled White

          Welcome aboard Chinese Nationalist. I read all your contributions and they are much appreciated. It is rare for other races to say ANYTHING positive about white people in this heavily anti-white propagandized country. I am a white man married to an Asian woman, One of the many qualities I admire in my wife is her unambiguous appreciation of white people and white culture and her outrage at the “politics” of race as it is practiced by other whites. She is a White Asian, by the way. Her skin is whiter than mine. SHe makes a distinction between equatorial Asians and Northern Asians, ie: Japanese versus Malays, for instance. My wife’s frank opinions regarding race reflect yours. Thank you for helping support White Appreciation and fighting for truth.

          • Ultimate187

            Alright, you’re starting to sound a lot like Michael C. Scott. Race- mixing is condemned around here, and reaching for justifications like her skin being “whiter” than yours is just sad. What if all whites did what you did? Would you be okay with that? Are you fine with Asian men marrying White women? That’s what you’re implying. Seriously, what’s the point in talking the talk if you guys can’t walk the walk?

          • SlizzardAjeosshi

            I am in the same situation : i am a blue-eyed white male living in East Asia and married to a light-skinned Korean woman.

            On top of that i am of partial Ashkenazim heritage.

            That’s why i call myself a race realist and not a white nationalist, obviously my choices and (maybe) my ethnic backround disqualify me.

            Still, being a race realist, i am very interested in what the WN community has to say, as more often than not they’re right rather than wrong

          • Clytemnestra

            Thank you for sharing your position, Slizzard. It offered me some insight on the interesting paradox of the race-mixers of Amren, a board that is supposed to be White Nationalist.
            I never could see how they could be considered White Nationalist or even particularly pro-White if they could compromise their own unique ancestral heritage even by marrying a high-IQ Non-White.
            I think that race realist sounds a lot more appropriate than WN or even Pro-White. I think many here want to preserve the cultural amenities of White civilization and, despite their Asian fetishism, subconsciously realize that only a substantial White population can preserve it.
            I myself get along with most Non-Whites, but with the old saying in mind that “good fences make good neighbors” would prefer to engage in friendly trade across tightly enforced borders with them back in their own countries.
            Nothing personal, but I stand with Matt Parrott who said, “Some of my favorite White people are ugly and stupid.” I’m not proud of them, I’m not ashamed of them; I love them because they are mine. Fourteen words; no less, no more.

          • SlizzardAjeosshi

            I probably went a bit off topic and i apologize for that

          • Exiled White

            She is my second wife, and we have no kids. She is conservative like myself and agrees that mixed race kids face a lot of challenges regarding their cultural identity; they are white, but rarely look white, yet the other non-white race usually does not accept them.

            I have two proud white boys with my previous wife. I wish I had more, but my x married and had 2 more white kids so it is a net white gain.

          • RationaliseThis

            Unfortunately many White women are degraded. I comes as a part of the demoralisation of our traditional culture that effects men and women alike.
            Left wing feminism has made many angry and irrational, alienated from their femininity, ‘intersectional feminism’ for instance specifically teaches them to hate White men, politically correct food introduced by Ansell Key’s has destroyed Western restaurants and food culture and lead to an obesity crisis: nearly 50% of White women are now obese. Its not their fault but it sucks. We must accept them, love them and take them to a higher ground.
            Coming across a charming unspoiled Chinese or Japanese women the former with an intelligent no nonsense and practical femininity combined with thrift and a strong work ethic the latter with refined genteel manners makes me want to cry. They carry little of the ugly baggage so many White women do.
            We of course need to fight for them. It also behoves us to help and appreciate races and people that have goodwill towards Whites.
            If you go on a business trip and you start to deal with these races you can not but help be impressed by their race and their women and become more aware of the depredations our own race has suffered.

          • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

            I am of the humble opinion that civilised races should work together towards a common goal. The savage races will do whatever they will, but we should not let them take over the West or any other part of the civilised world. So I support White nationalism and Whites wherever they are. I know they are good people. It is hard to see through the web of lies, but men like Jared Taylor and Nicholas Wade helped me to awaken to reality. Whites are not the most evil race on earth. Quite the contrary is true.

            Moreover, as I respect the White race, I would never consider myself White. I do not want to appropriate someone else’s racial identity. It does not matter for me how White my skin is. Race is more than skin colour. I would not try to make an argument from skin colour for my pro-White stance. I honour my Asian heritage, and I would not want to be something else, because the purity of my bloodline makes me who I am.

            Please do not take offence from my stance on racial purity: I do not support mixing between Asians and Whites, because I respect both bloodlines. I would not want to irreversibly ‘pollute’ (to use that negative word) either one of those bloodlines. Neither would I want someone else to do that. For me, supporting White nationalism negates supporting race-mixing.

