The only possible reason that blacks and whites would have different outcomes in anything is that whites are racist.

What that means, scientifically, is that everything blacks do is white people’s fault.

If a black man crashes a car, that is the fault of white people all over the world, including Russians and Lithuanians and so on. Whites are collectively responsible for the decision-making processes of individual blacks.

ABC News:

The number of Black people killed in traffic crashes rose 23% in 2020 compared to the year prior, according to early estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Out of the 38,680 people that were killed in traffic crashes last year, 7,494 of them were Black — the highest percentage increase out of any race. White people had the largest number of traffic deaths last year at 29,092, but the number increased by just 4% from the year prior.

The pandemic made the problem worse — Black traffic fatalities, as a proportion of all fatalities, increased the most during lockdown, from March to December, according to NHTSA’s data.

“BITCH ASS NIGGA, I BE IS HAS DAT VIRUS – I BE BOTTA SWIRVE DIS MUFFUGGUH OUT DIS BITCH,” the victimized black driver said.

Whites were responsible, collectively. Even Polish and Bulgarians were at fault.

Destiny Thomas, an urban planner and founder and CEO of the California-based Thrivance Group, believes there are two main contributing factors.

“These are the communities that were our essential workers across the country,” Thomas said. “Black folks in particular were more likely to suffer the negative impacts of compounding the location of disparity. Being a city worker means that you’re at greater risk because you’re on the road more than everyone, but it’s also high-stakes driving. These are people who are getting paid hourly rates. If you’re late three minutes, you’re more likely to lose your job, and of course during a time of economic downturn and insecurity that pressure makes you make different types of decisions on the road.”

TIL: black people can be fired from jobs in America.

The second factor, she explained, is lack of infrastructure.

“We live in communities that for generations, for decades, have been under invested,” Thomas said. “Everyone during the pandemic was driving faster because the roads were not as congested. So the implications for that in a community that has no functioning signal, less crossing opportunities, uneven pavement or unexpected community-wide construction [are worse]. There are still entire communities that don’t have sidewalks. These things make sort of a perfect storm for increased fatality rates in Black families.”

“BITCH NIGGA THERE AIN’T WAS BE NO SIDEWALK OUT THIS MUFFAHFAKKA, I IS BE SWERVIN’,” were his last words before he crashed and died.

White people collectively, including Siberian ice fishermen, were responsible for his death.

It’s Time for Whites to Take Responsibility for Black People’s Driving

If you go to the Wikipedia page about car deaths by country, and sort by deaths per 100K inhabitants, 9 out of the 10 deadliest countries are in sub-Saharan Africa, with the remainder being Thailand.

If you sort by deaths per 100,000 motor vehicles, 9 countries are from sub-Saharan Africa, with the only one not from there being a small island country named Saint Lucia, which is surprisingly overwhelmingly black.

Some people will look at this and say that race is a real thing that actually exists, and that giving 4 wheels to a race that couldn’t even invent a single wheel can’t end in anything other than catastrophe.

Those people are called racists, and you should ignore anything they say.

All humans were once hunter-gatherers. Back then, versatility came with the territory. There were only so many game animals, and they differed a lot in size, shape, and color. So you had to enjoy switching back and forth from one target animal to another. And you had to enjoy moving from one place to another. Sooner or later you’d have to.

Beginning 10,000 years ago, farmers made their appearance. Now monotony came with the territory. A plot of land wasn’t something you could forget while you took off somewhere else. It needed constant care. The tasks were also more repetitive: ploughing, sowing, harvesting …

Things worsened as farming became more advanced. You had to focus on one crop and a limited number of key tasks.

Different means of subsistence have selected for different mental traits, and this selection has had genetic consequences. Monotony avoidance has a heritability of 0.53 (Saudino, 1999). This predisposition has usually been a handicap in modern societies, so much so that it often leads to criminality. Males with a history of early criminal behavior tend to score high on monotony avoidance, as well as on sensation seeking and low conformity (Klinteberg et al., 1992).

Today, if you have trouble fitting into your society, you might still survive and reproduce. In the past, you probably wouldn’t. Other people would take your place in the gene pool and, over successive generations, their mental makeup would become the norm.

