Alt Left: (((Biden))) Bombs Pro-Iranian Militias and Builds New Bases in Syria

(((Joe Biden)))* just bombed pro-Iranian militias in the Syrian War for the Jews today. Why in the Hell did he do that? Also, (((Biden))) is increasing the number of US bases in the Syrian War for the Jews. In addition, (((Biden))) will reportedly say nothing at all as Israel expands settlements in the West Bank in the next four years. In the past, it was a ritual that the US would condemn settlement building in the very mildest of terms that didn’t change a thing but at least were symbolic.

Meanwhile, (((the US))) vetoed all UN resolutions condemning Israel for building settlements. In addition, (((Biden))) will not change the location of the US Embassy from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv. And worst of all, (((Biden))) is going to say nothing at all while Israel annexes the entire West Bank, including all of the Palestinian territories. This was always verboten and beyond the pale. Why is that US foreign policy regarding Israel seems to get worse and more reactionary with each passing year? I don’t get it. We just get worse and worse with no end in sight.

The Palestinians then will be residents of Israel in a sense, but they will not be included in population counts on censuses and they will not have any rights whatsoever. They will live in Israel only as ghosts, in effect, neither counted as residents nor as citizens  and without any rights of residents or citizens of the land.

Boy, those Jews sure are progressive people, aren’t they? Yeah, progressive in the Diaspora. Far rightwing ultranationalist fascists in their own country! What’s up with that anyway? Why are Jews leftwing in the Diaspora and far right fascists in their own land? What gives? By the way, what a bunch of lousy hypocrites, progressives and fascists at the same time. When they put on a progressive suit, they are progressive. Then they change clothes and put on a fascist suit and they are fascists. What a bunch of lowlifes these people are.

One thing I like about the US is all the choices we have, especially in foreign policy:

(((US Democratic Party))) foreign policy: More wars for the Jews!
(((US Republican Party))) foreign policy: More wars for the Jews!

Wow that’s some choice! I can hardly decide which one to choose!

P.S. Ever notice how silent the woketards are about Israel? You could hear a pin drop. And where is Black Lives Matter on Israel? How about on all these imperial wars we are involved in? How about US imperialism in general? Crickets. See? BLM and worketards are Fake Left. All they care about is Identity nonsense, abolishing police, jails, and prisons, playing the race card, hating White people, and opening US borders wide so 1/3 of the world’s population can flood in here completely unscreened. Economic issues? Foreign policy issues? On these questions, BLM’s silence is deafening. Fake Left!

*All Israel-firster  people and organizations get coincidence marks. You don’t have to be Jewish to get one. Really coincidence marks just mean Israel-firster.

Alt Left: Why Antisemitism Is Sometimes Mandatory for Gentiles

Why Antisemitism Is Sometimes Mandatory for Gentiles

A Jewish snake of a banker named Warburg (I think he had something to do with the Federal Reserve sleaze in 1912) played a significant role in funding both sides of the war.

In Henry Ford’s Dearborn Independent, there were many articles about this character, and I could not make sense of him. He was literally funding all sides in World War 1 all of the time. He would pull support for Germany and fund the allies and then pull support for the allies and fund the Germans. His shenanigans seem to know no bounds. I came away thinking that this guy was an amoral slimeball. He seemed to have absolutely no values whatsoever other than whatever his money could buy him in terms of influence and power. Other than that, he believed in nothing at all.

I’ve read issues of The Dearborn Independent in the 1910’s. It’s not particularly antisemitic. It’s more that US Jews were acting bad back then.

From 1900-1920, US Jews tried to take over the US Stock Exchange and almost succeeded until antisemitic Gentiles blew whistle on the scam and stopped it.

US Jews had already grabbed Hollywood. Four or five Jews from Galicia somehow managed to take over Hollywood from 1900-1920. This was around the time of Birth of a Nation and other extremely racist films coming out. Jews didn’t like that sort of racism because as a general rule, it tends to circle back around to the Jews sooner or later. So the Jews took over Hollywood not necessarily out of greed but to control the narrative and protect the Jews from racist and antisemitic White Christians.

Similarly, wealthy US Jews funded takeovers of many US newspapers from 1880-1920. The Ochs and Sulzberger families were among this group. They took over the New York Times in the late 19th Century and continue to run it to this day (talk about slimeballs – check out Sulzberger, the present owner of the Times).

In the late 1800’s all US papers were run by White Christians, and racist stories were the order of the day, as casual racism was normal in US society back then. The Jews became very alarmed at this and once again figured it would circle back around to the Jews at some point. Once again, the newspapers were taken over to the protect the Jews, not to make them a fortune. Much of this took place from 1880-1900 and beyond.

So many things the Jews do are for self-protection. You can’t understand Jews until you understand this fact. Jews are not so much wicked as they are paranoid, and they have a right to be somewhat paranoid.

US Jews also hatched a conspiracy to take over finance banking from 1910-1920, and they managed to take over most of these banks before antisemitic Gentiles got together and fought back.

During the same period, they then made a run at commercial banking and only made some headway before word went out,  antisemitic Gentiles blew the whistle, and stopped the Jews dead in their tracks. To this day, Jews do not have much presence in US commercial banking, but they continue to have significant presence in finance banking, and they are quite important to the New York Stock Exchange.

Ford’s paper was blowing the whistle on all of these Jewish shenanigans, and good for him! This was a very important thing for a Gentile to do at that time. The Jews had to be stopped before they took over the whole damn country, which seems to have been their plan.

You can also see here that when Jews wage ethnic warfare on other ethnicities as they are wont to do, Gentiles absolutely must become antisemitic and hatch antisemitic conspiracies to stop the Jewish conspiracies. So at times, a certain amount of antisemitism is absolutely necessary, and to fail to be antisemitic is basically suicidal.

As you can see, Jewish ethnic warfare is a direct cause of compensatory antisemitism in Gentiles. So Jews create antisemitism, to some extent anyway. This makes me angry. They go out of their way to directly cause anti-Jewish sentiment and then they scream and kvetch about it and play the victim. What a bunch of lowlifes.

Alt Left: The “Stab in the Back” and the Balfour Declaration: Anatomy of an Antisemitic Myth

Polar Bear: I thought the stab in the back was real. The British offered Jews Israel to turn on Germany and the scorpion stung the frog.

The British offered which Jews Israel if they turned on Germany? You mean the Balfour Declaration?

This is not correct.

Balfour had no effect on German Jews, most of whom disliked Zionism. You must realize that Zionism was unpopular among European Jews at that time and all through the 1920’s. As James Schipper notes in the comments,  Zionism was not popular among West European Jews. However, it was popular among East European Jews, especially the less religious ones.

As James Schipper notes in the comments, the notion that the British gave the Jews Palestine if they would get the Americans into the war does not appear to be correct. The US entered WW1 in April 1917. The Balfour Declaration was signed in November 1917. Unless someone makes a good argument otherwise, the timelines don’t line up.

However, I have seen this theory written up on the Internet – that the British promised the Jews Palestine and US Jews said, “If you give us Palestine, we will get the Americans into the war.” And then the Jews used money and media power to brainwash Americans into joining the war. As Schipper notes, this may well not be true as the timelines don’t add up.

In lieu of verification of this theory, this would have to be listed as a possibly antisemitic argument accusing US Jews of tricking the US into war against Germany in WW1 in response to the Jews getting Israel.

Although many of them had come from Germany, German Jews and US Jews nevertheless had very tenuous connections.

Jewish Hypocrisy on Race Is Astounding

Polar Bear: Jews and Gentiles are conditioned to side with Jews.

Well, Jews are not wonderful and special and perfect just because they got genocided. Lots of groups got genocided. Armenians, Assyrians, Greeks, Cambodians, American Indian tribes, Aboriginals, Moiriori, Chechens, Gypsies, Herero, Congolese, Hutus, Yezidis, East Timorese, Hindus in Bangladesh, got genocided. Have they turned into diabolical monsters because of it like the Jews did? I don’t see why getting genocided gives Jews the right to turn into the worst human beings on Earth. All that does is make people think maybe they deserved it.

I don’t think the world has the stomach for any more Jew-killing. It’s been going on a pretty long time, and this last go-round was a doozy. In fact, it was so bad that I think that all mass-Jew-killing is off the table for probably centuries into the future. No one wants a repeat of the Holocaust.

Why should I automatically side with Jews? Because they got killed in the Holocaust! This is going to sound cruel, but boo hoo! I’m sad that y’all got massacred, but now that you’ve turned into human monsters, I’m not going  to support you because bad people did something terrible to your people. By the way, you are now playing the role of the bad people doing terrible things to others.

Israel is a dyed in the wool racist state to the very core of its being. The racism or bigotry is enshrouded in virtually every law and code in the country. The other correlate is apartheid South Africa, which it seems to have been modeled on. It is also very similar to the Jim Crow laws that Blacks were forced to live under not just in the US South but in many places in Latin America. You never knew that Jim Crow was in place in other places too, did you? I know for a fact that there was legal segregation in Cuba until after the Revolution. And there was de facto legal segregation of coastal Blacks in Ecuador.

Israel is probably one of the most openly and brazenly racist countries on Earth. Why do they get to be racist monsters? Because they got killed in the Holocaust! Boo hoo. It doesn’t give you the right to turn into racist kleptomaniacs. No one gets to be racist monsters or terrible people. I don’t care what got done to them. You don’t get to turn bad in revenge because something bad got done to you.

Jews drive me up the wall.  They are absolutely committed to flooding all White Christian countries with non-Whites and non-Christians. Why? Because when the White  Christian population gets below 50%, a Nazi type regime can never come into power. I wouldn’t be too sure about that. Some Arab Muslim countries were pretty cruel to their Jews in the last 75 years. Be careful what you wish for.

They  scream and yell about racism of all types, but they exaggerate it by a factor of 10, and they make mountains out of molehills. It’s all done to demonize White Christians as racist devils. You know why they do this? Revenge. It’s revenge for the Holocaust. And part of it may be resentment because there was some legal discrimination against Jews for a while in the US.

As a counterpart to the argument about Blacks, the Jews seem to have prospered pretty well in spite of all of that discrimination. So there may be revenge for the anti-Jewish discrimination we put them through. A famous Jewish psychiatrist, Stanley
Rothman, in the 1960’s diagnosed the basic Jewish character as Paranoid-Masochistic Character. The masochistic part means they love being victims. I say you can take anything away from a Jew, but never take away his sense of victimhood. He will fight for that for his dear life. It’s literally the most important thing in his life. It’s his fuel for living.

The paranoid part is obvious. Jews are paranoid. You look at a Jew wrong and you just like those people who threw them in the ovens. They spend most of their lives all revved up about what their enemies trying to do them and how they are poor, pitiful victims. That’s a Hell of a way to live your life.

The young Jewish men Rothman saw were very angry at US society. Most of their rage focused on WASP’s. Coded, that means White Christians. Traditionally, WASP’s were the ruling class in the US, but that has probably not been true for a long time if we speak of mere White Anglo Saxon Protestants. The US ruling class for some time now has consisted of all White Christians. They were full of rage and hatred for WASP’s and harbored an extreme desire to get revenge on the WASP’s that had supposedly been holding the Jews back. So here you can maybe see the antagonistic position that a lot of Jews take towards White Christians.

Jews scream all the time about how wonderful all the non-Whites are, especially Blacks and Hispanics, but they won’t be caught dead living within 10 miles of any of them. But if we complain about crime, litter, or graffiti, we’re evil racist scum, and we need to get canceled.

Cancel culture was started by the Jews. So was Identity Politics. The Jews are the original Identity Politics group.

This above is raw, naked hypocrisy. They scream at us for being racists for complaining that some Black guy stole our car. They won’t shut up about how evil and racist White Christians are. But they won’t live anywhere near these minorities because they know full well how crime-prone they are and all of the pathologies that typically follow large numbers of these people.

So our countries all get flooded with non-Whites and non-Christians for the benefit of the Jews and the detriment of the White Christian sons and daughters of the land. Why? Because that’s good for the Jews.

But we’re all Nazis so we deserve it.

And Israel gets to be one of the most racist countries on Earth because…? Because why? Because they got killed in the Holocaust! See what hypocrites they are? Anti-racist, White-hating fanatics in the Diaspora hypocritically proclaiming their love of all non-Whites whom they disdain so much that they won’t even live near them. And in Israel, they’re as racist as a Southern cracker in the 1950’s. Why? Because that’s good for the Jews.

See how they think? Everything’s all about them. It’s all about what’s good for them. If it’s good for them, we have to do it, no matter if it’s bad for everyone else, no matter that it’s in direct contradiction to whatever they’re pushing on the other side of the world. What if we all went through life maximizing what’s good for us? It wouldn’t be a very pretty world.

Alt Left: Some Nazi Generals Were Merciful towards Jews

Polar Bear: Some have stated WWII era German women and children deserved to be cruelly raped and butchered. Neither side is “purely evil”. Some Jews are honest; some National Socialists were merciful. Having a bloodlust towards an entire group with no exception is “purely evil.”

World War 2 era German women and children did not deserve to be cruelly raped and butchered. Of course not. But this sort of vengeance is not abnormal during warfare, sad to say.

It’s hard to believe, but some Nazi generals actually saved Jews. Just because you fought in the Nazi army didn’t mean you hated Jews. Quite a few Nazi generals didn’t care about Jews very much. People joined the party and the army for all sorts of reasons, often nationalistic ones.

In Poland around the time of the Warsaw Uprising, 3,000 Jews were rounded up and sent to a warehouse-factory that was being run by the Nazi Army. Presumably they took it over from the Poles. The Jews were worked in the factory but otherwise treated well. After three weeks, the general gathered the thousands of Jews around and gave a speech. He said, among other things, “The SS is coming tomorrow.” He didn’t say anything else.

The Jews got the hint. It wasn’t long before they started escaping the factory. The general would not lift one finger to stop them. The SS came the next day and all of the Jews had fled. So this “evil Nazi general” actually saved 3,000 Jews. Later he tried to save more Jews in a similar manner but was caught and executed. My God, that’s sad. So you see, there were some decent people in the Nazi Army.

Alt Left: Did the Arabs Ever Threaten to Drive the Jews into the Sea?

All of their enemies are trying to exterminate every last Israeli Jew. The PLO was accused of this for decades.

Admittedly there was some overheated rhetoric. The Arabs said, “We will drive the Jews into the sea.” I think it mostly just meant pull guns on them and force them to go back to Europe where they all came from. The Arabs have definitely said this many times. I’ve heard them said it right in front of me, so it’s something they still do.

The man who said it was a member of the civilian apparatus of the PFLP. I was associated with some of these people for a while and got to know them pretty well. They eventually banned me as a “Zionist spy,” which figures. They’re very radical and paranoid. I was shocked at how extreme they were. They were overtly anti-Semitic too. Their beef didn’t just extend to Israelis. They also hated the Jewish religion.