            Regardless of my personal views on mixing, I respect your personal choice as it is, because the world is not as ideal as I would want it to be, and no matter how I feel about mixing, I am happy that you support Whites, regardless of your personal views on race-mixing. Since the world is not ideal, I am trying to see more what we agree on than what we fundamentally disagree on. My heartfelt thanks for welcoming me here, and my warm greetings to you and your wife.

        • SlizzardAjeosshi

          The problem with China is that, despite what many white nationalists think, it is not a mono-ethnic society. Approximately 9%-10% of the population is not Han and you know much better than me how troublesome Tibetans, Uighurs, Miao etc.. can be.

          China is already basically a majestic cluserfreak of an empire that stretched too far away from its own inner Han core.

          Korea currently is around 97% Han (different hanja character btw) so maybe it can be saved if they successfully manage to absorb the North (a big if) and maybe Japan (99% Yamato) will re-emerge in some distant (50+ years) as a major player.

          Considering the current meteoric rise of productivity and technological progress the Chinese decline won’t be all that easy to spot before a decade or 2 though

          • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

            I don’t share your optimism about China. Everything isn’t like Beijing or Hong Kong. Moreover, the ethnic make-up of China is of later concern. We can deal with that in a future time, and it’s completely of no use to think of any quick solutions right now. What we need right now, in my opinion, is a truly nationalist government. This will be a fresh start which wil give reason for optimism. The same is needed in America.

          • SlizzardAjeosshi

            Just a quick note: we work with many Chinese manufacturers (both private and SOES) so i’m well aware of the fact currently China is no technological powerhouse.

            China basically can’t even design the flash memory chips local giant hardware manufacturers purchase by the hundreds of millions.

            When i am referring to the service robot revolution i’m thinking mostly of Taiwan, SG and Korea which pretty much all surpassed Japan in that field.

            If and when this new paradigm take off in N.E. Asia, it won’t be long before even Qinghai will turn into robot land…even if the PRC has still lots of catch up to do.

            Let’s say LG crack the technology for friendly, cheap flexible service robots, it won’t be long (5 years ?) before some Xiaomi type of company break into the market with some clone products

      • guest

        The group of people making the most progress with the sorts of insights
        brought forth by the works of Wade and Taylor—and certainly by this interview–are able students in Chinese universities. It is possible over there
        to visit, if quietly, about these matters with far less trepidation and far more
        productive discourse than is possible in the U.S. In fact, it seems there was
        more freedom in this respect in the U.S. in the mid-90’s than exists now?

        • Garrett Brown

          Most certainly. I know that I was just a kid but the difference between the 90s and now is an extremely stark contrast. I believe the 90s were the last decent decade of America.

      • RationaliseThis

        Anti White Propaganda is embedded in our entertainment. Our children watch 24 hours per week starting from the age of 2. We lost control of our own media while damage to the family has reduced the chances of transmitting culture from grandparents to grandchildren.
        Dr Joseph Goebbels, the National Socialist Propaganda minister realised this and started to sponsor ‘racially healthy’ movies that were nevertheless entertaining and often light hearted. That’s what Hollywood does.
        To create healthy entertainment How would one raise the vast money, hire the actors, production crew, directors? How would one arrange distribution? How to avoid the inevitable boycott campaigns.
        The Resources of German Nationalist Socialist State might do it but at the moment we’ve lost the commanding heights.
        If Thomas Edison’s attempts at film production had of succeeded we might have been OK but his concern for healthy, moral movies produced overly serious films and the primacy of entertainment was realised too late and I suspect there was skull doggery as well.
        Mel Gibson, despite his personal wealth, learned a lesson in his innocuous “The Passion of Christ”. He is now ignored by film critics which lowers his exposure and its hard for his films to go to cinema..
        One would have though that the internet would lead to the destruction of Hollywood but the volume of entertainment they can beam into our children’s brains has them in an superior position.

    • Tucker

      Jared Taylor reminds me a lot of the things I’ve read about Robert E. Lee.

      Faced with an enemy who is totally devoid of honor, integrity or scruples of any kind and who cares not a whit about fair play or sportsmanship – an enemy who is willing to be as ruthless and as devious and as vicious as they feel is necessary in order for their side to prevail, while both Jared Taylor and Robert E. Lee insist upon trying to fight for their cause from the perspective and with the dignity of a Southern gentleman-warrior, which, I’m sad to say, becomes a recipe for eventual defeat.

      The enemy we face is not a chivalrous one, folks. I realize that the impulse and desire among Southern folk is to conduct ourselves in battle according to our noble sense of honor and decency – but, as Robert E. Lee discovered – this is a suicidal mistake in judgment when we are facing an enemy who is the true face of evil.

      We cannot reason with these people. We will not gain points from them or any respect from them by playing fair or by always following some sort of self-imposed rule book. that governs how a true Southern gentleman should fight.