That’s gene-culture co-evolution. We have reshaped the world we live in, and this human-made world has reshaped us. After describing how our ancestors radically changed their environment, Razib goes on to write: “We were the authors of those changes, but in the process of telling that story, we became protagonists within it” (Khan, 2014).

China: a case study

Advanced farming—intensive land use, task specialization, monoculture—has profoundly shaped East Asian societies, particularly China. This is particularly so for rice farming. Because the paddies need standing water, rice farmers must work collectively to build, dredge, and drain elaborate irrigation networks. Wheat farming, by comparison, requires no irrigation and only half as much work.

Advanced farming seems to have favored a special package of predispositions and inclinations, including greater acceptance of monotony. This has been shown in two recent studies.

The first one was about boredom and how people experience it in their lives. The results from the 775 Chinese participants were then compared with the results from a previous survey of 572 Euro-Canadians. It was found that the Chinese participants were less likely to feel bored in comparable situations. They seemed to value low-arousal (calm, relaxation) versus high arousal (excitement, elation) in the case of Euro-Canadians (Ng et al., 2014).

The authors attributed their findings to cultural learning. One may wonder, however, why preference for low arousal persists in the face of China’s massive influx of high-arousal Western culture.

Relational thinking, collectivism, and favoritism

The second study had the aim of seeing whether the sociological differences between rice farmers and wheat farmers have led to differences in mental makeup. When 1,162 Han Chinese performed a series of mental tasks, the results differed according to whether the participants came from rice-farming regions or wheat-farming regions (Talhelm et al., 2014).

When shown a list of three items, such as “train”, “bus”, and “tracks”, and told to choose two items that pair together, people from rice-farming regions tended to choose “train and tracks,” whereas people from wheat-farming regions tended to choose “train and bus.” The former seemed to be more abstract in their thinking and the latter more relational. This pattern held up even in neighboring counties along China’s rice-wheat border. People from the rice side of the border thought more relationally than did people from the wheat side.

A second task required drawing pictures of yourself and your friends. In a prior study, Americans drew themselves about 6 mm bigger than they drew their friends, Europeans drew themselves 3.5 mm bigger, and Japanese drew themselves slightly smaller. In the present study, people from rice regions were more likely than people from wheat regions to draw themselves smaller than they drew their friends. On average, people from wheat regions self-inflated 1.5 mm, and people from rice regions self-deflated -0.03 mm.

A third task required imagining yourself doing business with (i) an honest friend, (ii) a dishonest friend, (iii) an honest stranger, and (iv) a dishonest stranger. This person might lie, causing you to lose money. Or this person might be honest, causing you to make money. You could reward or punish this person accordingly. A previous study found that Singaporeans rewarded friends much more than they punished them. Americans were much more likely to punish friends for bad behavior. In this study, people from rice regions were more likely to remain loyal to friends regardless.

Interestingly, these findings came from people with no connection to farming at all. They grew up in a modern urban society, and most were too young to have known the China that existed before the economic reforms of the late 1970s. It looks like rice regions have favored hardwiring of certain psychological traits: less abstract thinking and more relational thinking, less individualism and more collectivism, and less impartiality toward strangers and more favoritism toward kin and friends.

Why farming sucks, for you but not for me

These findings corroborate the ethnographic literature on the differences in mentality between hunter-gatherers and farmers. Hunter-gatherers typically see farming as a kind of slavery, and they have trouble understanding well-meaning outsiders who want to turn them into land-slaves.

Yes, for the same land area, farming can produce much more food. But it’s hard work, not only physically but mentally as well. Humans had to undergo a change in mentality before they could make the transition from hunting and gathering to farming

Those humans ended up transforming not just their physical landscape but also their social and cultural landscape … and ultimately themselves. By creating new values and social relations, they changed the rules for survival and reproduction, thereby changing the sort of mentality that future generations would inherit.

Humans transformed the world through farming, and the world returned the favor.