In recent years, they have been milder.

Arafat, at an inopportune moment, said that the Arabs would simply move into Israel and live with the Jews, but they would commit guerrilla terrorism against them to slowly terrorize them and drive them out.

Sheik Yassin of Hamas said much the same thing, but he had an evil little smile as he said, “We will slowly kill them.”

Iran supports Arabs moving into Israel and Jews and Arabs living together.

I’m not sure what Hezbollah wants. They don’t want a 2-state solution but they said they would live with it and not say anything. The 2-solution is of course dead forever now due to Israel and getting more and more doomed all the time. The US has been secretly greenlighting all of this and Biden will continue to greenlight all the settlement building Israel wants. They will probably just let Israel take over the West Bank too.

Moderate elements of Hamas said similar things a while back.

I’m not sure what Islamic Jihad wants. I

The guys I knew at the base of the PFLP said they were going to throw the Jews out of Israel and “they can go back to Europe or Hymietown or whatever. We don’t care where they go.” However, the leadership of the PFLP such as Leila Faled has said that the PFLP officially says that all the Jews can stay. Faled is the famous counterculture airplane hijacker/hero of many US radicals in the 1960’s (many hippie women had photos of Leila Faled with an automatic weapon on their walls). She was the original badass chick.

ISIS says they are going to conquer Israel and kill all the Jews, but mostly they’ve just been working alongside of them. ISIS fighters have crossed the borders of Israel many times at the Golan Heights where they are treated for their injuries and returned.

Interviews with Palestinians on the street found few who wanted to throw the Jews out of Israel. Mostly they said that they wanted to move into Israel and live together with Jews. However, many Palestinians  prefaced that by saying, “The Jews will be our guests.” As you can see, the Palestinians want the upper hand in Israel and it will no longer be a Jewish state in any way, shape, or form.

Alt Left: Fascism and National Socialism: An Attempt at Some Definitions

Fascism:  An Attempt at a Definition

You can define a fascist country as an ultranationalist ethnic nationalist nation founded on a blood and soil mindset with an ideology based on Lazarus, the bird that rises from the flames. In fascism, there is a nationbuilding effort whereby the nation is seen to have fallen apart, typically by too much liberalism, pacifism, degeneracy, chaos, or economic problems.

The fascist comes in saying that they are going to bring back the glorious days of the founders of the land. So from the ruins of the present, the past will be mined to create a national myth and this mythos will be used to rise the country up from the ashes of ruin to the greatness it deserves.

Typically the unfortunate present moment is blamed on others, minorities or other countries that are singled out for hostility and blame.

Military missions of conquest are not unusual as the nationalist myth often if not always says that the borders of the land used to extend further than they do. Hence the project is Greater Ruritanian and reuniting all of the former Ruritanian lands which were stolen by the Other, the non-Ruritanians. In addition, if there are any Ruritanians residing in nearby lands, the project will be to reunite those areas with the homeland.

Fascism is typically conservative as the present moment is seen as tainted with modernism and democracy, both of which are associated with cultural degeneracy. Traditional sex roles are reinstated and the woman’s role is resigned to the kitchen, church, and home.

There is an exaltation of heroism, aggression, raw power, and even brutality, often in defense of the homeland. There is a self-sacrificing tendency where to die for one’s land is the greatest honor. And there is an exaltation of violence, usually for repression or invasions but sometimes in a Sorelian sense, violence simply for the sake of violence because violence is seen to have a mythic cleansing power especially over the permissive, excessively free, and degenerate present.

The military is exalted, battles of the past are discussed and exalted,  and often defeats are spun as victories as in the Battle of Kosovo with the Serbs in 1389. Men are exalted to be masculine, heroic, and sacrificing. Effeminate men, sexual outliers, crossdressers, and homosexuals are typically persecuted as grotesque and degenerate aberrations from tradition sex roles, which are seen as nearly divine.

School curricula are rewritten and often you end up with textbooks full of lies from front to end as in the nationbuilding in Poland after WW2. Statues are built to the greats of the land. Often there is Garden of Eden effect such that humanity is seen to have arisen exactly in the country.

At other times, the land is seen as the center of the Earth around which all other lands revolve. Examples in the Land of the Rising Sun in Japan and the land of the Four Winds in China.

The Land of the Rising Sun implies that when the sun rises in the morn, it first shines on Japan, hence Japan is the first nation to be brightened and in a sense becomes a satellite around which other lands revolve.

The Land of the Four Winds in China refers to the belief that the north, south, west, and east winds all arise directly in China itself and flow outward to the rest of the world from there. So China is the source or ground zero for all of the wind and moving air in the land. It’s literally the center of the world if not of the universe.

Trumpism is indeed fascism. Make America Great Again. See how that is talking about the ruins of the present and going back to an earlier time when the nation was great.+

A lot of out and out nationalist lying about history, minorities, languages – Hell, you name it, nationalists lie about it – usually goes into the construction of this mythological great past.

It’s called blood and soil because the ethnicity is seen as the “sons of the soil” or land itself, land that has been fertilized with the blood of the ancestors especially in n nationalist impulses where they fought invaders or minorities.

The blood also refers to the fact that there is only one ethnicity in fascism.

In Ruritania, all of the minorities have to become Ruritanians. Stop wearing minority clothing, practicing minority festivals and and lifestyles, give up the minority religion and especially stop  speaking the minority language.

Hence all minorities will become Ruritanians simply by assimilating to Ruritanian culture. Standard fascism gives minorities a break in that they are merged with the ethnic group even though they are a different ethnicity.

Racist Fascism or National Socialism

Racist fascism or Nazism is much worse because the minorities don’t stand a chance as their very blood itself itself is tainted, hence there is no way to escape minority status and become a Ruritanian. They are dealt with by segregation, expulsion, or murder, which can be genocidal.

They will be repressed, arrested, beaten, impoverished, uneducated, and often the state will move Ruritanians into their neighborhoods to drown them out. They will be tortured, their homes will be demolished and their neighborhoods will be bulldozed. Often their churches and monuments are targeted for destruction.

The intelligentsia  and the leadership of the land may be attacked and even killed, sometimes in  large numbers. This is done so the minority will be leaderless and even without thinkers.

They will also be killed, often in small numbers, but sometimes in much larger numbers, into the tens and hundreds of thousands or even a million as in National Socialist Rwanda. There were millions, 15 million, exterminated by the Nazis in World War 2. You keep hearing about the 6 million Jews, but did you realize that another 9 million people were also murdered? Well, they don’t count because they’re not Jews so they’re not special, as only Jews are special or “chosen.”

They are also often expelled from the land as their presence is seen as a literal toxin upon the body politic. Hence words like cockroaches, vermin, rats, infection, disease, virus, plague are used to describe the minority group. Nazis referred to Jews as rats and vermin and disease metaphors were also often used.

It is often stated that the nation has an “infection” – that is, it is literally infected with the minority group, which is a plague upon the land itself. Look around you and see how people act during plagues. Also, what do you do with a tumor? You cut it out. So you cut the minority out of the land, slicing them away with a scalpel. How do you treat an infection. You pour drugs at it to kill the infectious agents. Hence mass killing  of minorities is can be seen as germicidal and even a measure of positive public health.

The dehumanization makes it easier to mistreat them or even kill them.  After all, in Rwanda they were not killing humans. They were literally killing cockroaches. Six foot tall cockroaches with two arms and two legs, but cockroaches nonetheless. What do you do if you see a cockroach? You stomp on it and grind it into the floor. Hence “grinding the minority into the floor” is transferred to the minority group and mass murder is nothing more than squashing bugs on floors. Human bugs but bugs nonetheless.

Alt Left: An Overview of the Political Parties in Israel

Israel will never go along with being “guests” of the Palestinians in their own land, especially now that Israel is officially an ethnic nationalist ultranationalist country, in other words, Israel is literally a fascist country along the lines of the fascist nations of Europe in the 1930’s. Indeed, many early Zionists were admirers of fascism and wanted to create a fascist state in Israel.

The Iron Wall by Jacob Jabotinsky (1921) is along those lines. And he wasn’t the only one, trust me. The movement he founded was called Revisionist Zionism, a very rightwing and arguably fascist form of Zionism.

Israel has arguably been a fascist country from the very start

Their very blood is seen to taint them as Arab blood taints Arabs in Israel, so in this sense, Israel is a racist fascist country or a “Nazi” country. A better term would be a national socialist country. There is nothing inherently anti-Semitic about national socialism. National socialism can unfold in most any land, particularly where there are not a lot of minorities.

Jabotinsky’s spiritual heirs later because the Israeli guerrillas such as Irgun who fought against the British and the Arabs in  1940’s Palestine. And the spiritual founder of the Likud, the party of Netanyahu that has been running Israel forever now is Jabotinsky himself. The party sees themselves as the heirs to his movement. They even say it in their very own words.

Most of the other Israeli parties are now just “Likud without calling themselves Likud.”

Our Israeli Home is a good example of that.

Labor has been on the outs forever now in Israel.

Meretz is the Israeli Left, but they have 10% support on a good day.

I like Habash, the Israeli Communist Party. It’s an Arab and Jewish mixed party. They’ve had a principled line from the beginning.

There is an Arab party the name of which includes Land that seems to get most of the Arab vote. Arabs are 20% of the population of Israel.

 Alt Left: Identity Politics Is Counterintuitive: The More Their Demands Get Met, the Angrier and Unhappier They Become

 IP Is Counterintuitive: The More Their Demands Get Met, the Angrier and Unhappier They Become

All IP people are angry. They’re getting a raw deal! And paranoid. All IP people are locked into war with some binary “enemy identity.” Whites are the bad guys. Men are the enemy. The enemy is keeping us down!

With all IP, curiously, the more the groups realize their goals, first, they keep moving the goalposts, insisting its not enough and inventing new demands, and oddly enough, they get even more pissed off!

Remember the Second Liberation of Blacks in 1964? How did Blacks react to the greatest freedom from shackles since the First Liberation in 1863? For the next half decade, they rampaged though America’s cities with deadly riots, killing people, fighting cops and firemen, getting themselves killed, and most stupidly, burning their own hood, and then complaining their living in the embers of the ash heap. I’ve got a theory about why this curiosity exists. It actually makes complete sense.

I’ll give you a clue? Though they were in shackles, the source of all of their misery was not to be found in the shackles. A lot of it was but a lot of it wasn’t. So the shackles came off and they looked around, and they still weren’t equals. They felt ripped off by a shapeshifting enemy and exploded with frustrated rage. And it continues to today.

As racism declines with each year, Blacks continue to have their usual Black problems. Their ideology tells them that their problems are all caused by racism, so if their problems persist even after all these years of work, racism must truly be insidious, evil, and even possible mysterious and invisible. Solution: Double down on the antiracism and Black IP to defeat this racist monster once and for all!

We liberated women, and they still had most of the same old woman problems. Liberation didn’t fix their troubles, so obviously they didn’t do it hard enough. So they double down.

We liberated gays, but of course they’re still all screwed up. They’re far nuttier than straights. Both sexes of homosexuals live 18-20 years less than straights. All of the problems of gay men (Remember Boys in the Band?) remain. All of the problems of lesbians (Remember The Well of Sadness?) remain. All the wars of homophobia didn’t work. What to do? Double down on the anti-homophobia campaigns.

Alt Left: Minorities Who Let Go of Their Identity Politics Seem Happier

Minorities Who Let Go of Their Identity Politics Seem Happier

I’ve known Blacks who chucked Black Identity Politics and said, “I love White people!” There’s a whole sex kink out there like that for Black women. There’s Black men who think Whites are the bomb. I’ve met a lot of these folks. They admire Whites. They try to act like Whites. They see them as models of behavior.

And if you’re Black and you love White people, most Whites will let down their guard. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. I compared them to Blacks locked into Black Identity Politics, and the Black Identity Politics people seemed much less happy. They were locked into a war. Racism was everywhere, fogging up their glasses, giving them scratchy throats, and causing rashes on their arms. They were living in enemy territory every day.

Gays who dropped gay politics were a lot more relaxed. Gays locked into gay Identity Politics always had their dukes up, surrounded by homophobes, getting in fistfights every day. Gay Identity Politics is a scary place. There’s a gaybasher hiding in every bush. It’s enough to drive you nuts.

Alt Left: Identity Politics Causes Paranoia

Identity Politics Causes Paranoia

Identity Politics people are paranoid.

– Boo! There’s a man under your bed! I bet he’s going to rape you! Run! Spook!

– There’s a White devil in your closet? I bet he’s got a rope! Save your neck and head for the hills! Scary!

– There’s a homophobe lurking behind every corner as you turn it. I bet he’s going to gay bash you! Creepy!

– Don’t answer the door! It’s probably a transphobe who’s going to misgender and snicker at you! Oh noes!

Get it? The enemies of Identity Politics people are the damned Boogeyman! He’s under every bed, crouching in every dark room, waiting with fangs out around every corner. And when you get up the nerve to see if he’s there, he vanishes! But he’s still there! He just changed positions! Now he’s in the closet hiding in your clothes!

Obviously, if there are enemy ghosts stalking you everywhere you go, you can’t stop looking over your shoulder. And the world’s a scary place. It’s full of invisible enemy spies! They’re like structural racism. You can’t see ’em but you know they’re there.

That’s why all Identity Politics people ending up thinking they have way more enemies than they do. Jews think there are five times more antisemites than exist. You look at a Jew wrong, and he’s on the phone to the ADL.

“I bet he looked at me wrong because he figured out I’m Jewish!”

We all know that anti-racist nutballs and Blacks in general argue that there are 10X more racists against them than there are. When the number of enemies seems to be decreasing, they see this as a catastrophe because they subside on victimhood. So they constantly lowering the bar for being an enemy to make sure their world is full of enemies the way they want it to be.

Alt Left: Black Identity Politics: Dialogue with an “Antiracist” Black

Dialogue with an “Antiracist” Black

– Those crackers are harassing you? I’m sorry. I’m keeping out of this crap. I ain’t joining that mob.

– But wait, hold on. It’s not ok just to not harm us Blacks. Silence is violence! You’re a fencesitter. Fencesitters are all on the other side. You have to pick sides. Us or them and if you ain’t risking your ass with us, you’re obviously an enemy spy!

– Whoa! I better tone down my queasiness around you Blacks. I’m hurting your feelings. How would I like it? But I  get no credit. I wipe my mind free of preconceptions, and meet Blacks with an open heart.

– Gong! Not good enough.

– You forgot to attack your microaggressions!

– WTH? I don’t even know what they are!

– I don’t have time to educate you. My job is to chide you like a mother to a five your old. Next time I see your White ass, you better have bug sprayed all these microaggressive midges that hover around you!

– Ok, ok. I got out a magnifying glass, and saw a bunch of racist gnats hanging around me and using me as a base to attack local Blacks. I got out the Raid can and Shoah’d them all. To the flying specks, I’m Richard Speck! Ha ha!