      To defeat this enemy, we have to become just as ruthless, just as determined, and be willing to adopt the tactics of our enemy – and become better at using them than they are. This is a life or death struggle, and there will be no consolation prize for coming in at second place.

      • KFS

        The Paula Deen event made that point even more than Zimmerman and Ferguson: She was someone who bent over backwards to be all sweetness and congeniality to black guests. But a 30 year old story that under oath she admitted having said a bad word in a private conversation about someone who put a gun to her head and none of those black guests would try to help her. Not Michelle Obama, for sure, who Paula had on as a guest allowing Michelle to look nice to Paula’s mainly white audience.)

        The mainstream media attack on Paula Jones was absolutely vicious and cruel and she should have stood up to it rather than grovel because it did her no good to grovel. Its like that saying, “Once you have paid him the Dane-geld, you never get rid of the Dane.”

        • Garrett Brown

          Paula Dean is one of my heroes.

          • antiquesunlight

            She is a beautiful Southern lady. She brightens the world with her Southern manners.

          • Garrett Brown

            Can you imagine what she looked like in her twenties with those eyes? Hoooooooooooooooooooo man.

        • RationaliseThis

          Her grovelling was unbecoming and disgusting because it was false and cowardly. She would have done better to defend herself. Fairness and truth would have been on her side. Instead she gave away power and strengthened those that hate us.

      • KFS

        sorry that should be “Paula Deen” not Paula Jones in the second paragraph. The attack on Paula Jones was vicious, too, of course. So much for telling the truth under oath.

      • Sick of it

        As I’ve stated before, we’d be better off with a Stonewall Jackson.

      • Beowald

        You put a harsh, but realistic case. On the one hand, if we adopt the methods of those who would erase us and our heritage, we are essentially erasing that heritage ourselves. On the other hand, if we fail to do what is necessary, we will not even be remembered. Future events will tell us the necessary balance between pragmatism and idealism.

        At this point in the struggle, though, I think there is enormous value in Mr. Taylor’s approach. As a newcomer here, I can testify that his patient compilation of data was important for me. His calm, rational tone also helped. Most people are not convinced by argument. I suspect there is a large reservoir of white Americans–Europeans, too, for that matter–who are or soon will be ready to receive the fundamentals of race realism. Mr. Taylor’s gentlemanliness will be important in making large numbers of them feel safe while they try on dangerous new ideas.

        As for General Lee, I have always thought of him as a pre-eminent warrior as well as a gentleman. There is no incongruity between the two. The War of Northern Aggression is not my period of expertise, so correct me if I am wrong.

        The case of over-gentility is more plausible with the British aristocracy, I think. Again, I am eager to learn if I am wrong about this, but my impression has been that they were almost too refined to defend their ancient privileges. Or perhaps, they were just a special case–a precursor–of the pathological altruism that afflicts our people generally.

    • excellent comment, I’d reply in length but this thread is getting old. I’m now following you on discus.

  • Im surprised he has not been crucified yet. There are many eastern countries that are following this topic and field study. If the western leaders and sci community don’t pull their heads out of the sand and drop the P/C we will be left behind on this research.
    Dr Taylor is not using this to degrade nor use this info to make any one less human. He is keeping a level head, and fair.
    History will show that he is and has done humanity as a whole a great service, and we will find and see why some people act and see life as they do, it can and dose explain much why some races and cultures act and will act to what life shoves at them as a person as a people and as a culture.

    • LHathaway

      Mr. Taylor points out himself, someone will do this genetic engineering. It’s already happening, actually. Women are engaging in a Eugenics program on their own already. It was good to see the scientist offer up some reservations about this. Also, one of them brought up the idea that the human gene may possibly become somewhat standardized in the future. The definition of what it means to be human may become specifically defined. No doubt some would favor an end to separate human races entirely. It would certainly be safer and help to end ‘racism’ if we truly WERE all the same race and truly shared the same DNA.

    • guest

      I would be keenly interest in any effort to give copies of ATI to the ablest of the multitudes of Chinese students now on our campuses. If allowed to react securely, that reaction juxtaposed to what would yet be typical of our students would be a great wake up call. Mr Wade is aware that as early as 1983 the Chinese were getting open eyed about the merits of the work of H. J. Eysenck, Arthur R. Jensen, and Phil Rushton.

  • M&S

    Typical Ivory Tower Doublethink.

    1. The only thing that matters is the attitudes of my fellow scientists and their treatment of me as, gasssp, some kind of ‘scientific racist!’ (can’t define what that is but accepts it blindly as a self-definition threat). That the rest of the planet operates on a fear based _lack of informed discussion_ on this subject is entirely alien to the man as being something to which science is intended to ameliorate. He is clique centric and couldn’t care less what his non letter fellow humans think.