References

Khan, R. (2014). Our cats, ourselves, The New York Times, The Opinion Pages, November 24

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/opinion/our-cats-ourselves.html
Klinteberg, B., K. Humble, and D. Schalling. (1992). Personality and psychopathy of males with a history of early criminal behaviour, European Journal of Personality, 6(4), 245-266.

http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1993-18051-001
Ng, A.H., Y. Liu, J-Z. Chen, and J.D. Eastwood. (2014). Culture and state boredom: A comparison between European Canadians and Chinese, Personality and Individual Differences, 75, 13-18.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886914006321
Saudino, K.J., J.R. Gagne, J. Grant, A. Ibatoulina, T. Marytuina, I. Ravich-Scherbo, and K. Whitfield. (1999). Genetic and environmental influences on personality in adult Russian twins, International Journal of Behavioral Development, 23, 375-389.

http://jbd.sagepub.com/content/23/2/375.short
Talhelm, T., X. Zhang, S. Oishi, C. Shimin, D. Duan, X. Lan, and S. Kitayama. (2014). Large-scale psychological differences within China explained by rice versus wheat agriculture, Science, 344, 603-607.

http://internationalpsychoanalysis.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/RiceversusWheatScience-2014-Talhelm-603-8.pdf

In the Aryan-birthed religion of Vedanta and yoga (as exemplified in the Bhagavad-Gita), there is an element of creation  identified as “satva.” (SAT-vah)

Satva refers to the more refined, harmonious, graceful wisdom aspects of the material creation. Flowers, beautiful music, poetry and scripture, wholesome food, harmonious order, subtle beauty. All people and things, in this theory, have some satva. However, the spiritual men and women (God-seeking), and the pure and virtuous, the righteous, are considered to have more of it. They are more satvic.

Satva is the wisdom element, and guides the two other elements, rajas and tamas. It is lighter and more refined. Tamas is said to have the quality of inertia, densness, coarseness, and darkness. In fact the color black is its associated color. Rajas has the qualities of activity, ambition, and desire. It is associated with blood and redness. The three qualities are found in different mixtures and combinations in the natural things. The various peoples and ethnicities, likewise, have more or less preponderance of satva, rajas, or tamas. Jews could be said to be a more rajasic people. Blacks could be said to tend toward tamas. And of course, the very nature of Blacks, visually, is dark and their features are coarser. This triune theory from the Upanishads is known as the theory of the three gunas or trigunas.

There is satvic, tamasic, and rajasic music. And satvic, tamasic, and rajasic food.

There are satvic interests and tendencies:

— Meditation, art and music, order and beauty, philosophy, learning, service, moral cultivation.

There are rajasic tendencies:

— Work, fighting for dominance, acquiring wealth and power, sex.

And there are tamasic tendencies:

— Bodily pleasure and sensual gratification, inertness, addiction, crime.

Tamas is the stone and bone of life. Rajas is what allows men to be fighters and acquire power. All three gunas are needed, in the the theory, and they keep nature in its state of movement and disequilibrium. Their distributions differ in both individuals and peoples. God-seekers, according to Vedic Yoga, should try to increase their satvic nature and effect diminution of their rajasic and tamasic natures. God Itself, in It’s manifested form, is said to predominate with satva. Krsna, in the Bhagavad-Gita enumerates essential qualities of the Godhead and many of them are satvic things. Because the satvic guna is closer to God, thesatvic Lord is  the ultimate controller of rajas and tamas, just as a wise and good king exercises control over his soldiers (the rajasic) and his less virtuous and intelligent laborers (the tamasic).

A natural and metaphysical principle is that  spiritual reality is expressed in physical forms. Just as there is such a thing as a noble brow and honest hands, Nature does communicate inner reality through outer form. If you simply look at the color White and the places that it shows in nature, White people can understand that their light color — often indeed as white as ivory and bone — marks them as a race of  beauty, wisdom, and grace. Be worthy of your color.

— White is almost always associated with purity in many things.

— The more things are purified the more they take on lighter colors. When people seek to clean things they are also usually trying to make them lighter. A carpet after purification has a lighter color, for example. Because cleanliness and purity are critical conditions for healing and health, nurses and doctors have long dressed white in hospitals and clinics.

— White is the color that shows up and reveals stain. When people have any ideal of purity or cleanliness, they seek white things to verify it. So when we want to clean counters and things, we want a White rag. We want our undergarments to be maximally clean, thus white undergarments (underwear) is the norm. White both absorbs stain and reveals it. (We could even point then to the phenomenon of White nations absorbing so many other races as having some metaphysical basis in our very Whiteness.)

— The more a thing is refined and purified, the lighter and whiter it becomes.

— Sweet things are white, such as sugar. Even powerful drugs that addict people to their ill-gotten bliss, such as cocaine, are white.