– Hi, my Black friends. Think you can relax now? You can talk to me without batting away swarms of no see ums! Can we be friends now?

– Nope! Sure your wiped your mind slate clean and consciously, you’re MLK in White skin. But that’s an illusion! Underneath all your brand new antiracist makeup, you’re still a Klansman!

– Whoa. How is that?

– Well, you’re a Klansman, but you can’t see that fact.

– Eek! What gives?

– Your night-riderness is lurking inside of you, but you can’t see even see it! It’s in your damned unconscious. And that only comes out at night, and you’re not conscious enough to deal with it.

– I guess I’m screwed to be permanently racist, huh, Trayvon?

– Oh no! Have no fear. We can provide a purgative for your evil racistness.

– Cool. How?

– Just give me $thousands$ of $dollars$ and attend my stupid seminar for six months where we will attack your unconscious racistness by telling you you’re fucked, and it’s never going away!

– Dude! Sounds like a con job. No way, man.

– You have to do it. Everybody at work has to do it. You want me to can your White ass? Submit, White man! Supplicate yourself at my Black feet. Kiss them, I said!

Repost: Frances Cress Welsing

This is an old post from, believe it or not, 10 years ago! The old post also had a lot of comments too. I’ve changed my views in the last 10 years, and I am now less “racist” (LOL) than I was in this post. Still I think it’s for the better. There’s something umcomely about my smirking and smug attitude towards the Black race in this post. I’d like to think I’m beyond that. What I would say now is that most Whites do not necessarily feel that we are superior to Blacks in general. We tend to regard Blacks on an individual level.

Nevertheless, we do see the average Black as existing on a somewhat lower basis than the average White. They are human of course, but they’re just not up there with us. Sort of the way that white collar workers somewhat look down on blue collar workers or how moneyed people look down on the poor. They may be perfectly nice people, but they’re just not on our level.

Now I for one don’t like this particular mindset, yet most Blacks I regard as inferior are decidedly that. They tend to be part of that ghetto culture. It’s an inferior culture that creates inferior human products. Not biologically inferior. Culturally inferior. And I’m not sure to what extent any of them are recoverable.

The recoverable ones are capable of two existences: a middle class one where they more or less conform to satisfactory values, and  ghetto one where they revel in the ghetto culture they apparently find so appealing. This is why the split between ghetto Blacks and middle class Blacks is somewhat false. Because so many Blacks are “floaters.” They float in between both ghetto and middle class cultures. They’re capable of either more or less, but one gets the feeling that they feel most at home in ghetto culture.

Because I feel bad about this, I’m always on the lookout for Blacks who I can see as being on my level. And I’m pretty generous about my endowing them with that trait.

Anyway, this post is good for seeing where my mind was at 10 years ago, and unfortunately, I’m sure many Whites think in exactly this same way. Not that this is such an evil racist way to think. It’s not. But it’s a little bit racist, and I for one think it’s a bit too much. Black people have a whole world of problems. Last thing we Whites need to do is hate them on and make everything all that much worse.

Frances Cress Welsing has written many a ridiculous thing in her career as a Black radical. God pray she is not a tenured academic somewhere. Here are a few. Check out the mouth-feel as you read over them. Scrumptious!

The color of White people is the result of leprosy and genetic inferiority and the ancestors of White people are the sexual partners of dogs and jackals. It took 600 years to breed them, part man and part beast. Hence is it any wonder that Whites lack true emotions in their creation? Is it any wonder that white people are never peaceful? Whites were only created to fight other invading races, to protect the God race of the Black man…

LOL.

White men give there women chocolate with nuts on Mothers day, so they can feel sexual equal to the Black man. You notice the way so many White males are homos? It’s because through anal intercourse, the sick self-debasing White male may fantasize that he can produce a product of color, albeit that the product of color is S**T. Do not take what I say lightly, this is the truth.

LOL wut.

You know something, silly Blacks? Most White guys don’t go around all the time being worried about Black guys and their big Black cocks.

Anyway, some of us White guys, like the author, are pretty big themselves, not that it matters, but still. I once had a Black woman tell me, in the midst of the frolics but before the penetration, “You’re pretty big, you know?” Her terrified eyes were as big as moons. I’ll take that compliment to the bank, hun. Really, how big do you need to be? I’m big enough for my own ego. Who needs more?

Most White guys think that White women who slut for big Black cocks are whores anyway. Many of us effectively throw them right on out of the White race. That’s punishment enough.

White guys? I hate to break it to you Black guys. We feel superior to you. You can argue on and on how this is racism, how it’s crap, how it’s really inferiority transposed as superiority, but still. We just think Black guys are inferior. On a group level, at worst, you’re animals. At best, you’re still below us. On an individual level that may vary, but we still often don’t feel that the individual Black guy is our better. A lot of us have residual racism that gets in the way of that.

That sucks but that’s how we feel, even White liberals. Sure, Black guys are better at some stuff, but nothing that’s important. Sure, White women dump us for Blacks, but those are women of the street, nothing more than silly whores who are being evicted from the Great Race. Who worries about whores?

A much better analysis is to see White Supremacy for what it is, not psychoanalyze it away with nonsense. Yeah! We think we’re better! Not just better than you Blacks, but better than everyone else on Earth! And we really, really do believe it, too.

All races are supremacist in a sense, ethnocentrism being what it is after all.

But there are a few races, like the European Whites (North Europeans worst of all) and the NE Asians (Japanese worst of all) who have a truly extreme sense of their superiority. They don’t just feel superior to those “wife-stealing bastards over the hill” as most tribes do, they actually feel better than most other humans on the planet! And they really believe it.

The consequences of Super-Supremacism are not good. That Germany and Japan, two ultra-supremacist nations, engaged in mass genocides recently is not incidental. It’s easy to kill the inferior, not much harder than stomping on bugs.

Blacks and humanist Whites have written whole libraries full of the harm that White Supremacy as an ideology has done especially to Blacks and to other non-Whites.

  • We think we’re better. This is the real problem. Discuss.
  • We don’t think we’re worse. This is a Black fantasy to avoid dealing with the painful reality of number 1, that the Black is the butt of jokes and the object of humiliation by Supremacist Whites.

Repost: Englishes, Portugueses, and Chineses

In the comments to a previous post, Goyta made several comments. First of all he noted that the differences between Brazilian and European Portuguese are considerable, especially when a Brazilian hears a less educated, working class or rural Portuguese.

He also said that when European Portuguese are interviewed on Brazilian TV, Brazilians wish they had subtitles. Wanting to have subtitles when you see a video of someone speaking is actually a symptom that you are dealing with another language. He said the differences are particularly severe when it comes to IT. He said he cannot understand 99% of what is written in a European Portuguese IT magazine, whereas with a regular publication, he can get 99% of it.

It does appear that the differences between European Portuguese and Brazilian Portuguese are pretty significant, more significant than the differences between US and British English.

On other hand, I find Hibernian English spoken in Ireland to be nearly incomprehensible, though it is said to be just a dialect of English. It’s clearly been influenced extensively by the Irish language. Scots, the regional English spoken in Scotland and exemplified by the movie Trainspotting , is actually a completely separate language from English. That movie actually needed subtitles. On the other hand, there is a Scottish English dialect that is not Scots that is pretty intelligible.

We can always understand British English no matter who is writing it. Same with understanding spoken Australian and New Zealand (Kiwi) English. British English is often written a bit differently in slang expressions, but we pick them up. The formal writing is totally understandable.

There have been huge fights on Wikipedia between British English and US English speakers with complaints from the Brits of bullying by the Americans. There was an attempt to fork the English Wiki into Br and US versions but it failed. Wikipedia demands that you have an ISO code in order to get a Wikipedia and ISO codes only come from SIL, who publishes Ethnologue. I petitioned for a few new languages a couple of years ago and they all got shot down.

There is an ongoing war between European Portuguese and Brazilian Portuguese on the Portuguese Wikipedia with complaints from the European Portuguese of bullying on the part of the Brazilians. Gotya noted that he, a Brazilian, could not read Portuguese IT materials. This is unfortunate. All written British is intelligible to us. We can read anything written in the UK, though most of our reading material here is from the US. I can read The Economist and The New Standard and The Spectator with no problems at all.

As a Californian, I speak completely normally, of course, and have no accent whatsoever! Haha. We can understand the Midwest accent perfectly, though it can be different. It sounds “flat”. They also insert rhotic consonants before some consonants at the end of a word and the raising of the preceding vowel – “wash” becomes “worsh”.

The Oklahoma accent is different and sometimes it can be hard to understand. I heard some people speaking Oklahoman in the doctor’s office the other day for a minute or so I thought they were speaking a foreign language! Of course they were mumbling too. Then I asked them where they were from and they said Oklahoma. At that point, I had caught onto their accent and could understand them perfectly.

I do not know why the Texan accent is said to be hard to understand. We understand it perfectly, but it sounds funny. We make a lot of jokes about it. George Bush has a strong Texan accent. There is also an Arkansas accent (Arkies) that is different but understandable. This is also the source of jokes. In this part of California there are many Whites who still speak Arkie and Okie. They are the descendants of those who came out here from the Dust Bowl in the 1930’s. Steinbeck wrote a book about this called The Grapes of Wrath.

Other than that, there are no accents in the West.

There is some sort of a Kentucky-Tennessee accent, but I am not sure if they differ. This is also a source of jokes. It’s sort of a general Appalachian accent, and it’s the source of jokes about inbred hillbillies and whatnot.

The Southern accent is well-known but usually understandable. My brother went to live in Alabama though and he said that the workers in the factory he worked at were often completely unintelligible. The Blacks were worse than the Whites, and they had separate accents. He has imitated their incomprehensible accent to me and it’s pretty hilarious.

I have heard poor Blacks from Memphis on the Cops show who were completely unintelligible to me. People with more money and status tended to be more comprehensible. I sometimes have a hard time understanding a Mississippi or Alabama accent, but it’s no problem. Our Southern politicians all have thick Southern accents.

Cajun English from Louisiana is often unintelligible to us, but the people with more money and status are quite intelligible.

There is also a Black accent from the coast of South Carolina called Gullah that is hard to understand. The Blacks from around there speak something like it and you can pick it out if you are sharp. It has a pretty, lilting sound to it. It’s different from the standard Southern accent and is sort of charming.
Moving up the coast, there is a Virginia accent that is softer, pleasant and charming.

There is the famous New York accent, which to us laid back Californians sounds horribly rude, obnoxious, loud and belligerent. Some forms of it also sound ignorant – these tend to be associated with working class Whites in Brooklyn and the Bronx.

One thing they do is to glide and lengthen rhotic consonants – “New York” becomes New Yawwk” “Brooklyn” becomes “Bwwoklyn”.

A similar accent seems to be spoken in New Jersey, but it may be different. One again, it involves lenition of rhotic consonants, in this case turning them into dipthongs with long vowels. “New Jersey” becomes “New Joiisey”. This is also a source of jokes.
There is a Boston accent which is completely understandable. Ted Kennedy speaks that. It involves the lenition of hard consonants into glides and the end of a word – “car” becomes “caw”.

I believe there is a sort of a slow drawl from Vermont and New Hampshire too. Those people, especially the older men, are known for not talking much. Men of few words.

Some Blacks around here still talk with thick Black accents that sound Southern even though they were born in the Central Valley.
There is also an “Ebonics” English (for lack of a better word) that is spoken here by sort of ghettoish or semi-ghettoish Blacks. It is frankly, almost completely unintelligible. They seem like they are talking with their mouths full, mumbling and speaking extremely fast, running all of the sounds together.

Everyone who talks like this can also speak Standard English thank God, and they can quickly move in and out of that Ebonics talk when you talk to them. It’s sort of a language for them to talk so that we can’t understand them, I think. To us, it sounds sloppy, low class and ghetto, but it reportedly a full-fledged language.
The Blacks in the Caribbean do not speak English! That makes me feel good because I can hardly understand a word they say. Each island has its own form of Creole English which is a completely separate language.

I think that Indian English (Chichi derogatorily) and West African English need to be split into separate languages because they are often incomprehensible to us. This is a case of regional Englishes evolving on their own. Further, West African English often differs a lot in its written form.

Indian English is often so mangled in its written form that it is incomprehensible, but more educated writers are comprehensible. The tendency to drop articles is very annoying and makes written Indian English sound ignorant to us. Don’t mess with our damned useless articles!

Reading about the Chinese languages, there are efforts underway to get speakers to speak proper Putonghua, whatever that means. Speakers from different parts of China still speak Putonghua with an accent that can be heavy at times.

Here in the US, we do not have this problem. Even our politicians still speak in heavy regional accents, and no one cares. We can always understand them. There is no national effort to get everyone to speak proper English that involves wiping out regional accents, though I understand that in the corporate world, they are offering classes to help people get rid of Southern accents, which are stereotyped as sounding backwards, ignorant and racist. I think this is sad. Our regional accents are what makes this country great.

Goyta also notes that Brazilians are starting to speak Spanish and the neighboring Spanish speaking countries are starting to speak Portuguese. When I was dealing with them 5-10 years ago, most Brazilians did not speak much Spanish (They acted like it was extremely low on their list of priorities) and Spanish speakers had zero interest in learning Portuguese (In fact, they regarded the suggestion as offensive and preposterous!)

Goyta notes that with regional integration, more Portuguese are speaking Spanish and more Spanish speakers from nearby countries are learning Portuguese. Spanish is becoming a prerequisite to getting a good job in Brazil. This is good as it’s good to see Latin Americans getting together.

It is also true that in China there has been a big fight over Chinese language classification. The unificationist – fascist types, associated with the Communist government (and actually with the Nationalist government before also – this is really a Chinese elite project) insist that there is only one Chinese language.
This goes along with racism of Northern Chinese against Southern Chinese and to some extent vice versa. This racism is most evident in the Cantonese vs Mandarin war in China.

Cantonese speakers say that they speak the real Chinese and that Northern Chinese speak a bastardized tongue derived from the old Manchu language. Cantonese speakers also resent that a Northern Chinese was turned into the national tongue and imposed on them against their will. They also say that Northern Chinese are really from the South and that the real NE Asians are the Mongolians, Koreans, Manchu, Japanese, etc. Genetic studies show that this is not the case.

Northern Chinese say that Southern Chinese are not real Chinese and their blood is “contaminated” with Tai types like the Tai, Zhuang, Vietnamese, etc. There is probably something to this.
Although Putonghua is the only official language in China and there is a war going on against the regional Chineses, enforcement has been held off against Cantonese. And Cantonese  areas are still where you will hear the least Putonghua and the most regional Chinese in all spheres of life. Cantonese is also allowed on the radio and TV, whereas regional Chineses had previously banned from the media.

The Putonghua-only campaign has been too successful and regional Chineses are being wiped out. There is now a regionalism movement arising in China to promote and retain regional Chineses.