    2. Science is an intriguing problem, to be dealt with analytically, purely for it’s own ‘this is how the brain works!’ outcome condition. Never mind -what- the brain creates as a function of enhanced creativity and faster process logic. Intelligence is hard to find and in any case is a function of a great many allele fragments coming together so therefore the entire concept of using science to improve man’s lot rather than provide a living for purely experimental/rhetorical discussion and review by scientists doesn’t matter.

    All theoretical. No practical application or even derivation.

    This man has been stepped on.

    Such is the likely reasonm in my opinion for his irrational conflations of cultural ‘preferences’ and scientific ‘rationalism’ whereby, making everyone equally smart (or even just your own people) is somehow as dangerous as making everyone male.

    Such idiocy on the part of the Chinese is a product of cultural bias which bears far greater similarity to the ‘no race but human race’ idiocy of our own cultural left’s confirmation bias. When in fact, higher intelligence would make people more likely to realize the dangers of having too many men for the women for exactly the reasons stated: Unhealthy population losses, unhappy men without wives and an exccedingly high likelihood of secondary artifacted behaviors like crime rate and war.

    ‘Benign parental effects’ is the same as saying ineffectual parental influences and is again, more related to class conditions of access to health care, advantaged education and safe upbringing than the science of germ line engineering.

    Nor does this man’s assumptions on the nature of IQ as an ‘unbalancing’ effect upon society pass the smell test. Ninety Nine point Nine Nine percent of disasters both man made and naturally inflicted derive from stupidity as ignorance. Stupidity in creating conditions that cause the disaster or ignorance as a lack of the underlying scientific knowledge to predict it’s causation and outcome.

    Would an IQ 150 population be ‘unbalancing for society’?! Of course not. Just because everyone wants to live without doing menial work or live in a world free of war, doesn’t mean that they can. But if everyone had a near genus ability to -contribute- to that level of cultural advancement, we would no longer be fooled by those mid-range intelligence, exploitative personalities whom we call politicians, into helping out the few for some ephemeral ‘moral just cause’ reasoning. Instead, we woudl have, within a few years as opposed to a few decades, the SERIOUS automation with which to simply no longer require ditch digger manual labor services from our fellow man. Would not /want/ that level of dray beast contribution to a flawed and faulted society that needed it.

    Society being a zeitgeisted view of the myth of present existence, would society’s /change/ then necessarily be equated to it’s -fall- by those who had access to both the before and after? How about just the after? Man seeks improvement in his condition, this is natural. Man lives in a highly technical, detail oriented, condition of rational cognition. Yet there is no ‘potato famine’ proof that the smart man would fail where the instinctive HG personality would succeed, did society itself fail. That high intelligence instead being what would give him options to ‘rediscover’ such things as how to make fire, source water or create traps by which to hunt game or fish, using available, natural, materials.

    Now flip this. Is a man who has a 70 IQ going to be able to ‘abilities vs. talent’ survive in our modern society, no matter how much he -wants- to live here? Ahhhh, now who risks the destruction of the common good eh? Because the HG level intelligences are outbreeding and increasingly murdering the smart folk, left, right and center and I _guarantee you_ that, in a world of 435 active nuclear reactors, post-modernism will not look kindly upon a generalist survivor in a radioactive fallout zone from 20+ nuclear reactors melting down per large nation.

    Mr. Taylor is incorrect in his assumptions. Because just as with the nuclear industry with it’s finely machined marraging (sp.) steel in things like centrifuges, a single touch from a human hand being enough (finger oils and pressure) to permanently destabilize the rotors, so too are there types of equipment which are necessary and singular in their application (Gene Hoods etc.) that make it all but impossible for ‘rogue states’ to turn from war to economics as their path to victory.

    Hence, we MUST act to make these things publically open and aggressively pursued, through actively, competitively, yet openly sought, programs which break the ‘regulataory process’ which begins and ends with: “Thou shalt not search for anything which is not related to brain function that is not associable to a congenital disease condition.”

    Folks, for the majority of our evolutionary existence, we have survived by not feeding the weak. By not /having/ the medicine to cure exotic ailments. Thus looking for the causes of congenital illness is like looking for bad apple in a ship’s fruitbarrel by throwing all the good ones overboard. Search for the good allele frequency variants and amplify their presence in society and what happens is an exponential effect as you generate a population with more and more people with the brains to solve the remaining problems!

    You don’t build a race car by first confirming that square wheels on cow shaped body are a bad idea. You build a race car by starting out with sleek shapes from the avian or fish world where performance is essential and then integrating curve and line into the requirement to mount four round wheels.

    With this ‘from like to like you find commonalities’ let’s talk banning of human stem cell research. There are only four baseline chemicals which will take any cell in any part of your body back to pluripotent stem state (that is to say, all genetic options are open, based on the starting mix of 46 chromosomes, to generate any tissue type), we know that Eve was snapped up and taken into obscurity because she was a genetically cloned child. And we know that the Chinese are already trying their best, by isolating grade level competencies of students into longitudinal study groups who are encouraged to breed together, to find the basis of IQ.