— The Sun itself, physical creator and sustainer of us all, around which our earth and planets revolve, is white. When filtered through impurities sunlight looks golden. But looked at directly, the sun is electric white. Sunbeams seen on the dusk or morning air are white shafts.

— The moon, also, is white as white! Both heavenly bodies dominating day and night — are  white, and both luminous.

— Indeed, white is the very color of luminosity.

— White contains within itself the entire spectrum of other colors.

— In clothes and in visual art, the color white looks good with any other colors. White  brings out the  very presence of other colors, and makes other  colors more vivid, more known for what they are.

— Like light, the color white provides sight and guidance. In a dark place or a dark night, things that are white are more easily seen, thus white is a color of guidance.

— The whiter a thing is, the more it can reflect light. Light reflected on white surfaces can become almost as bright as the original source. White surfaces can catch light and shine like the sun.

— Fresh snowfalls, one of my favorite things, are white. So are snowflakes. Because of this, snow crystals catch light and glisten even under moonlight.

— White is the color of the pages upon which all thoughts, all ideas, all knowledge — can be written.

— The color that surrounds perception (the iris) in the eye is white.

— Without the surrounding the iris of the eye, the human personality has no focus and is not seen. The white of the eye reveals the personality of the eyes.

— The whitest organ in the body is the brain.

— The blood cells that purify us and kill disease are white.

— All higher creatures love and require milk, especially at birth, which is white.

— White is the color of all the stars seen at night, and of comets and meteors as they streak through the sky.

— Lighting is white. So is electricity, with sometimes a tinge of blue. (Just as Europeans are White with a tinge of blue eyes in some of the population.)

— The experience at death is meeting a pure white light.

— The Buddhists also (founded by an Aryan, Lord Buddha) teach that death brings  an opportunity to merge with the “clear light” or the “clear white light.”

— The teeth that feed us, and long defended us, are white.

— The bones that support us and give us strength and structure are white.

— When men and women get wisdom, their hair turns white.

— The crests of ocean waves are white.

— The clouds which bring rain, give inspiration, and add beauty to an empty sky are white.

— Some of the best flowers are white, and people love white lilies.

— The milk of the mother female is translucent white.

— The sexual generative material in the male, highest and most vital product of his body which reproduces vital human life itself (this most evolved life form) — is pearly white.

— Most eggs in nature are white or a very light color. The egg is pure, and represents life and all good to that species.

— Both diamonds and pearls, some of the most highly treasured objects on the earth, are white or crystalline white.

— In deep dreamless sleep, when the Vedas say that the ego becomes merged in the Pure Consciousness of the Creator, the only color ever sensed is white

— The north, where White people came from, is the land of White snows

— The amazing Northern Lights are white.

— The wax made by the bee, where he stores his honey and births his young, is white wax

— The body and skin of the beautiful White European woman, pinnacle of beauty to White men’s eyes, is a White field of dreams that evokes the purity of the Pure Consciousness, or Brahman. The White body of the European woman is the reminder, to her men, of the Purity of Brahman.

— When mystics and yogis go within successfully, in meditation, they see a  light, called bindu. According to the Aryan scriptures of the Upanishads, this inner light is the one original light, source of all grosser lights such as stars and suns, and synonymous with God or Brahman. It’s primary color is white.

— Saints have auras around them that are mostly White, with some blue

— The color white, being the color of purity, most evokes Brahman, or God as “pure consciousness”

The color white is, in fact, close to God. For this reason Whites have pioneered the great religions such as Vedanta, Yoga, Buddhism, and Christianity. All of those religions, developed by whites, contain a moral rule and a quest for transcendental divine knowledge. This is the highest fruit of the White race, and when we return to it again, we will be strong as before.

Love your people. Protect and fight for them. Stop Jew-fomented race-mixing and race-fetishism. Be worthy of your ancestors, their religion, their knowledge, their attainment, and their color.

The whole multi-million dollar skin-whitening business is proof of the natural aristocracy that exists among the races. Of course Black women want to look White, White women are the most beautiful women in the world. Common sense tells you that and all the studies done on the subject do too. Yet the media still insist on castigating this woman for wanting to enhance her looks. If they hadn’t told us that we were all the same race she would not be comparing herself to Whites in the first place.