I think that the Putonghua campaign has been good, but that China should promote bilingualism. The Putonghua campaign has not yet been successful. As of 2001, only 53% of Chinese could speak Putonghua, but it has probably risen a lot since then as the government is really pushing this hard.

China clearly needs a language that they can all speak. For its entire history, many Chinese have not been able to speak to each other, including folks from one village to the next if you go to the southeast and the central coast. Provinces like Fujian, Jiangxi, Jiangsu, Henan and Hunan are notoriously multilingual.

Most of these places have a lot of very high mountains, and transportation was typically very poor. Even today, you can scarcely get around by vehicle and you sometimes have to walk from one place to the next, sometimes for dozens of miles! Bottom line is they were very isolated from each other.

These places also retained a tradition of being hideouts for “hillbilly” types where there was a lot of unemployment and many folks turned to crime. Also criminals fled to the mountains where they could hide. Upshot was that due to all of this, and people seen as backwards, lazy, stupid and thieving, people from the rest of China had no interest in going to these places anyway.
When people left these parts of China to go to big cities, they were stereotyped in a way similar to how ghetto Blacks and Browns are in the US. This made them want to stay in their mountains.

Alt Left: Repost: Mao Messed Up

I think an assessment of Mao ought to be made on a scientific basis, beyond politics. Anti-Communists and rightwingers have an extremely poor record as far documenting this sort of thing, so I almost want to dismiss everything they say.

Probably the best sources would be leftwingers or even Communists who also happen to be some sort of China scholars. To the detriment of Mao, a number of Leftists, socialists and Communists who are also China scholars are starting to contribute some very negative things about Mao.

The good side is quite clear. Life expectancy doubled under Mao, from 35 to 70, from 1949 to 1976, in only 27 years. Supporters of fascism and Hitler are challenged to provide evidence that Hitler’s rule benefited anyone. Nazism was at core a death cult. Life expectancy collapsed in Germany under Hitler and in all of the regions that were occupied by Nazis. Nazism wasn’t about improving life for the common man at all; it was about war and endless war and endless extermination of the less fit.

Communism, with the exception of Pol Pot’s rule, where life expectancy collapsed in Cambodia and 1.7 million died, has been quite a bit different. Most Communist regimes have killed people, but at the same time seem to have saved many lives, often millions of lives. So it gets hard to tally things up.

I suppose pro-Communists would say that the many deaths were necessary in order to save so many lives. That’s an interesting argument and ought to be taken up. Was there a way to save so many lives without killing millions of people? I hope there would be, but I’m not sure.

Pre-China Mao was vastly deadlier than China under Mao. The life expectancy figures make this clear. Czarist Russia was 3 times deadlier than the USSR under Lenin and Stalin. This is where this “greatest killers of all time” crap runs into the mud. If the death rate was 3 times higher per year under the Czar than under Stalin, just how was Stalin the worst killer of all time?

Same with Mao. I don’t have good figures, but once again, it looks like Nationalist China in the 1920’s, 30’s and 40’s was 3 times deadlier per year, or maybe more, than Maoist China. If the death rate collapsed under Mao, how was he the worst killer ever?
The truth is there are plenty of ways to kill a man. You can kill him with a bullet or by sending him to a camp, or you can kill him by disease and lack of food, the silent and uncounted method that the capitalists prefer.

Nevertheless, an accounting of deaths under Mao needs to be done. Just glancing at the data here, it’s already looking like Mao was way worse than Stalin. Way worse.

The initial consolidation of power in China was brutal. Whether the landlords were killed by the party or by the peasants is not that relevant. Mao said that 700,000 landlords were killed, and even he thought that was too many. China scholars think it is higher, from 1-4 million. I would dismiss the 4 million figure, but anywhere from 700,000-3 million is possible. Further research is needed here.

The Anti-Counterrevolutionary Drive of 1950 followed, an attempt to uncover supporters of the Nationalists and counterrevolutionaries. Tens of thousands were killed, or possibly up to a million, let’s call it 20,000-1 million. Further research is needed.

Anti-Christian Campaigns of the 1950’s. These were launched against mostly Christians, but also other religions. “Many thousands” are said to have died. Definitely some further work is necessary here.

Anti-Counterrevolutionary Campaign of 1953. Mao said, “95% of the people are good.” The Party assumed that this meant 5% were bad. Hundreds of thousands died.

The Great Leap Forward Famine happened between 1959-1961. Unlike the fake Holodomor of 1932-33, it’s looking more and more like most of the blame for this horrible catastrophe can be laid at the feet of Mao himself. The man was a fanatic. He was told that there was a famine, and in early 1959, he backtracked on some of his crazy ideas, while he blamed subordinates for the famine.

Then there was the Lushan Conference in May 1959. Mao accused Peng Dehuai, a critic of the Great Leap, of conspiring against him. Peng was purged, and the Great Leap went was ordered to go ahead full speed. If there had been no Lushan Conference, there would have been no famine. There followed two years of catastrophe, in which there was overprovisioning of grain from the peasants which was then stored in warehouses in cities, where it rotted or was exported for scarce foreign currency.

Much of the problem was that local officials were wildly exaggerating harvests, hence the overprovisioning at the state level. They thought that with bumper harvests, they could take grain from the countryside to the cities without problems. But there were no bumper harvests. Harvests had collapsed.
Finally in 1961, the state figured out that it had screwed up royally and started mass importing grain. Caravans of grain trucks flowed to the countryside, and the famine was over. But many were too weak to even walk to the trucks to get the food.

Mao is blamed for an atmosphere of terror that led underlings to fake bumper crops where none had occurred. With no democracy in the party, no one wanted to contradict Mao. Mao himself had some utterly idiotic ideas, which he was allowed to implement due to lack of party democracy. After the Great Leap, the party realized it had screwed up bad. Even Mao knew that. The Cultural Revolution was in a lot of ways Mao’s attempt to regain face after getting egg on his face in the Great Leap.

As far as deaths during the Great Leap, this is still up in the air. Even Maoists admit that there were 15 million excess deaths in the period. Some of the higher figures use preposterous accounting techniques whereby people who had never even been born were counted as “deaths.” Tell me how that works. Nevertheless, the figure may be higher than 15 million. At any rate, it’s the worst famine in modern world history, and it’s a permanent blot on Mao’s record.

The Cultural Revolution was sheer insanity. Many received poor educations as schools were shut down. Many cultural relics and buildings were destroyed, and a good part of China’s cultural heritage was smashed up.

People were killed and hounded all over China for little or no reason. Red Guards rampaged all over China, torturing, humiliating, imprisoning and murdering all sorts of people, including local party officials, teachers and even university professors. When someone was hounded, the humiliation went on every day and there was no escape. No one would dare to come to your side, not even your spouse. Deng Xiaoping’s son was tossed out of a window and paralyzed from the waist down.

Red Guard factions battled each other in cities across China with weapons looted from local Army depots. Sometimes Army units joined in. Red Guards in one city would attack Red Guards in another city. Women and children were murdered and kids were even buried alive. Enemies were cannibalized in one area. Ridiculous, insane and anarchic, right? Sure.

In some parts of China, victims of the Red Guards are still angry. The Red Guards are still around, older now, but still living in the villages alongside their victims. Their former victims hate them. Lawsuits have been brought against former Red Guards, but the courts have thrown them out.

From a Communist POV, one of the most tragic things about all of these persecutions and killings, when one reads the details of the individual cases, is that many of the victims were not even counterrevolutionaries. Many were dedicated, hard-working Communists and revolutionaries, often devoted Maoists. Lord knows why they were purged and victimized.

The insanity and anarchy of the Cultural Revolution is one reason why the Party wants to keep a tight reign on power. China descends pretty quickly into wild and deadly anarchy.

Lately, I’ve been reading a lot of Chinese Communist Party publications and the theses and dissertations by students at Chinese universities, which tend to toe the party line. As a rule, the Cultural Revolution is regarded as a big mistake by ultra-Left forces, and the Party definitely wants to avoid such messes in the future. I’ve even some some Party critiques of the Great Leap, though not much is said about that. It’s clear that the high ranks of the Party regard the Great Leap as a disaster.

There continue to be some very serious human rights abuses in China, as this 89 page report from Human Rights Watch reports. Even from the POV of a Communist, some of the abuses of these petitioners seem just flat out wrong. There doesn’t seem to be any legitimate Communist reason to be attacking a lot of these poor petitioners.

Surely in a Communist system, petitioners should have the right to protest uranium pollution of rivers, corrupt officials abusing their posts and stealing land, etc. In what way are these folks counterrevolutionaries?

But it’s not true that everyone who protests in China goes to jail. There are around 100 public protests every single day in China, often involving large groups. Only a few of them get arrested, harassed, beaten, tortured or jailed. But I guess you never know when your card will come up.

The fact that some of the harshest critiques of Mao’s crimes, excesses and stupidities are coming out of the Chinese Communist Party itself shows that slamming Mao can be done within a socialist, Leftist or Communist framework.

Can it be done in a Maoist framework? This I’m not so sure of.
The Party will not come out and make public its findings on Mao as the USSR did with Stalin because the party continues to wave the banner of Mao and practically rules under his name and visage. It’s possible that slamming Mao would so delegitimize the party that it might be fatal for the CCP. It’s a tough call.
For the anti-Semites, I have a homework assignment for you. Since Mao was a Communist and Communism is Jewish, obviously Mao was a Jew. Please uncover the secret Jewish connections of Mao and his closest supporters in the CCP.

Alt Left: Why It’s Hard for Non-Whites to Insult White People

You see, we Whites have a dirty secret. An evil secret. Deep inside, we are rather evil. It doesn’t come out much, but it lurks in all us.

And here it is.

We are not insecure. We are not worried. We can’t be insulted.

Why?

Because other races insulting us is laughable! Call us names all you want. Call us cavemen. Call us albinos. Call us devils. We don’t give a damn because you’re not hurting our feelings.

You are not hurting us because deep down inside – and here’s where the evil part come in – we Whites secretly think we are better than a lot of the other races.  You see, we already think we’re Kings of the Hill, deep down inside, even if it only comes out rarely and remains hidden most of the time. A lot of us walk around most of the time dealing with non-Whites and thinking “I am no better than this person merely because of my race.” I see groups of non-Whites and I think “I am no better than any of those people due to my race.”

Whether this attitude is fake or not, I am not sure. I can tell you that sadly I have to force it on myself a lot because a lot of the time my mind simply defaults to White Superiority. Not White Supremacy because I don’t think Whites are better than all other races. I believe there are races superior to us. This does not bother me one bit. In fact, I am perfectly happy that they are better than we are.

But I would not want to be them. I still want to be my race, even if it is somewhat inferior to a few other groups. Superiority and inferiority doesn’t matter to me. Anyway I find my mind defaulting to Superiority a lot, and then I have to force myself to think that those people are the equal of me. It’s a lot easier to do if they don’t behave like they are inferior. The more they act like they’re inferior, the harder it is to convince myself that they’re not.

I’m not going to say how I feel about Black people deep down inside. I try to feel like they are on the same level as I am, but with ghetto Blacks that is hard to do because they act like they are inferior and it’s hard to fool myself into thinking that they’re not. But I do not see individuals or groups of Blacks and think they are inferior to me necessarily. I take each individual in stride.

If I see three Black university professors discussing something, I assure you I will not think they are inferior because they are Black. That’s crappy. That’s being a bad person. And I have strong morals and a guilty conscience. If I meet an Hispanic attorney, like Hell I will think he’s inferior because “he’s a Mexican.” I don’t do that.

Other races hating on us is laughed off because when they do that, we Whites will always shift to White Superiority mode and see them as pathetic inferiors laughingly trying to insult superior people which is just about the lamest thing on Earth. We are just sitting back on our well-deserved White thrones, glass of wine in one hand, bunch of grapes in the other, members of our harem on each side of us, laughing our asses off at these subjects, these servants, these pathetic peasants and serfs, could possibly thing they are superior to the King of all Kings, our great White race.

Alt Left: The Concept of Replacement Theology

In a previous post, we discussed how the element of Mercy or Forgiveness is the essential element of Christianity This concept is why I support Replacement Theology and the Palestinians.

Replacement Theology

When Christianity came, according to Christian theory, Judaism was overthrown as the basic religion of the people, and Christianity took its place.

That’s why the Old Testament – the overthrown religion – is Judaism, or Jews acting like Jews, and the New Testament, the new initially Reform Jewish religion that overthrew Judaism, is Christianity or Christians acting like Christians.

Look how different people act between the Old and New Testaments. Look how polar opposite the ideology is. That’s the difference between Christianity and Judaism.

With the overthrow, the Jews no longer got Israel. Instead, the Church became the new Israel and Israel was granted to the Christians.

Furthermore, the concept of Mercy was born, a concept completely absent in the Old Testament, which can be summed up as “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.”

I think even Islam allows forgiveness. People who don’t believe in forgiveness are almost evil. Or women spurned ha ha.

Jews, of course, say everything is anti-Semitic, so it follows that of course they say Replacement Theology is anti-Semitic. The thing is, Replacement Theory is Christianity in a nutshell. In that case, Christianity at its core is anti-Semitic according to its basic nature. I agree and have no problems with that notion. But I don’t think we Christians should use that to hate Jews. It’s a dumb reason to hate them.

Alt Left: Why SJW’s Are Almost Satanic

Vicmund the Han, seeing a comment written 2 1/2 years ago: what the fuck, rob why so racist, you cracker. Geez talk to him nicely and stop acting like a bitch, man. You are showing that socialist and communist are racist, dang man, chill.

I respond here:

Fighting Words Are Often Different from Racism

Anon: I understand the logic but it’s a low IQ move. You alienate massive swathes of people who might have otherwise sided with you.

Polar Bear: The low IQ normie move is to hold it against him. Nobody with a good sense of humor would hold it against him.

Yeah this is what I agree. The low IQ Normie thing to do is to point out some single old comment and scream, “Look, he’s an eeeeeevil raaaaaaaaaaaacist against Xpeople! Let’s all hate the evil racist forever like good SJW’s!”…

…and doing that without looking at the person’s body of work in which many times I have spoken very highly of Asians. Take all the times I spoke well of Asians versus one outburst in a fight, and it’s clear that I basically like them. That’s the holistic look, looking at the whole picture, seeing the forest for the trees, etc.

The SJW thing to do is to use one single comment or even sentence of yours to falsely characterize your basic views, fire you and ruin your career and life, and furthermore to hold it against you for the rest of your life, a very un-Christian and almost Satanic thing to do because it denies the essential element of Christianity, which is Mercy or Forgiveness.