    How is this something that can be ‘carefully entered into’ when the obvious next step is to take _Multiple Examples_ of a given suspect allele fraction (the genome is divided based on morphological assocation areas, it is _not_ randomly scattered, if you know where the ‘head’ portion is, vs. flipper or tail, you can quickly, using animal experiments, determine the number of multi-resident allele locii feeding into that part of the tissue generation process using lumiscent dye trace of the active genes) from related high skills children and feed it into a cloning system to see if the resulting tissue match generates neurons of the right configuration in the right part of the brain to influence high mathematical or musical or language talent?!

    What is _dangerous and foolish_ is NOT undertaking these studies because it risks a circa 2100 condition where there are some 14-17 billion souls on the planet and 90% of them are not smart at -anything-. Do you want to start ‘fixing’ the human race then?

    Please, you claim to think of consequences but your illustrated rationalizations are little more than Grimm Fairy Tale fear pandering while you IGNORE the simple truth that nothing you do to human tissue is ‘un dangerous’ in the way that no exploratory phase of discovery is. But at the same time, you don’t have to go with human cloning from a fetal state when there are animals that can be used as baselines to find the morphological association points for the tissue generation and then you can generate _just the tissues themselves_ using these four basic, retrograde, chemicals to regain pluripotency.

    The Genetic basis of Radius Of Trust is one of cultural payback and rewards as protected assets to be shared only with those whose recognized similarities enhance your own genetic potential to survive within the given environment as societal system.

    It has less to do with oxytocin than pragmatic observation-emulation-reward (Pavlovian) response.

    In this you must first define the nature of racism as a negative behavior. If race exists in a biological context, then it’s label-recognition as an advantageous or is also natural in a sentient species whose ‘wise ape’ mental function is one of statistical weighting.

    Help the HG barbarian with extremely low IQ and impulse control, high incidence rates of violent behavior and little time domain prediction of negative outcomes deriving from them. Or choose someone, ‘closer to home’, whose evolutionary ancestry puts them in a position of much higher levels of social safety factor, protecting both themselves and any children they might have with you or your child. Hmmmmm…. In this, it is the radical left who are constantly associating the outward (ugly) appearnce of black and brown skin as features with the racial stereotype rather than taking the ‘whole picture’ view of a much broader range of behavioral and cultural incompatibilities.

    I say cultural here because, much as I believe societies are a racial construct, not the other way around, so do I also believe that -today’s- universalist civilization is one which is in fact based solely upon attributes associated with White and East Asian (social conformity, hard work, easy adaptability) genetic traits as opposed to say African, Hispanic or South West Asian equivalents.

    As I said at the opening, Mr. Wade has been stepped on, hard. I sympathize with Mr. Taylor’s frustrated sighs at various points in the program trying to get more than a mealy mouthed PC response from him.

    For it is in his attempts at even handedness that Mr. Wade shows his truly retranchist colors. He is envisioning consequences as linearities of outcome rather than potentialisms of possible alternatives. His FEAR of what could go wrong with experimental proofs that show the reality of race as genetically differentiated outcomes, whether internal or externally sourced, is what is really dangerous here because it seeks -uncertainty- as justification for avoidance. Better we all be hiearachial line: serfs to lord, than that some mistakes be made in setting us all free.

    No better method for maintaining the status quo, exactly as it is, has there ever been. Nor a more unscientific approach to learning.

    From our perspective, his views since _Before The Dawn_ have become worthless because they don’t dare to take the next step in a hierarchial value system condition by which the conditions of racial evolution in a group X historical environment have proveably made them dangerous to be around today.

  • Cecil Broomsted

    Splendid interview Jared. Mr. Wade’s next book on language should be very interesting indeed.

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    Two intellectual giants in conversation. Who could ask for more? Twice I listened.

    As a fan of both Before the Dawn: Recovering the Lost History of Our Ancestors (2006) and now of A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History (2014), I am delighted Jared Taylor secured an interview with Nicholas Wade and that this premier science reporter/journalist has agreed to talk with Jared about his forthcoming book on the origins of language (likely out in 2016).

    I will say that my copy of A Troublesome Inheritance has about half as many words of my own in the margins — summarizing salient points — as are in the text itself. It is a fundamental book, as is Before the Dawn.

  • “Let us beware of those who seek to possess our bodies and our minds, for the academic world dehumanizes us and we become its natural dependents.”

  • Thorsted

    It was a fine conversation. I think the reel differences between races might be in the epigenetic. We don´t have identical gene transcriptions to the same environment.

    • Joseph

      The “transcriptome” would only be the fine-tuning result of the genome. The genome is the ultimate determinant of what is even possible. Indeed, the genome determines the activity of the very transcription factors and promoter regions resulting in epigenetic effects.