From Daily Mail

An African singer behind a skin-bleaching cream called ‘Whitenicious’ has tried to justify the name of her product in a TV interview, saying: ‘white means pure.’

Asked what the product’s name meant to her, Nigerian and Cameroonian singer Dancia appeared to contradict herself by saying: ‘White means pure, not necessarily skin, but in general.’

She insisted that the cream is only for covering blemishes, despite an advertising campaign showing her entire body appearing lighter, adding: ‘Some people they don’t feel confident, they don’t feel pure, they don’t feel clean with dark spots.’

Critics have branded the product an ‘abomination’ saying it teaches young ‘girls of colour’ to be ashamed of their skin.In an interview with Channel 4, Dancia was asked whether she thought the message behind the product was that being white looked better than being black.She replied: ‘I was not selling that message, the media are selling that message. I didn’t say, buy the cream and look like Dancia.

‘I said seven day, fast acting dark spot remover. It’s called reading comprehension. If people missed that class then it’s not my fault.

‘If they think that their whole body is a dark spot then fine, because that’s not how I feel.’

Among Dancia’s critics is oscar-winning actress Lupita Nyong’o who spoke out against racism in beauty and fashion and warned young black girls not to use bleaching products.

Nyong’o, star of 12 Years A Slave, admitted that when she was younger she wanted to wake up ‘just a little bit lighter’, because she was ashamed of her dark skin.

When asked whether she accepted the point made by Nyong’o, Dancia responded: ‘I don’t accept that. I don’t care about her story. I don’t know her.

‘I’m an adult and if I lighten my skin then that’s my choice, the same as bleaching my hair.’

The white man is responsible for every single civilized feature that Negro Africa possesses; and the present negrophile psychosis, as Dr. Verwoerd calls it, spells doom not only to the white man in Africa but everywhere else. The line has to be drawn somewhere, for there is no limit to the demands that are made upon us. For every one demand we meet, two fresh demands are instantly made. Extended appeasement, Dr. Verwoerd predicted, would lead not only to the return of heathendom and chaos in Africa, but to the eventual overwhelming of the Western nations themselves by the unopposed and actively White-assisted, tide of colour.

-Anthony Jacob in White Man Think Again

There are small but significant coalitions of anti-immigration groups in virtually every European country. Because the anti-establishment groups are primarily white, the liberal establishment calls them racist. Would this were true. The groups are not racist. They don’t talk about restricting colored immigration, nor do they urge the deportation of the colored races from Europe. They simply want to slow down the immigration rate, and some of the bolder members of the immigration-restrictionist coalitions want the new immigrants, “no matter what their color,” to “respect our culture.” This, of course, will never be the case. The Celts can let the negroes toss the caber in the Highland games, which they have done; the Brits can let black soldiers into their army, which they have done; the Basques in Spain can feature negroes on their websites, which they have done, and on and on it goes, but such appeasements will never make the colored savages respect the white culture. In their minds there is only one culture – the blood-soaked culture of the African jungle. Whether it is Somalians in Minneapolis or Zulus in Sweden, it is all part of the same worldwide process: the Africanization of the European nations. When that process is complete, not even the liberals who set the process in motion will be left alive.

The spirit of the various anti-immigration groups throughout the European nations still savors too much of modernity. The use of the phrase ‘tea party’ in America illustrates the weaknesses in all the European resistance movements. The phrase ‘tea party’ conjures up an old quarrel of whites against whites. What if the tea parties had called their movement ‘Rorke’s Drift’ and carried placards calling for the end of the negroization of the white nations? No doubt the liberals would be angered, but the liberals are not going to budge one inch from their negroization policies because of polite, white requests to slow down the negroization of Europe. So why not counter the implacable hatred of the liberals with an implacable hatred of our own? The white man’s fear of being called racist must cease before white genocide can be halted. I don’t see any diminishing of that fear in the ranks of the tea parties of the U.S. or in their European counterparts, which is why I still don’t see any movement that is leading us away from the negroization of Europe.