Alt Left: The Difference Between Blacks and Whites Is There are Far More Bad Blacks Than Bad Whites

Yes, there are bad Whites, but there are not a lot of them.We all know there are scums amongst us. Except in the White community, someone like that usually gets a punch in the face. Or he gets his property damaged. Or gunshots in his window. Or a ton of menace and threats.  He goes out in town and people  confront him on the streets, walk up to him, try to start a fight with him, and literally order him out of town. The cops find out about it, don’t get involved, and seem to say, “He’s a scum. Go ahead and run his ass out of town. One less POS we have to deal with.”

Word travels fast among Whites. I would meet people who I had never met before, who would come up to me, and say, “Hey, Bob.” I’d look at them like, “Who the Hell are you?” Some of them were cops. How did they know my name? I’d meet people and they’d say, “You don’t know us but we know you. We’ve been watching you for years, five or ten years. We like you too. We went to some of your parties but you don’t recognize us.”

Also the White community polices its bad actors.

The Black community fails to set standards for behavior or sets them ridiculously low. It gladly tolerates minor shittiness that would get you a knuckle sandwich in Whiteville.

Like ripping people off for $5-15. Ghetto Blacks do this all the time. If you let them, they will take you for more, up to $50-80.

The ones who ripped me off were all Black women because Black men are so scary I mostly just don’t deal with them. But being a pig who screws anything that moves and thinks a lot of Black chicks are hot, of course I’ve dealt with Black chicks most of my life because I’m trying to fuck them. Duh.

They have a pretty damn poor track record. They were 5-10X more likely to steal from me than White women. White women don’t really rip you off. It’s considered to be low, literally “acting like a nigger.”

Whites don’t like to be called niggers or be told they act like niggers. And if you act bad enough, that is exactly what people will call you. You will essentially be evicted from the White race and be told you are Black.

We don’t care what you look like. You act like a Goddamned ghetto nigger, so that’s what you will be called. Niggers come in all races.

You will be told, “Leave this town and go to Detroit where you belong.”

Usually scumbag Whites who act very bad in our communities are White lowlifes who just so happen to typically be White trash trailor park types who are usually quite racist. Way more racist then the rest of the town calling him a nigger. Well, racist Whites really hate being called niggers. Them’s fighting words. They look like they will murder you when you call them that. It’s their ultimate raw nerve designed to push them over the edge: calling them niggers. So of course that is what these Whites precisely get called, just because we know they hate it that much.

White policing seems to work. The community polices itself. The Black community does not police its own. It sets very low bars for behavior and lets other Blacks get away with shit that you would get your ass kicked pretty quick in Whitetown.

You stole $15? First of all that’s pathetic, and you are truly being a nigger by stealing a petty amount of cash. If we get ripped off for a good amount, of course we hate you but we get it. It was worth it to grab your $240. In a way you admire them because at least the crime was understandable. And a lot of Whites will almost respect you for a good burn.

You showed us up. You shamed us. You showed us just how stupid we were. In the future we have to act smarter and quick being such chumps and marks. In that odd way, Whites get more furious about getting ripped off for $20 than for $200.

You go around Whiteville stealing $5-25 here and there on a regular basis, and you’re going to get hit. Punched. In the face. “Get the message, bitch? Knock it off!”

Blacks don’t do this. They act like this is normal behavior so amongst these Blacks you have all these sleazy people who think ripping you off for $5-25 is perfectly normal behavior and you are the jerk for getting mad about it. There’s no policing. It’s regarded as normal, like walking down the street.

The White Community Polices Its Own

A guy was going around ripping off us drug dealers and we got together and slashed all his tires. Then we engaged in nonstop phone terrorism against his home. Then we made a bomb and put it on his car and blew the Hell out of his windshield.

As if that weren’t enough, a bunch of other folks who he also ripped off went over to his car in his apartment complex garage in the middle of the night and somehow turned his car literally upside down! So when he came down to get in his VW bug the next morning, he saw a car that was literally sitting on its head with his wheels in the air. LOL! How the Hell do you remedy a situation like that?

The guy was a cocaine addict. Well, that was his excuse. He was really a Goddamned psychopath. He went around to all us dealers and got us to front him ounces of weed. $60 apiece back then. He nailed me for two.

Then he would take them, sell them for cocaine, hole up in some rat-hole motel in San Fransisco, and put a needle into his vein. When he came back, his attitude was, “Hey, fuck all of you. Sorry, I’m a cocaine addict and I can’t help being a thief. None of you are getting any of your money back. By the way, I did nothing wrong and of course we still friends even though I literally stole from you. And about the weed I stole? You’re never getting paid back. That’s the way of the world. Oh, and tough shit if you don’t like it. By the way, I’m an addict and I can’t help it. Ha ha.”

Well, we dealers were hopping furious at him because we were not used to being ripped off. Most of us never fronted because everyone is your best friend and would never rip you off and deserves a front and of course will pay you back except it’s not true. You get away with it for a while if you vet your friends well and act like you will murder them if you don’t the money. A little terror works wonders.

Problem is you can’t vet psychopaths. This guy, we had no idea he was a psychopath because it only came out in the context of drug addiction. But we thought he was being a huge ass even if he was an addict. “You’re an addict? So what! Pay for your dope, asshole. All the other addicts do!

But he was special so he got to steal, and ha ha, you can’t get him back neener neener. By the way, we’re still friends, right? God, the arrogance!

He looked me straight in the face and said, “Bob, I swear to God I will pay you back.” I’m good at reading people. I looked him hard straight in the face and sized him up. He saw me do it and straightened his back. “I swear to God, Bob.” I’ve literally known this guy like a good friend since, what? 7th grade? 1969? Here he is, it’s 1986, and he’s asking me to front him. I’ve known him for 17 damned years. I trust him, in part because of that.

Problem is psychopaths are chameleons. They look you straight in the face, and you gaze hard into their eyes, and you think, “There’s no possible way this guy could be lying to me. I know what a liar looks like, and this ain’t it.” He looks like a completely honest person. So you trust him, he fools you and he burns you. And that’s how psychopaths roll. And it’s how they’re so good at what they do.

Alt Left: Non-Whites: Please Culturally Appropriate Us Whites

Non-Whites and Especially Black People: Please Best Us, Show Us Up, Beat Us, Cause Us to Lose While You Win, and Culturally Appropriate Our White Asses All You Want

I don’t care how many Black people in this country want to start acting like White people. Y’all are free to act like us all you want. I won’t scream cultural appropriation. And it won’t worry me if you are spending more time with us.

Hence I would like to officially encourage as many Blacks in America as possible to talk, act, walk, and drive like Whites as much as we do or even moreso for that matter.

Try to best us. And do it all to get back at us.

Get back at our cracker asses by getting an advanced degree and besting your White peers. Please keep using and stealing our achievements. Even better, take our achievements and products and make them better. All just to show us up and get back at us.  Beat us. Outcompete us. Buy a bigger home than ours. Get a better job than we have. Make more money than our lazy asses do. Raise your kids better than we do to our rugrats.

And do it all to get us back for all the shitty racist stuff we peckerheads subjected you to.

Game/PUA: People Are Kinky, Perverted, and Sexually Weird as Hell

Black Women Who Are Going “White Cock Only”

My observation is that Blacks who get involved with Black Identity Politics don’t seem very happy. They seem pissed off and angry a lot of the time and many see Whites as their enemy.

I also met Blacks who had abandoned Black Identity Politics, more or less said the Hell with my race, and started liking White people a lot, identifying with them, trying to act like them, befriending them, refusing to see them as enemies.s

They never talked about racism against Blacks and said they didn’t experience it much because they loved White people too much. Some openly despised what they called ghetto Blacks and were going for White men because they were disgusted with the fucked up, criminal, ghetto men of their race. I’ve met a number of Black women like this from age 19 to age 47. Many of them were officially “White Cock Only.”

There was a sexual fetishization aspect to a lot of it. A Black guy who loved Whites was talking about fixing me up with his fat-assed bitch of a wife who he described as very racist against Whites, something that made him mad at her because this guy absolutely loved Whites, admired us, and saw us as role models.

To get her back or maybe punish her, he wanted to see her get fucked by a White man.

Sort of like some White might be annoyed at some racist White woman and want to see the bitch get fucked by some Black guy as punishment for being such a racist, hating bitch.

I know this sexual aspect seems weird and fucked up with aggressive and vengeance, and payback overtones, but trust me, a lot of people are all mixed up in exactly this way about sex and for women a lot of sex is mixed up with hate for the men who fuck them.

There is this whole fetish of women wanting to get fucked by guys they absolutely despised, liberal White guys wanting to get liberal women get cucked by asshole Trump MAGA assholes, liberal and even Communist women seeking out fascists, Proud Boys, Trump supporters, and MAGA dicks who they hate more than any other people in order to get fucked by the people they hate the most.

I know that seems weird and fucked up, but you have no idea how many people, especially women, are all perverted and fucked up sexually like this. When it comes to sex, don’t expect anyone to be sane! Especially the women. Humans are weird as fuck all when it comes to sex and you would not believe how many normal seeking people are incredibly weird, fucked up, sick, kinky and even perverted in bed.

If you knew them on the street and someone told you that, you would say no way is that true because it’s completely against this “totally normal and not weird sane person” persona you see when they are out of bed. As long as they are out of bed, they are pretty sane but once they get in bed and get sexual, they’re weird, insane, and fucked up as fuck-all.

Basically as far as I am concerned, humans are perverted!

Alt Left: Fighting Words Are Often Different from Racism

RL (2 1/2 years ago): Look, I am going to have to ban you. You’re a conservative anti-Communist quoting Robert Conquest. Nope, nope, nope. Not acceptable. This is a socialist site and we are Lefties here. We don’t allow conservatives to voice their opinions here. We simply don’t allow that.

I am so sorry my friend, but I think another website would be a better fit for you.

Jethro Cao: You do you geezer

RL (2 1/2 years ago): Ok Ching Chong I am going have to ban your chopstick ass. Back to Chinatown coolie or I give you a death by a thousand cuts!

Jethro Cao: Lmao you triggered like a lil bitch

RL (2 1/2 years ago): Your rickshaw is pointing that way, Chinaman. Out of town and off the site. Go back to your opium den or wherever you crawled out of.

HAVE A NICE DAY!

vicmund the han: what the fuck, rob why so racist, you cracker. Geez talk to him nicely and stop acting like a bitch, man. You are showing that socialist and communist are racist, dang man, chill

PolarBear: That’s classic Robert banning style. He’s not racist. He’ll do it to any group. Robert’s extremely pro-Asian. Putting out a few yellow fires doesn’t change that fact.

I’m actually pro-Asian and like hapas, but one of the meanest racial things I’ve posted was to an Asian.

Just be cool and nice and friendly, Vicmund, and don’t piss me off, and we’re fine. And if you catch me being a dick to you for no good reason, point it out and I will try to stop it. I don’t get in fights with friendly people.

I’m just messing around, man. I hate him so I’m going to attack him on anything that’s relevant to him: his race, his looks, his language, I don’t care. But it doesn’t mean I hate the whole race. I do this to anyone I hate of any other race. I unleash a bunch of racist slurs on them, mostly because I know people hate that more than anything else. I’m just trying to piss him off and push him to his limits.

Similarly, if I hate a gay man, I unleash a torrent of the worst homophobia against him. If I hate a woman, I rip loose with the most misogynist language you’ve ever heard.

But I like most races of people, I don’t really care about gay men, and I love women. So even though I love women, if some bitch pisses me off, I might unleash a nightmare of misogyny against her mostly because I know that pisses them off more than anything else.

If I hate someone, I think, “What can I say to this person that’s relevant to him that’s going to piss him off the most?” So I end up attacking their ethnicity, race, looks, weight, height, intelligence, religion, sexual orientation, gender, sexual identity, etc. But I don’t hate any race really, I’m not a misogynist and I could care less about gays and trannies. I also don’t hate homely people, fat people, short people, dumb people, any religion at all or religious people.

But I will use all that stuff against them because those are their raw nerves, and I’m trying to piss them off as much as possible. Hell, if I make them kill themselves, I might be happy.

It’s just fighting words. I only talk that way in a fight to use words as a weapon because I need weapons when I fight. Otherwise I don’t particularly have any prejudices about any types of humans, genders, orientations, identities, weight, height, etc.

Repost: The Purest Whites of Them All

Indicates that, contrary to White nationalists, the purest Whites of all are not Nordics but the Whites of the Caucasus and, of all folks, those nasty Jews! Holy Semites, Batman! What now?

The Purest Whites of Them All

This very term White itself is a little bit absurd, but as long as White nationalists talk about pure Whites versus non-pure Whites, let’s evaluate the matter.

On a board I used to frequent called Human Biodiversity (mostly non-racists interested in race, genetics, anthropology, etc.), someone said that the purest Whites are from the Caucasus and noted that White Power types don’t even consider them to be White! Recall that hundreds of Armenian White Power types were tossed off Stormfront recently for being “non-Whites.” So I decided to look into the matter. From my research:

Group          % Black
Iraqi Jews     0%
Iranian Jews   0%
Sephardic Jews 0%
Georgian Jews  0%
Kurdish Jews   0%
Ashkenazi Jews 0%*
Azerbaijan     0%
Armenia        0%
Georgia        0%

*Note that these are just averages. Some studies have claimed to show that individual Ashkenazim have some Black in them.

Figures from my post A Little Black in All Of Us.

So the only Whites that don’t have any Black blood are Mizrachi (Eastern) and Mountain Jews and Whites from the Caucasus above. All other White groups have some Black in them. Horrors! Sephardic refers to the Jews of the Mediterranean – Spanish, Italian, Greek, and Turkish Jews.

On the board where I posted this, I got some hostile responses. One asked me why Jews should have avoided this presumably terrible situation (having a few drops of Black).

I suggested that in part it was due to the purity of the bloodline in the Jews and their long-term hostility to mixing with non-Jews. Ashkenazim came to Europe in ~300 or so and moved into the Continent over the next 700 years, taking in some non-Jewish genes. Typically, Jewish men would move to a new area, marry a non-Jewish woman who would convert and then stay pure after that.

After 1000, Talmudic rules kicked in with very heavy penalties for Jews, especially Jewish women, having sex with non-Jews, and only 1 in 200 matings in Ashkenazim were with non-Jews. I suspect that there were few Blacks in Europe from 500-1000. What few there were lived in far Southern Europe.

After 1000, there seem to have been a few more Blacks moving into Europe as part of colonial armies, freed slaves, and whatnot. The Mizrachi Jews have no Black in them because they were not Muslim. I would suspect that Christian Arabs also have little to no Black in them.

The slavery of Blacks in the Arab World was very much associated with Islam. Jews did not keep slaves. In the Arab World, the Black genes came from Arab men having children with the Black slave women. Black slaves hardly had sex with Arab women at all, although there was some of this in Yemen.

The Yemeni Jews are the only Jews outside Africa to have some Black blood, and they have a fair amount. I’m not sure how this came about, but Blacks have probably been a more important part of Yemen than any other Arab country.