  • JohnEngelman

    I wish Nicholas Wade had discussed the different population pressures that have led to the evolution of recent racial differences. In”RACE, EVOLUTION AND BEHAVIOR” Professor J. Philippe Rushton attributes racial differences to evolving in climates with different temperatures.


    In “The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution” Professors Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending attribute these differences to the differing amount of time each race has practiced agriculture and civilization.


  • Robert Binion

    Though a man be frail yet are his genes robust. In the current, prestigious Breeders’ (!) Cup two of the best thoroughbreds share the same daddy. Untapable and Tonalist were both sired by Tapit. With due respect to Wade the broad outline of this “inheritance” ain’t rocket science.

    • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

      “…the broad outline of this ‘inheritance’ ain’t rocket science.”

      True, but in the post-WWII West, “rocket science” is needed to give credibility to the role of heredity in behavior, even to the very existence of races. We need Nicholas Wade.

      • Robert Binion

        Still, it would be more honest to say that blood will tell as DNA spiral is neither estate nor house of cards. When the brightest fail candor working Joes like me are reduced to metaphor or (worse) invective.

  • Josh

    Countries like Norway and Denmark have maxed out on the progress afforded by environmental intervention. In other words, there isn’t much more environmental intervention that Denmark can do to increase the health of its general population. But the progress that can be afforded to health by improvements to genes is immense. That’s why eugenics is fundamentally a progressive ideology.

    The same could be said of education. What more could Finland do to make its population smarter? Not much, really, except for eugenics.

  • Josh

    It’s in the interest of the west to advance the third world up to the 1st world because so long as western countries are better off than 3rd world countries, they will be clamoring to come here.

    • ncpride

      It can’t be done. We’ve spent untold millions for decades trying to do just that with no progress. A study of South Africa is the result of what happens when turning over a White 1st world country to Negroes. They simply can not maintain it because of their proclivity for violence and low IQ.

    • JohnEngelman

      It will take those people at least a thousand years of evolution, and probably more, before they have the ability to emulate our societies.

      • mikekingjr

        They never will develop to the extent which you describe. Thank You, Baby Jesus!

      • LHathaway

        Since they can’t ‘create their own good societies’ our leaders have seen fit to hand over ours to them. Don’t fear for them. No, not for them. Our genes have enabled us to build societies of such perfection they will continue to function smoothly well after we are gone. You’ll still have the reports on AmRen, though, to help you feel better about it, as this takes place, is taking place and has been taking place. . . Yes, the folks at AmRen care. Who says our feelings count for nothing?

    • Ultimate187

      The better off a country is, the less emigration there is. More people will stay at home. It’s why few economic immigrants are Europeans; the quality of life is good in Europe. However, most developing nations aren’t modernizing fast enough to stem the tide. China is, but certainly not Africa, Mexico, or anywhere in the Middle East.

      • mikekingjr

        Africa ain’t a nation. Must concur in one respect, however. The sub saharan part is not developing. Makes me feel sort of warm and fuzzy.

      • Ella

        There would be much more European immigration from former Eastern Europe and some high-taxed EU States if the US allows more than 300-800 visas p/y for each country through the lotto system. Some want to come and the US govt. says, “no.” More than half the French and Germans, according to polls, said that they would leave their countries for Canada and Australia if they could!

    • KFS

      Dr. Brantley was in Africa to deliver babies, I believe. He is not an infectious disease specialist. Why do Africans need American doctors to deliver babies? Why do they need Bono to dig water wells for them? Hundreds of years ago when Europeans came to America, they were digging wells for themselves with the equipment they had. Imagine the well digging equipment every African country could have today but they need Bono and other celebrities lecturing white people to send money to dig wells in Africa.
      We cannot “advance” third world countries. We haven’t been able to “advance” blacks in the USA much, either.

      • mikekingjr

        Eloquently stated.

    • MBlanc46

      That may be so, or it may not, but whatever the case, our elites have decided to turn us into an underdeveloped country.

  • pons_asinorum

    Before the Dawn was probably the single most important book to turn my perspective away from an egalitarian world view and towards an epigenetic world view. The ancestors of modern humans were qualitatively different from those that didn’t survive the Toba extinction event. From that insight, it’s obvious that the founder effect of those who colonized the globe — Europe, Asia, Africa — led to profoundly different aspects of humanity. Ancestry matters.

  • Manxman3

    The welfare state has become a eugenics programe in reverse. What started as a safety net to prevent extremes of poverty has become a state funded breeding programe for the degenerate.

    • JohnEngelman

      The word for “eugenics program in reverse” is “dysgenics.”

      Richard Lynn, who has spoken at American Renaissance conferences has written about the process in his book, “Dysgenics: Genetic Deterioration in Modern Populations (Human Evolution, Behavior, and Intelligence).”


      • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

        Dysgenics is a global problem. Some believe China is doing something about it, but I don’t believe it. China isn’t doing anything about it. We’ll just be lucky if the one-child policy happens to deliver any good results in eugenics terms. However, China’s population is aging rapidly and that’s going to deliver an enormous blow to the Chinese economy in the long run.