The Caucasus has no Black blood because there were probably few to no Black slaves in the region. Most of the region is Christian, and the Muslims there did not keep slaves. If anything, the region’s Christians were raided by the Turks for White slaves. See Circassian Beauties for more.

Interestingly, the reason that the women of the Caucasus were so prized by the Turks was because they were considered to be the purest Whites of all (see above). The same pure Whites who get tossed out of White Power forums on the net. Go figure.

Repost: Berber Genes in Europeans

Interesting stuff about Berber % in modern Europeans and speculations about the Berbers being the remains of some of the most ancient proto-Caucasians. In other words, if you are White, the Berbers are like your most ancient grandparents.

Berber Genes in Europeans

It seems reasonable that Southern Europeans especially would have a considerable amount of Berber genes in them. This has been disputed by certain Southern European White racist bloggers like Dienekes Pontikos and Racial Reality. These bloggers are vociferously opposed to the notion that Southern Europeans are anything but pretty near pure White.

For instance, here Dienekes states gives Berber percentages in Europeans as follows:

Nation          Berber %

Spain           1%
Italy           1.75%
France          2%

I am going to disagree with this assessment, though I admit I am not an expert on the subject. Looking at this journal article (table here). we come up with something a lot different. From Cruciani et al 2004:

Ethnic Group                Berber %

Spain (Cantabrian Pasiegos) 30%
Spain (Cantabria)           17%
Southern Portugal           12.2%
Northern Portugal            4%
Spain (Basques)              3.6%
France                       3.5%
Spain (Asturias)             2.2%
Southern Spain               1.6%
Northern Italy               1.5%
Central Italy                1.2%
Italy (Sicily)                .7%
Sardinia                      .5%

The Berber genes seem to have come to Europe for the most part in the past 3,000 yrs. Cantabria is an interesting place. The Cantabrians, in particular the Pasiegos, are said to be quite distinct genetically, almost like the Basques. No one really knows what this is all about.

During the Moorish invasion, they conquered all the way up to the southern mountains of Cantabria, a province in the far north of Spain on the coast next to the Basque region. Perhaps this is where the Moorish (Berber) genes came in.

Looking at the figures above, most Berber genes appear to have gone into Iberia in tandem with the Moorish conquest. Strangely, they are concentrated in the North of Spain. This doesn’t make much sense to me.

The Cantabrian language is still spoken here. It is said to be a dialect of Spanish, but actually it is part of the Extremaduran language spoken in Caceres in Extremadura. People say it is dying out, but in the mountains children are still being raised speaking Cantabrian. They show up in school as Cantabrian monolinguals and their teachers cannot understand them.

Extremaduran-Cantabrian is really just Eastern Leonese, which got cut off from the rest of Leonese ~400 years ago and came under heavy influence from Old Castilian. Nowadays East Leonese proper scarcely exists in either Asturias or Leon. Extremaduran itself spoken in Caceres is endangered, has no official status, and but has 500,000 speakers, including monolinguals (!). A Spanish informant who grew up in the region told me that Extremaduran has only 17% intelligibility with Spanish. And he has been hearing it off and on his whole life.

Leonese has only 50,000 speakers, is considered very endangered, but does have special status in Castile and Leon. And children are still being raised speaking Southeastern Leonese or Porteno. Leonese is part of the Asturian-Leonese language, with Asturian spoken in the north in Asturias and Leonese spoken to the south in Castile y Leon.

Asturian has 550,000 speakers, but is considered endangered.

A related language is Mirandese, spoken in Portugal. This language looks a lot like Portuguese, but it is actually a branch of Asturian-Leonese. It has 83% intelligibility with Southeastern Leonese or Porteno. It has only 15,000 speakers, but it seems to be recovering. It is spoken in Miranda do Douro state, and this is another name for the language.

About the Berbers, I consider them to be one of the most ancient, if not the most ancient, Caucasian groups in existence. Berbers go back at least 20,000 years and possibly up to 50,000 years in North Africa. Much of the Berber group may have come from the Middle East in the past 10,000 years. There is a huge split between Berbers and Sub-Saharan Africans.

The Mozabites, the Tuaregs and the Chenini-Douiret are quite different from the rest of the Berbers. Why? Probably genetic drift.

These men are Mozabites, possibly some of the most ancient Caucasians on Earth, with a genetic line going back up to 50,000 years. Though White nationalists probably freak out if you say these people are White, they are most definitely Caucasians. The fellow in the right forefront also looks Caucasian – he looks somewhat East Indian.

The two men standing at the top could be East Indians or some strange Mediterranean type. Given that East Indians are also one of the most ancient Caucasian groups on Earth, it figures that these Berbers resemble Indians. Both groups came out of the Middle East – the Berbers probably 42,000 years ago, and the East Indians about 17,000 years ago.

There are few genetic differences between Berbers and North African Arabs, which means that North African Arabs are simply Arabized Berbers. There are lots of great photos of Berbers at this link.

The origin of the Berbers is nevertheless quite obscure. This article suggests that both Berbers and Europeans came out of the Levant about 40-45,000 years ago. Obviously, prior to that, they came out of Africa. A date of 40-45,000 years is about right for the genesis of the Caucasian race. The homeland of the Caucasians is often said to be located in the Caucasus itself.

This line rose in Southwest Asia (the Caucasus) and then moved to Africa along the Mediterranean, not via Somalia – Yemen as the Out of Africans went. They moved first into the Levant, and from there went to Europe and to North Africa, both at the same time. This line went to the Cro-Magnon as well as the Berber, and both came out of the Levant about 40-45,000 years ago.

Another very interesting looking Mozabite fellow. There are some Mediterranean types who look something like this, but I have a hard time pinning this phenotype down. Clearly, they are Caucasians, but other than that, they look pretty sui generis. A recent genetics study, though poorly done, seemed to show the Mozabites as one of the most ancient ethnic groups on Earth and a source population for many other groups outside of Africa.

The Uighurs in Central Asia were also a source population for many diverse groups all over the place. The Uighurs may be the remains of ancient Caucasian-Asian hybrids that go back up to 40,000 years.

The first Caucasians were probably a mixture of 1/2 Africans (possibly Maasai and Tutsi types from Central Africa) mixed with ancient proto-Asians from China (who may have resembled the Ainu). From this strange mixture arose the original Caucasians, probably in the Caucasus and southern Russia, but maybe also in Iran.

There is good evidence that the first Caucasians, including the Cro-Magnons, looked a lot like Black Africans, in particular the Caucasoid-appearing Africans such as the Maasai and the Tutsi. Cro-Magnon skeletons look like the Masai more than any other modern skeleton. Cro-Magnon skulls are more likely to be confused with Negroid skulls than any other.

References

Cruciani, F.; La Fratta, R.; Santolamazza, P.; Sellitto, D.; Pascone, R.; Moral, P.; Watson, E.;  Guida, V.; Colomb, EB.; Zaharova, B.; Lavinha, J.; Vona, G.; Aman, R.; Cali, F.; Akar, N.; Richards, M.; Torroni, A.; Novelletto, A.; and Scozzari, R. 2004. “Phylogeographic Analysis Of Haplogroup E3b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events within and out of Africa.” American Journal of Human Genetics 74:1014-1022

Repost: Alt Left: The Birth of the Caucasian Race

The Birth of the Caucasian Race

An early European, possibly of the M173 line. He may somewhat resemble a Khoisan or Bushman.An early European, possibly of the M173 line. He may somewhat resemble a Khoisan or Bushman.

A reconstruction of a very early European, based on fragments found in caves in the Carpathian Mountains of Romania from 2002 on, offers a tantalizing glimpse at what early Europeans must have looked like.

He actually looks a bit like Richard Steele, boxing referee and possible throwback.

Previously, the oldest European skull was 30,000 years ago and was said to look like a modern European, with closest affinities to Finns.

As you can see, the White nationalists are furious about this. White nationalism has always opposed the Out of Africa theory, now accepted as the Gold Standard by nearly all of anthropology. It’s just too offensive to imagine that Grandpa may have been a nigger*.

Yet obviously he was.

The “White European” phenotype as we know it today did not come into existence until after 12,000 years ago, or maybe sooner.

Before that, European Caucasians resemble Arabs. For instance, A 24,000 year old Cro-Magnon European shows DNA similarities to Near East (Arabs or the Caucasus). A 23,000 year old Italian Cro-Magnon sample genetically resembles modern Middle Easterners from Palestine, Syria, Yemen and Iran.

It’s time for WN’s to quit claiming Cro-Magnon as The Original White Man. Forget it! He was a Middle Easterner – an Arab – Iranian type. As almost all WN’s say that Arabs are not White, and many, even more bizarrely, state that Iranians are not White (genetically, Iranians look like British, Danes and Norwegians), WN’s need to quit claiming Cro-Magnon as some Super White Cave Man.

The original Proto-Asians came out of Africa 65,000 years ago, probably descendants of the M168 line, although NE Asians are probably partly M89.

The original Caucasians did indeed come out of Africa about 40-45,000 years ago, probably descendants of the M89 line. Whites and Caucasians in general are probably a legacy of M89 and not M168.

M89 birthed M45, which are the Proto-Amerindians of 35,000 years ago on the steppes and in the Mongolia-Siberia region. A child of M45, M173, were the first Europeans, and may be represented by this fellow. Later, M343, the real Cro-Magnon, appeared. It is a bit confusing whether Cro-Magnon is M173 or M343 or both.

The early genesis of the Caucasoid race involved a large injection of Asian genes from Mongolia, Siberia and East Turkestan. This occurred about 40-45,000 years and represents about 2/3 of the Proto-Caucasian genetic line (Bowcock 1991). These Proto-East Asians probably looked something like Aborigines or possibly Ainu. Modern NE Asians do not appear until about 9,000 years ago.

Before that, all Asians looked like Aborigines, Melanesians, or Ainus. As noted above, the modern European phenotype also only appears 10,000 years ago. So both modern Whites and modern East Asians only go back 10,000 years, to the Last Glacial Maximum. All humans had dark skin until 10,000 years ago. What birthed light skin? The glaciers.

For an analysis of this early process, which injected a lot of Proto-Asian genes into the Northern European Cro-Magnon line, see this early discussion on my now-banned blog:

Based on y-chromosome lineages, Atlantic and north European men (Cro-Magnon descendants) are related to N.E Asian men.

They all descend from haplogroup Q which arose in the north Himalayas and south Siberia 45,000 years ago, with one group branching off west eventually ending up in the Pyrenees, the Caspian sea and northern Scandinavia. The other group would go across east Asia and even to the Americas.

Indeed, there were movements in the other direction too – from Northern Europe back to Siberia. An ancient line of Europeans called Orcadians (named after barren islands in the north of Scotland) went back to Siberia at some point and contributed significantly to the genetic line of the Yakut, a Siberian grouping that is now only 6% Caucasian. The Yakut as ancient Scotlanders? Incredible.

The other 1/3 of the line was an early African  (Bowcock 1991), possibly a Khoisan or Bushman type, but maybe a Proto-Caucasian African out of South Africa (see below). Out of the Proto-African and Proto-Asian mixture was birthed the Proto-Caucasian.

The African phenotype was Bushman or Hottentot or S African Proto-Caucasoid, not Bantuoid, because modern Blacks do not appear in Africa until about 12,000 years ago. Before that, all African look like Pygmies or Bushmen.

I have always wondered what these folks looked like, and this is an interesting part of our heritage.

In the Amren article linked above, commenter JPT is not correct that Whites are on our way to being a different species. Caucasians are closer to Blacks than any other group since we were the last to split from them. Ouch! That’s painful, huh WN’s? Caucasians and NE Asians are also quite close, but not nearly as close as Caucasians and Africans.

The furthest apart are Blacks and Aborigines. If anyone is evolutionarily on their way to becoming a separate species or subspecies, it is the Aborigines and the Papuans of New Guinea. The distance between them and Africans is greater than the distance between any two human groups.

It might be interesting to see what happens if they mate. I am pretty sure that they can mate successfully, but it might be interesting to see if their couples are less fertile than others. As genetic distance increases, infertility does too, because you are moving closer and closer to separate species. I know that Europeans and Aborigines can mate successfully, as there has been a ton of this going on since the first White invaders attacked (I mean landed on) Australia several hundred years ago.

Speaking of Aborigines, yes, they are very different, but they are not Homo Erectus as many say. They are fully human. Homo Erectus lives to this day in large numbers in San Fransisco. Whoa! Sorry, that was a joke!

What follows is reconstruction of the genesis of the early Caucasians.

First of all, a line descended from the original M1 line out of Africa arose in Southwest Asia, frankly in the Levant (Israel, Palestine, Lebanon and Syria). This line had come out of Africa via Somalia to Yemen and Arabia 40-45,000 years ago.

It’s known that they went back to Africa, but it was always thought that they went back the same way that they came, via the Red Sea. Instead, they moved out through the Sinai and into North Africa to become the Proto-Berbers. This same line moved into Europe via the same Mediterranean route, this time along the Northern Mediterranean. These folks indeed may have been related to the fellow pictured above.

The most succinct summary of the Proto-Caucasians is found here. The actual birthplace of the Proto-Caucasians was in the Caucasus, as one may expect. A figurine has been found in the Don River area of southern Russia dating from 45,000 years ago. It is thought that this is a remnant of this earliest Proto-Caucasian culture.

Proto-Caucasian Man came out of the Caucasus 39-52,000 years ago. One went west to Europe (possibly resulting in the fellow above) and N Africa (this is the line out of the Levant described above) and other east to NE Asia (probably the M89 line described above, and this in part explains Caucasian affinities of Koreans, North Chinese, Mongolians, etc.

There were also further returns to North Africa from Caucasus and India 30,000 years ago. It appears that the birthing grounds of the Caucasian Race were in the Caucasus, the Middle East, India and North Africa. The highly modern East Indian and North African Berbers – both diverse groups of Caucasians – may be the remains of the earliest Proto-Caucasians.

It is interesting to postulate on what the Proto-Caucasians who moved out of Africa via the Red Sea 42,000 years ago looked like. No one knows. However, curiously, 36,000 years ago a new line arose in South Africa that did not look like the Khoisan types prevalent at the time. Instead, it looks like a Caucasian, specifically like Cro-Magnon and other Late Pleistocene cave man types in Europe.

No one knows what happened to this line, but this Proto-Caucasian in South Africa 36,000 years ago could have moved up to the Rift Valley area and then to Arabia to give rise to the Caucasians. Keep in mind that by the time that Africans moved out of Africa, only 2 lines left.

At 65,000 YBP (years before present) an incredible 40 different lines had already evolved separately in Africa, and they were all quite different. Only two of these 40 diverse lines left Africa. The rest stayed and birthed the tremendously diverse African race of today.

It’s often said that the Khoisan-Bushmen of Southwest Africa are the most ancient living people. However, recent research shows that this is wrong. The most ancient humans are from East Africa, specifically from around Kenya and Tanzania.