        • SlizzardAjeosshi

          I respectfully disagree on both points:

          As inhuman as it sounds the single child policy, combined with selective abortions, seem to have worked fairly efficiently to weed out the dumbest 10%-15% of the Han population which is basically unable to reproduce. I basically agree with Ron Unz on this topic.

          Also i wouldn’t be worried about the aging process and the population decline, given the ongoing robotics and artificial intelligence revolution

          • Chinese Nationalist Maiden

            I couldn’t care less about whether the one-child policy is fair or not. I just don’t think it’s helping our country that much. To be fair, there are some advantages, but those advantages will be outweighed by the disadvantages. It’s an artificial system that’s not implemented in such a eugenic manner as eugenicists might like to think. It’s wishful thinking that our quasi-communist government is practising eugenics. For some, it’s appealing to believe that the the Chinese government has some great eugenic masterplan, but I just don’t see the evidence for this. In fact, I see evidence to the contrary. The Chinese government is trying to control a huge country, and you got to give them credit for what they have achieved despite their ideological incompetence, but they’re failing miserably if one thinks about what they could achieve.

            Regarding the aging population of China, I wouldn’t set all my hopes on the ‘robotics and artificial intelligence revolution’ (to quote your words). China is not like Beijing or Hong Kong. The majority of the Chinese live under poor conditions, yet the elites in Beijing and Hong Kong are profitting from ‘China’s economic wonder’. Only a few are profitting from the system, and it’s going to stay that way. The majority of the Chinese are hardworking people who are struggling to survive and can’t enjoy the luxuries of Beijing and Hong Kong. No, I don’t believe in a ‘technological superpower’ fantasy because that’s not what my country looks like for the most part. I’ll believe it when quasi-communist China manages to make serious progress in technological terms instead of merely showing off to the rest of the world for the sake of upholding the Government’s pride.

          • SlizzardAjeosshi

            Just curious: what is your view on the Taiwanese model ? Wouldn’t a KMT-like model be good for your country too ?

            Taiwan is a proud, nationalistic country, with strict immigration rules, 99% mono-ethnic and to a certain degree with a better quality of life than Korea and Japan

      • Mack0
  • Unsilenced Science

    This is interesting, but could have been even more interesting if Jared Taylor had asked more adversarial questions. In one interview, Wade called JP Rushton’s book racist, and I think Taylor and Rushton were friends. Anthropologists attacked Wade just for receiving an early and somewhat positive review from Taylor, so it is also interesting that Wade agreed to the interview and that he waiting so long for it.

  • Jim

    I have great respect for Jared Taylor, but this interview was a little troubling. I felt that Jared was, at times, “leading” his guest in a desired direction when his guest’s responses didn’t quite fit into the Amren narrative. Most notably, when Mr. Wade said that the amount of biological difference in the human mind (from race to race) was relatively small. As a result, it almost felt, at times, as if Mr. Taylor was conducting an interview of himself. This is unfortunate, given the importance of the author and the book.

    I think we look for a reflection of ourselves in the media at large, and often end up being disappointed when we realize it isn’t there most of the time. Our presence is almost non-existent in the media. And Mr. Wade is not, “one of us.” His perspective isn’t to find value and significance in the white race, but to explore human evolution from a certain perspective, and that perspective has put him at odds with those in the politically correct scientific community. In this sense, we have common ground with Mr. Wade, and that’s important.

    It’s wrong to assume that everyone who has been chastised by the race-equality police all think like us. The fact that we aren’t a monolith works in our favor, actually, as it reveals the simplistic thinking and baseless accusations of the militant left in academia and government. It also shows that race realism can be a legitimate part of a wide range of political or scientific perspectives. Mr. Wade is definitely a race realist – he’s just not a race realist like those of us who are fans of American Renaissance.

    • LHathaway

      Regardless of his scientific views, Mr. Wade seemed to think whites in NA are in danger and he seemed to appreciate Mr. Taylor’s efforts in that regard, at least it seemed like that to me. Race realism, in regards to heredity, will never accomplish one thing to advance White interests in north American. White dignity, and ultimately, White survival, will depend on an acknowledgement that Whites are equally worthy of dignity and survival. But Whites will never receive dignified equal treatment in NA. Whites will have to vote for these rights for themselves by choosing survival: a reservation just for Whites in NA, or by voting to accomplish this by way of racial separation.

    • mikekingjr

      Oh God! Another over-analysis.

      • Jim

        No, another perspective.

  • guest

    It would be a great complement to this work and to this interview, in fact, if copies of Mr. Wade’s book could be made available to small groups of abler undergraduates whose views could be recorded in discussion but held, as such, in strict confidentiality while a complete and exact written transcript was published. And a nice contrast would be to limit some of those groups to the ablest of Chinese students who are present in abundance on American campuses–with the same emphatic safeguard to personal privacy. Technology makes it unwise for us to keep viewing the book merely in terms of what it contains or how two remarkable intellects perceive it. These group samplings would tell us a lot about what filaments of contact to this topic exist within the experiences of abler literate youth and how great the remaining gaps have arisen and are maintained.

    • mikekingjr

      Are you asking for info for free? Money talks. Buy the book if you cannot figure it out. Or go back to china. You confuse me.

    • guest

      It is perhaps uninspired to suggest that the English-speaking Chinese students
      would be those studying in the US now, as distinct from those who have studied
      recently and returned to China. Ironically, the Chinese students would probably feel
      far less risk in commenting from China than from within the U.S. The reflects the not yet widely known fact that in China over the last thirty years or so, there has been
      a willingness in many academic circles to understand Arthur Jensen’s works and
      those of Hans Eysenck, as well as those of other “London School” figures, such
      as Richard Lynn, Chris Brand, J.P. Rushton… The Chinese are far ahead of us
      in grasping that “nothing scientific can be racist or Marxist or National Socialist, etc,
      and nothing characterized by political coloring can be scientific”. They are matured to the harsh reality that facts must be faced and the disputation will be over the range of emotions, values, and policy options brought to bear upon the facts.
      A comparison of groups of able American students with able Chinese students
      would likely be a massive eye-opener.

    • guest

      Much of psychology in China has been for more than three decades rapidly developing a realism about genes, race, and IQ—very much unencumbered by
      features in American history that seem persistently to hobble Campus USA from
      getting realistic. Ranking figures within psychology in China in the 1980’s–all
      putative Chinese Marxists–were giving central focus and keen respect to the
      realism of the works of the London School–especially those of Arthur Jensen
      and Hans Eysenck. By all indications on many campuses in China (e.g., Beijing
      Normal University ) the ablest students with academic focus relevant to Wade’s book
      would discuss it openly with much greater consensual insight and fruitful dialogue than would be remotely possible on most American campuses. The Chinese have
      understood keenly that nothing scientific and factual can be racist or sexist, etc.
      The task is to interface via consensual understanding and dialogue, a range of
      acceptable emotions, values, and policy options. They are vastly ahead of us and
      probably gaining steadily.
      The ultimate “review” of Wade’s remarkable work would be a series of video tapes
      of discussions possible on Chinese campuses vis a vis the increasingly Dark Age
      repressions spreading in the U.S. BTW, one would hope that at the executive and advisory levels of the FBI there would be keen awareness of this chilling contrast. This state of affairs is testimony to the price paid for having far too
      many rank and file FBI agents more or less in orbit around “Intelligence” function$
      at Montgomery, Alabama, when they might gain insight by regarding China.

  • It’s weird hearing Mr. Taylor as the interviewer. I’m so used to hearing him as the interviewee. At any rate, I think he did a great job – both of them in fact – in giving more context to the book “A Troublesome Inheritance” (which I haven’t even read yet myself).

  • Garrett Brown

    No surprise the Italians, Spanish, and Japanese are allowing Wade’s book to be released in their countries. Still very proud of them for doing so.

  • Mack0

    More evidence of what we all already know. The implications while not directly stated are obvious.


  • Remnant

    It is a non-insignificant step forward that as mainstream a figure as Nicholas Wade is willing to speak with Jared Taylor. Whether Wade’s willingness reflected an overall openness of mind or the fact that he is retiring from the Times and therefore doesn’t care what people think is irrelevant. Jared Taylor is “Someone Who Must Not Be Spoken With” (he may be denounced per Robert Sussman, but he may not be taken as a peer). So the fact that Wade is speaking with him is a good sign. Wade’s speaking with Taylor can act as a kind of bridge to otherwise unreachable people who may now think “Hmm, if Wade is willing to be civil to Taylor perhaps he isn’t the monster I have been made to believe.”
    Also, I would disagree with the commentators who say that, as Wade is “not one of us”, therefore this is not a useful exercise. For the same reasons outlined above, it is important to have people engage with us on civil, respectful terms, even where there is fundamental disagreement. The left generally, and particularly the so-called “social justice warriors” (SJWs), demand even OF THE LEFT that people such as Taylor be either denounced or, at best, ignored. To pay attention to him without denouncing him is something that SJWs will not accept: debating Jared Taylor on respectful terms is enough for a person to be denounced himself by the SJWs. So again, any kind of respectful debate is itself a sign of our strength against the zeitgeist and should be encouraged.

  • Beowald

    Copernicus did not publish his most controversial work during his lifetime–and I mean him no disrespect. It’s not lost on me that Wade waited until retirement to publish his summary of the latest genetic research. Even so, he has a great deal of courage, both to publish the book and to be interviewed on AmRen. Thanks to both these gentlemen.