This includes the Masai (thought to be originally from the Sudan), the Sandawe (a Khoisan type in northern Kenya), the Datog (similar to the Masai, and probably also originally from the Sudan), and the Burunge and Gorowaa, both of whom came from Ethiopia recently.

The African Eve, the first human, was probably a Northeast African or East African. Man probably originated in Ethiopia or Sudan, close to the Rift Valley that transformed the first men from apes and watered the fields of the long line of Homo that ended in ourselves.

From a dead link discussing Tishkoff’s findings:

Sarah Tishkoff of the University of Maryland and a team of coworkers reported genetic analyses of more than 600 living Tanzanians from 14 different tribes and four linguistic groups. They analyzed mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) the tool of choice for tracing ancestry because it is inherited only through the mother as part of the ovum.

The number of mutations that have accumulated in mtDNA is a rough measure of the time that has passed since that lineage first appeared.

The owner of the first modern human MtDNA (by definition, a woman) is often referred to as “Eve,” although many women of that time are likely to have shared similar mtDNA.

Genetic diversity

Tishkoff and her colleagues chose to investigate East African peoples for specific reasons. The number of linguistic and cultural differences is unusually high in the region, as is the variation in physical appearance – East Africans are tall or short, darker-skinned or lighter-skinned, round-faced or narrow-faced, and so on.

This observation suggested that the genetic composition of the population is highly diverse, and as expected, the team found substantial variation in the mtDNA.

In fact, members of five of the lineages showed an exceptionally high number of mutations compared with other populations, indicating that these East African lineages are of great antiquity.

Identified by tribal affiliation, these are: the Sandawe, who speak a “click” language related to that of the Bushmen of the Kalahari desert; the Burunge and Gorowaa, who migrated to Tanzania from Ethiopia within the last five thousand years; and the Maasai and the Datog, who probably originated in the Sudan.

The efforts of the University of Maryland group reflect a substantially larger database and more certain geographic origins for its subjects than earlier mtDNA studies.

Further, the work by Tishkoff’s team reveals that these five East African populations have even older origins than the !Kung San of southern Africa, who previously had the oldest known mtDNA.

“These samples showed really deep, old lineages with lots of genetic diversity,” Tishkoff says. “They are the oldest lineages identified to date. And that fact makes it highly likely that ‘Eve’ was an East or Northeast African. My guess is that the region of Ethiopia or the Sudan is where modern humans originated.”

For more links between the Tutsi – Masai types and the original Europeans, see the following early discussions (here, here, here) from my previous (now shut down) blog. It’s a bit hard to get your head around, but if you think hard, you can start to understand it.

I spent months trying to figure out exactly what this guy was saying, and I think I have it now. His intriguing comments strongly suggest that the earliest Cro-Magnon ancestors were derived from populations that are now the East African Masai, Tutsi, etc:

Masai and Tutsi are doliocephalic and orthaganus. Tutsi and Masai Central African types are quite low-skulled, like the original Cro-Magnons were. Also MtDNA retrieved from a Cro-Magnon in Europe was found to belong to haplogroup *N, which directly and immediately descends from L3, which originated in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Some of its clades went south and then east onto Australasia, while the northern clade went to the Middle East and gave birth to *N, and other clades went to West Africa and south.

It’s the northern subclades of L3 that gave birth to *N (like l3a1) that are the most closely related L3 members, and Sub Saharan Africans are closest to *N bearing Cro-Magnons, as they are their most immediate and closest ancestors.

It would be interesting to see if the Tutsi and Masai have any of these northern subclades of L3, as they are more closely related to Cro-Magnon *N than any other MtDNA lineage in the world.

What I cant get my head around is the overlap in identical SNP clusters (Caucasoid) between populations of predominantly different patrilineal and matrilineal ancestry. e.g. e3b Ethiopians (also predominantly indigenous African on mtDNA) and r1a/I1a Norwegians.

R1a and Ia descend from K, which arose in the Middle East, and e3b descends from YAP, which arose in Uganda. The nearest ancestor of R* and I* and J* Europeans/Middle Easterners with E3b Ethiopians is the M168 male, which is the ancestor of all other modern humans, so they share as little as possible recent ancestry.

On mtDNA East Africans are predominantly L3, which is the direct ancestor of mtDNA N*, which is the original Middle Eastern Caucasoid mtDNA marker, which has been retrieved from 2 European Cro-Magnon specimens too. I wonder if East Africans have northern subclades of L3, as they would be the most closely related L3 subclades to N*.

See below. They do look like White people, don’t they?

An example of a Dinka, an example of what I call a West Sudan Elongated Desert-Adapated African. This man is a negotiator for the SPLA, the Sudanese People's Liberation Army.An example of a Dinka, an example of what I call a West Sudan Elongated Desert Adapted African. This man is a negotiator for the SPLA, the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army.

A Masai man. The more I look at this guy, the more I think he looks like our 36,000 year old Caucasian guy reconstructed at the start of the post. Or am I hallucinating? A Masai man. The more I look at this guy, the more I think he looks like our 36,000 year old Caucasian guy reconstructed at the start of the post. Or am I hallucinating?


More Dinka West Sudan Elongated Desert African phenotypes.

Another West Sudanic type, from an old anthropological textbook, back in the days when race still existed and we could still discuss phenotypes and whatnot. You know, before the Cultural Marxist dickwads took over?Another West Sudanic type, from an old anthropological textbook, back in the days when race still existed and we could still discuss phenotypes and whatnot. You know, before the Cultural Marxist lunatics took over?

A Tutsi, possible ancestors of the original Proto-Caucasians. Note the Caucasoid appearance.

Another Tutsi. I must say they are handsome folks. Hey WN's, say hello to Grandpa!
Another Tutsi. I must say they are handsome folks. Hey WN’s, say hello to Grandpa!

Yet another Tutsi. I can't get over how much these Africans look like Caucasians or Whites in facial structure.
Yet another Tutsi. I can’t get over how much these Africans look like Caucasians or Whites in facial structure.

Eastern Desert Elongated Africans, possible progenitors of the Caucasoids, look like Caucasians. One argument is that this is due to inbreeding with Caucasoids. In fact, they are pure Africans. See the chart.
Eastern Desert Elongated Africans, possible progenitors of the Caucasoids, look like Caucasians. One argument is that this is due to inbreeding with Caucasoids. In fact, they are pure Africans. See the chart.

Another chart showing the African purity of the possible proto-Caucasoids of Africa. Take home point: Caucasian appearance is not due to Caucasoid interbreeding; it's de novo.
Another chart showing the African purity of the possible Proto-Caucasoids of Africa. Take home point: Caucasian appearance is not due to Caucasoid interbreeding; it’s de novo.

*Used sardonically.

References

Bowcock, A. M.; Kidd, J. R.; Mountain, J. L.; Hebert, J. M.; Carotenuto, L; Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. and Kid, K. K. 1991. “Drift, Admixture, and Selection in Human Evolution: A Study With DNA Polymorphisms.” Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1991 February 1; 88(3): 839–843.

Cabrera, Vicente M, Maca-Meyer, Nicole, González, Ana M, Larruga, José M, Flores, Carlos. 2001. “Major Genomic Mitochondrial Lineages Delineate Early Human Expansions”. BMC Genetics 2:13

Hellenthal G, Auton A, Falush D. 2008. “Inferring Human Colonization History Using a Copying Model”. PLoS Genetics 4(5).

Wade, Nicholas. 2006. Before the Dawn: Recovering the Lost History of Our Ancestors. East Rutherford, New Jersey, USA: Penguin Group.

Repost: Alt Left: Black Males and Testosterone: Evolution and Perspectives

Black Males and Testosterone: Evolution and Perspectives

Repost from the old blog. Interesting stuff.

Development of agriculture in modern Blacks also seems to have led to high testosterone levels. Groups with the highest testosterone in the world today are primitive agriculturalists.

Hunter-gatherers tend to have lower testosterone. This is because in hunter-gatherer society, women need men to survive. So they  grab one pretty quickly and get married.

In primitive agricultural societies, women do not need men, since they can farm on their own. So they can afford to be choosy. These societies have tended to develop in a polygynous way, where a few high-ranking males monopolize most of the females, and the rest of the guys get none. It’s kind of like high school, except it keeps going for your whole life.

Sub-Saharan Blacks are highly polygynous, and this resulted in intense competition for fewer women and selection for very robust male body types. SS Blacks are more robust than Whites on all variables. In Namibia, the polygynous Kavango have much higher testosterone than the much less polygynous !Kung.

Young Black males have higher levels of active testosterone than European and Asian males. Asian levels are intermediate to Blacks and Whites, but Asians have lower levels of a chemical needed to convert testosterone to its active agent, so effectively they have lower levels. Androgen receptor sensitivity is highest in Black men, intermediate in Whites and lowest in Asians.

US Blacks have the highest rate of prostate cancer on Earth, and the levels in African Blacks may be just as high.

Blacks do not retain high testosterone throughout life.

Blacks have much higher testosterone levels than Whites from age 7-24. After 24, the difference starts shrinking, and by the early 30′s, it is gone. In later years, White men have higher testosterone than Black men. This makes it very difficult if not impossible to explain differing behavioral variables, including higher rates of crime and aggression, in Black males over the age of 33 on the basis of elevated testosterone levels.

Higher testosterone levels are linked to violent behavior. High testosterone results in lower IQ in males but better fighting and mating skills. Interestingly, the black male IQ is 83 and black female IQ is 87.

By the same token, Black females earn 99% of what White females earn when they are employed, implying either than White racism is minor in the US against Black females, or whatever racism exists is being effectively countered by diversity goals, affirmative action and whatnot.

Testosterone is an interesting hormone. A little extra testosterone makes a man – good visuospatial skills, etc. Lots of extra testosterone is too much of a good thing – it lowers IQ.

In the UK, young Black females have higher IQ’s than young Black males. However, Black females also have higher testosterone than White females.

Black boys’ exposure to high testosterone begins in the womb. Black mothers’ wombs have higher testosterone, and this feeds to the fetus.

Assuming that higher Black testosterone levels are a causative agent in Black crime, aggression and lowered IQ, experimental interventions could be tried: two pills – first one pill to lower testosterone to Black fetus’s brains by 20%, and possibly another pill to lower Black infant testosterone by 20% – could be beneficial. Such an intervention could possibly raise Black male IQ and decrease Black male crime.

Of course, in our insane PC anti-racist society, such interventions are banned now and forevermore as “racist.”

Repost: Alt Left: The Development of Agriculture in Africa

Repost from the old site. Great stuff. Theorizes that the birth of the modern Black race only goes back 6-12,000 years and speculates on how it developed in conjunction with primitive agriculture. Also suggests that Black Africans were probably the first agriculturalists on Earth.

The Development of Agriculture in Africa

Hang out long enough on White Nationalist fora, and after a while you will be amazed at how many White racists actually believe that Black Africans were Stone Age people who had no metalworking, no agriculture and no civilization of any sort by the time the Europeans contacted them.

It’s true that Africa is not known for its incredible cultural achievements. But it wasn’t exactly a complete backwater either. The White Nationalist line that Africans were a Paleolithic people with only stone implements and no agriculture is surprisingly widespread. Too bad it is horribly wrong.

First of all, agriculture comes to the Sahel as early as 9000 BC. It comes to West Africa around the same time. Later it goes to Southern and Eastern Africa. The “Niggers are too stupid to grow food” line, appalling in its stupidity, continues to retain a lot of currency. Africans have been growing food for 1000’s of years.

The latest permutation has to do with Zimbabwe. Ruined by US and UK sanctions that have completely shut the nation out of the international trade and banking system, the economy is imploding and people are starving.

Instead of blaming imperialism, White racists blame those dumb niggers for overthrowing White rule and confiscating White farms where 5,000 White farmers had 50% of agricultural land and all of the good land. With the Whites thrown off the land, the narrative goes, these dumb niggers were too stupid to even figure out how to grow food.

They need Homo Blancas Superiorus to show them how to plant seeds and hoe rows. Without White Johnny Appleseeds to grow the food for them that they are too stupid to grow for themselves, the dumb niggers in Africa will all starve to death.

Incredible.

All over Africa, there are hardly any Whites left. Blacks are growing food all over Africa, in every country, in vast numbers. Black Africans are surely smart enough to figure out how to grow food to eat.

In order to look into this story in greater depth, we need to look at the development of Blacks in Africa from an anthropological point of view. The story of Stone Age Africans with no agriculture until Whitey shows up is nonsense.

White Nationalists counter that African Blacks, even over 10,000 years ago, were too stupid to figure out how to grow stuff on their own, so they had to learn from superior Caucasian North Africans. This theory is humorous because in general, White Nationalists refer to North African Caucasians (Berbers and Egyptians) as non-Whites.

Furthermore, at over 10,000 years ago, I’m not sure it matters how Black Africans got agriculture. Cultural diffusion occurs everywhere, and true innovation is pretty hard to pin down. Finally, there is not a lot of evidence that North African Caucasians innovated agriculture at such an early date themselves. As a result, the whole discussion is rendered academic as just another way for racist Whites to kick the Black man while he’s down.

First of all, the original Africans looked like Pygmies or Khoisan (Bushmen). From 6,000-12,000 years ago, Pygmy-Khoisan types traverse from archaic types to the modern Blacks we know today. Modern Blacks are a young race. Pygmies and Khoisan resemble our oldest human ancestors. They have light brown skin and gracile, child-like bodies.

Modern Blacks mostly speak languages related to a huge family called Niger-Congo. During the transition from archaic to modern Blacks, modern Blacks developed agriculture. Blacks had agriculture or proto-agriculture possibly as early as 10,000 years ago when Proto-Niger-Congo first started breaking up.

This means that Black Africans were actually some of the first agriculturalists on Earth. Sango Region hunter-gatherers were the first Blacks to develop agriculture. At first they protected wild grain fields, and then made clearings for wild yams and oil palms. At 12,000 years before present (YBP) they were already using hoes that they made, and at 8-9,000 YBP, they were tending pili nut trees with agricultural implements.

There are agricultural terms in reconstructed Proto-Niger-Congo from before 10,000 YBP, so they must have had some form of agriculture. Mande  is a branch  of Niger-Congo. Proto-Mande speakers inhabited the Niger’s headwaters at the Mali-Guinea border near the modern city of Bamako, and they were the first group to break off from Proto-Niger-Congo.

The Fouta Djallon Highlands in Southeastern Guinea, source of the Niger River. This is probably where Black African agriculture, cultivated by Proto-Mande speakers, began over 10,000 years ago.

 

Modern Black Africans are associated with the spread of agriculture in Africa at this time, and this agricultural spread is also located at the headwaters of the Niger, because this is the cradle of the Sudanic Food Complex.

Also, agriculture independently evolved in West Africa (African yams, kola nut) and Ethiopia (coffee, tef) during the period of 4,000-9,000 YBP.

Animal husbandry was widely adopted, and by 7,200 YBP, the Sahel had a full array of food production (cultivated crops, animal husbandry) before this full array was developed in Egypt. So the movement of agriculture in its full array from North African Caucasians to Sahelian Blacks is shown to be a lie.

It’s true that Africa south of the Equator lagged behind, and White Nationalists love to go about this, but the truth is that there were no animals to domesticate down there, nor were there any plants to domesticate either.

It’s doubtful that the Sahelian Blacks were any smarter than the ones south of Equator. They were just better positioned to receive animals for husbandry from Southwest Asia, and they had plants that could be domesticated.

Development of agriculture in modern Blacks also seems to have led to high testosterone levels along with more robust body types. See the prior post for more on that.

The first real classical Black Negroid skeleton dates to only 6,500 YBP. Before that, at 12,000 YBP, they look more like the San or Pygmies. Within 6,000 years as Africans moved to agriculture, Blacks changed from gracile archaic types to robust Negroid types. At 6,000-7,000 YBP, the agricultural transition was full.

In contrast to Afrocentric hokum about Black Athena and Black Egypt, modern Blacks do not appear in Egyptian paintings before 4,000 YBP. Before that, the Blacks in northeast Africa, Nubia and Ethiopia were more gracile San (Bushmen) types.

Modern Blacks reach the middle Nile by around 4,000 YBP. At 3,000 YBP, the Bantus spread from Cameroon all through East, Central and Southern Africa, of course bringing agriculture, and yes, iron-making, with them.

Nubians do not obtain their modern Black appearance until 2,700 years ago. Before that, the Nubians and presumably the Hamites look like today’s Egyptians.

Black populations in Africa do not bode well for Philippe Rushton’s R-K Theory. The oldest African populations of all, the Pygmies and the San, with presumably some of the lowest IQ’s (the San have IQ’s of about 54), are very highly K-selected.

They have low fecundity (are not very fertile) and very long intervals between births. This is normally what is expected of a super-K-selected group such as NE Asians, and is said to be associated with high IQ. Yet in the San, it is associated with the lowest IQ’s on Earth. Rushton’s theory does not smell right.

References

Rushton, J. P. 1995. Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective, 2nd Special Abridged Edition. Port Huron, MI: Charles Darwin Research Institute.

Alt Left: A Tragic Template for Anti-Semitism

If Jews want to lower anti-Semitism, why don’t they quit acting like they just out of the pages of the Protocols or Der Strumer? If your group is being stereotyped negatively and you dislike this, why don’t you quit acting like the stereotype? You know, like Step 1, before you do anything else? But oh no, we can’t have that. All the Jews get to continue acting out the worst anti-Semitic stereoty0pes, which are justifiably hated by Gentiles and all decent people for that matter, but everybody has to quit hating them.

It’s like:

Group A, a single group, act like total assholes.

Group B, which consists of all of the other groups, get mad at them, of course, for being such dicks. “Quit acting like total assholes, you jerks! You’re starting to really piss us off!”

Group A freaks out, call this criticism evil, racist, bigoted, murderous, genocidal pure irrational hate and wages war on the Group B. The message: “You’re evil scum for hating us! Quit hating us and maybe we’ll start liking you again!”

Group B says, “Quit being dicks, then!”

Group A says, “Nope, we get to keep on being the biggest dicks on Earth, but we’re going to make it illegal for you to hate us over our behavior! And now we hate you way more than we did before.”

Group B says, “Well, fuck that shit! Now you’re making us hate you even more, you fucks!”

Result: The phenomenon known as “anti-Semitism” is created and rages across the land, causing lots of unpleasantness, hostility and fighting and even leaving a few casualties here and there. The cucked leaders of the country claim that this “anti-Semitism” is a scourge upon the land and wage war on it.

Next result: Group B gets tired of being represented by a bunch of cucked wussies who suck up to their enemies. In response, they form a nationalist movement to protect their interests.

Next result: The nationalists achieve power.

Next result: First thing they do? Throw all of the Group dicks out of the goddamned country!

Next result: Jews wail and cry, “Everyone hates us for no reason! We dindu nuffin!”  Their Jewish mothers yell, “They wuz good boys!”

This is, briefly, the template for anti-Semitism in my opinion. I believe it had a lot of terrible results though. It’s not illegal to be an asshole or act like a dick. Hell, it’s not even against the law! I don’t mind a group of people throwing the dicks out of the country though. It’s like a guy’s acting up in a bar, and the bartender throws him out. Being a dick is never a reason to kill any human being, not even one.

It’s much less justifiable to massacre large groups of people acting like dicks. Many terrible pogroms were set upon the Jews. In one case in far Southern Germany several centuries ago, enraged Gentiles raided a city of 50,000 Jews and murdered every human in the land, men, women, and children all. I can never support such crimes. It’s sick and gross.

And in many cases, Jews were persecuted and even mass murdered in response to imaginary crimes, such as when they were slaughtered during the Black Death for supposedly poisoning the water wells and thereby killing people. But Black Death was being spread by fleas, not water. That’s not only cruel; it’s insane.

Notice how I said Jews love to live out their worst stereotypes? After World War 2 in Southern Germany, a Jew was caught literally poisoning the well of a town of Gentiles. No one died, but still. And I believe that in the First War in Palestine, Jews poisoned the wells of Arab villages to get them to flee.

They just can’t quit, can they?

Alt Left: Particularly Ugly Racist Propaganda about Black Murders of Whites

Rishi: Off topic, Robert, but what do you make of this news? It’s left me sad seeing the faces of the victims.

This stuff happens all the time, but keep in mind that the vast majority of those killed by Black criminals are just other Black people. Black criminals positively nuke their own people. If Blacks should be getting mad at anyone, they should be getting mad at their own criminal class which is devastating them. Blacks bear by far the largest brunt of the damage that these men cause, and of course, they are almost all men.

Whites are not particularly at risk of homicide from Blacks.

Blacks make up 13% of the population, yet only 16% of the killers of Whites are Blacks. However, 60% of Whites are killed by other Whites. The average White person you see on the street has an average risk of killing you.

The average Black person you see on the streets is 25% more likely to kill you a person of any race. Hispanics are 18% of the population and 21% of the killers of Whites. The average Hispanic is 16% more likely to kill you than a person of any race. 2% of Whites are killed by the combined group of Asians and Amerindians, which accounts for 7% of the US population. This group is actually the safest to be around if you are a White person. They are 70% less likely to kill you than the average person of any race. It’s much safer for Whites to be around Asians than to be around other White people!

Whites having a 25% increased risk of being murdered by Blacks and a 16% increased risk from Hispanics is not a large risk. It’s not like the average person of these races is 2, 3, 4, or 5 times more likely to kill you.

Note that that 25% elevated risk is taking into account all of the avoidance of Blacks and heavily Black neighborhoods that Whites engage in. So at the present rates of avoidance, the average Black person is only a bit more dangerous to you than the average White person. On the other hand, if you are a White person hanging out in the middle of the ghetto at night, everything is different.

Most Whites are killed by other Whites. If you are White and you get murdered, chances are another White person will have killed you. 84% of Whites are killed by non-Blacks. 1 in 6 murdered Whites are killed by Blacks. 5/6 are killed by non-Blacks. If you are murdered as a White person, chances are you will be killed by a non-Black person.

People don’t get it.

Black men are highly homicidal. Their homicide rate is fully 8X higher than that of White men. But they’re not real particular about who they kill. Actually in fact they are. Black killers massively over-select their own kind for homicide and appear to under-select or go out of their way to not kill Whites.

Black criminals kill everyone. They kill their own people (for the most part), they kill Whites, they kill Hispanics, they kill Asians. And they victimize all these groups for violent crime too. Black criminals simply prey on and kill other humans. If you’re human, you’re at risk from them.

This idea that these evil Black criminals are going out of their way to massacre, wage race war on, and even genocide our White race is a particularly ugly and nasty racist lie. Granted, these folks are murderous and some of us Whites are among their victims, but I assure you that they don’t go out of their way to select us for murder.

People wonder what real racism looks like. Well, it looks like this – this lie that Colin Flaherty et al are pushing. You want to print articles about Blacks killing Whites? Fine, if you run a newspaper. But if not, why not run articles about all of the other races being killed by these people too? Or run articles about every race getting kiled by every other race. In other words, leave race out of it. You’re writing about homicide, not race relations. Homicide isn’t a race problem. Homicide is a human problem, part of the human condition.

Because if you solely focus on Blacks killing Whites, you are pushing a racist lie that Black killers are preying on us Whites like hunters against prey, going out of their way to murder us for some reason, possibly due to their extreme racist hatred of us.

There is a very racist publication (and note that I don’t use the word racist lightly – I only use it where it absolutely applies) called New Nation News. Every month they print an issue of all of the Black on White homicides that month. In a typical month, there might be ~25. Of course most of the cases are very tragic.

If you read that and don’t know what’s going on, you will be outraged and infuriated. It will seem like Black killers are waging a genocidal war against us Whites. And you will start to hate Black people. The more articles you read like that, the more you will hate Black people. Which makes sense because the only reason White people write those articles is to get White people to hate Black people or hate them more if they already do. Their inciting people to anti-Black racism. It’s outrageous.

But that needs to be taken in context.

First of all, 83% of the victims of Black killers are other Blacks, 10% are Whites, 3% are Hispanics, 2% are Asians or Amerindians, and 2% are of unknown  race.

Victims of Black Murderers

Blacks Whites Hispanics Asians Unknown

83%    10%    3%        2%     2%

Since Whites make up 60% of the population but are only 10% of Black homicide victims, Black killers are going massively out of their way to avoid killing Whites. Why is that? Who knows? Blacks are 83% less likely to kill a White person than a person of any race. They are also 83% less likely to kill an Hispanic than a person of any race. And they are 67% less likely to kill an Asian than they are a person of any race. Obviously Blacks are going dramatically out of their way not to kill Whites and Hispanics and to a lesser extent Asians.

But they are 640% more likely to kill another Black person as they are a person of any race! So Blacks massively over-select for their own kind when it comes to choosing who to murder. They go wildly out of their way to preferentially kill their own kind while going seriously out of their way to avoid killing non-Blacks. They clearly have a strong preference for killing their own kind and a strong disinclination to kill non-Blacks.

Victims of Black Murderers Odds Ratios

Blacks Whites Hispanics Asians

+640%  -83%   -83%      -67%

So while Blacks may have killed 27 Whites in the US in November, a similar article about Black victims would show that Blacks killed 224 of their own people in that same month! Holy homicide, Batman! That article would be almost 10 times longer than the one above and would contain almost 10 times more victims.

So what’s the real problem here? 27 White people getting killed by Blacks every month or 224 Black people getting killed by Blacks every month. Clearly the latter, no?

And this is the particularly vicious racist lie being pushed in these publications – that the murders of 27 Whites every month by Blacks is somehow a phenomenally worse problem than the 224 Blacks (8.3X more!) murdered by these same folks. I guess those 224 Black people don’t matter. Why should they? They’re just a bunch of fucking niggers, right? But when a White person is killed? Holy Moses! It brings the house down and it’s a national emergency. Whites lives matter! Black lives clearly don’t. I hate BLM but I will give them that one.

The very notion that one White homicide victims is a vastly worse moral offense than five Black homicide victims feels like an ugly racist lie to me. Black lives are only 1/8 the worth of White lives, if that? We are back to Dred Scott now and going even beyond that. What an appalling mindset.

In recent years there have been reports that in certain large cities, 98% of the homicides involved not only Black killers killing Black victims. In these cities where Black homicide rates are raging like Chicago (Chicongo – sorry, racist slang, but it still applies), New York, Philadelphia (Killadeldphia), Minneapolis, St. Louis, Baltimore, etc., sure, a lot of the rise is due to police backing off due to all of these stupid anti-cop BLM protests, but still, in all of those cases, almost all of the killers and victims are Black.

And the homicides are very closely associated with gang warfare, which accounts for the overwhelming majority of the killings. Racists freak out about this and scream and yell, but shouldn’t they be happy? Hey, the niggers they hate so much are Shoah’ing each other. Should be time for celebration, right, boys? Break out the champagne. Guess not.

If anything, these crime waves ought to make us feel overwhelming sympathy for any innocent Black lives that are taken by these killers.

We should also feel sad that Black America has descended this low and debased itself in this matter.

But these city massacres have about 0% to do us White people.

It’s basically a Black on Black Civil War. In a way, I hate to say it, but it’s really not even our problem. They started it and they’re continuing it. They own it. It’s their problem. Maybe they should sort it out.

Alt Left: What Is US Conservatism About?

Excellent post from commenter Brian, a fine new writer, about the meaning of US conservatism. No conservative will believe this but that’s a pretty good definition of it. There’s also a fake populist angle to it. I know a lot of Republicans who insist that this ultra-right politics of the bosses, an ultra-anti-worker philosophy, is good for workers! They have all sorts of crazy reasons why this is true, mostly boiling down to Supply Side Economics, which has been endlessly proven to be a lie in praxis if not in theory.

There’s also a social side to it. Racism, sexism, and even transphobia. I’m no tranny fan either, but I will grant them basic civil rights. Trump won’t even do that. And that’s bigotry all right. Trump is also said to have been bad for gays, though I can’t single anything out. There are the other social issues. The continuous genuflecting to Christianity, especially in the ability to discriminate and lately, to spread deadly viruses at will. The abortion issue, the classic wedge issue. The guns issue. The Democrats are coming to take your guns.

The crime issue.

Novocostello: I don’t really understand US conservatism, what exactly is it trying to conserve? Is it just classical liberalism mixed with some Northwestern European type of ethnocentrism/racism?

Brian: US conservatism is about conserving and enhancing the status of those already high up the ladder and mostly those at the very top. It’s really not so much about conserving their position as it is about increasing their wealth and power while decreasing the wealth and power of the rest of society.

It’s not just disparities in wealth and power that US conservatives want to increase but disparities in what we might call “cultural standing” or social perception. So they want most people to be increasingly looked down on and to be made to feel crummy about their lives while getting ordinary people to look at those up top as superhuman and godlike.

“Traditional” Burkean conservatism was about accepting the system as is on the assumption that it developed this way for reasons we might not understand and that altering it too much too quickly could be very dangerous while also allowing for slow change to address the needs of the masses.

So there was a progressive leaning in that kind of conservatism, but it was deliberately meant to be slow progress. And this type of traditional conservatism was always largely just a way for those at the affluent to keep others in their place despite its theoretical grounding which many adherents probably didn’t care much about. However, those conservatives were more willing to yield and compromise.

Today’s American conservatism, which has become the mainstream since Reagan, aims not only to preserve privilege and inequality but rather to exacerbate them. What’s called “conservatism” in the US is a form of reactionary politics. Or you can think of it as a kind of radical conservatism: a radicalism from above instead of from below.