In a relatively recent biography of Stanley, the African explorer, the mad-dog liberal author wrote of the cowardice of another English explorer who stood by while some African natives killed and then ate an African girl right before the English explorer’s eyes. The English explorer claimed he had no idea the Africans were going to do such a hideous thing, because he never dreamed that any people, even African people, would do such a thing. The author didn’t believe the English explorer and spent a couple pages commenting on the moral shortcomings of the “cowardly” Englishman. First off, I believed the Englishman. I don’t think he knew what the Africans intended to do. Secondly, what if the much-maligned explorer had known that the Africans were going to kill and eat the girl: how was he supposed to stop them? Only an extraordinary man would have even attempted such a futile rescue. It would have been more difficult than taking a lion’s meat away from him as he was about to take the first bite. So why should the Englishman be condemned for not knowing the African natives were going to kill and eat the girl right before his eyes, or, if he is to be viewed in the worst light possible, why should he be condemned for not being as courageous as St. George? Why is the liberal author’s focus not on the subhuman bestiality of the Africans who killed and ate the African girl? I think we know why: it’s because nothing, absolutely nothing that negro savages do is ever, in the eyes of the liberal, their fault. Somehow, by a strange, mystical transformation, the evil that black men do becomes the fault of the white man. “Yet though he slay me, yet though he commits every seeming evil under the sun, still will I trust in the noble black savage, because he alone is the holy one, he alone is the lord god.” So the liberal believes. Can a man who believes such things be swayed by reason, pity, or compassion? Of course not.

I believe that a resolute band of white men, if they truly act as white men, can turn the colored tide away from the white lands, but we must first see just how deeply the “negrophile psychosis” has seeped into the soul of the modern Europeans. When I was an undergraduate, an older professor, a devout liberal, confided to me that he had all the correct opinions about blacks, but still he had to confess, much to his shame, that whenever he saw a black person up close and personal, a little voice inside of him said, “You’re black and not to be trusted.” That liberal professor was much like the firebrand abolitionist preacher who toured the U.S. just prior to the Civil War, exhibiting a free, educated negro who was “just as good as any white man.” Yet when the negro started acting on the ‘just as good as any white man’ dictum by making advances toward the preacher’s daughter, the preacher went berserk. Obviously those two men, the liberal professor and the abolitionist preacher, had a serious conflict between their rational, stated beliefs and their heartfelt instincts about the nature of existence.

The aforementioned professor and preacher were relics. The modern liberals no longer have a conflict between their expressed love of the negro and the call of their blood. They have killed their white instincts and allowed the love of the black man and the hatred of white men to enter the inmost recesses of their soul. No longer having to forcibly make their rational self coincide with their inner soul, the liberals instinctively blame black atrocities on whites and assume that all problems on earth stem from the “racism” of the white man. Following that reasoning to its logical conclusion, the liberals will do whatever it takes to ensure that the white nations of the world become black nations. And why is that a bad thing? To men and women whose inmost souls are tainted with liberalism, it is a consummation devoutly to be wished.

As the negrophile psychosis sinks into his soul, the white liberal starts to become like unto his god. He starts to act out a perverse parody of Thomas à Kempis’ Imitation of Christ.The liberals’ Imitation of the Negro is a Gnostic imitation because the white man cannot actually become a negro, much as he yearns to. His grandchildren can become negroes if his offspring will mate with the negro, but until that blessed time the liberal must become a Gnostic negro. Where the negro actually cannibalizes his own people, the liberal must be satisfied with gnostically cannibalizing his people by turning them over to barbarians of color to be tortured and murdered in the name of diversity. Where the negro destroys and murders the innocent with his own hands, the liberal destroys the innocent secondhand in abortuaries. The ethos in both cases is the ethos of the jungle. Only the strong survive; the weak and the helpless live or die according to the whims of the strong. Thus nature’s god, the negro, and the cosmic naturalists, the liberals, are entwined together on the satanic tree that holds the forbidden fruit. Negro worship represents a second fall of man: it is Satan’s ultimate gambit. By negroizing Europe the liberals are building the kingdom of Satan on earth.

God will judge the disposition of their souls, but it is up to us to judge the words and actions of the Christian missionaries, Catholic and Protestant, who helped to build the kingdom of Satan on earth. Starting with the assumption that we are all God’s children and armed with Christ’s injunction to preach the gospel to every nation, the white Christian missionaries went forth.(1) But the best of the missionaries, a minority, were misguided, and the worst, the majority, were egomaniacs who felt that they were not sufficiently adored by their own people, so they sought the adulation of their new people, the innocent, often wayward but nevertheless loving children of nature, uncorrupted by the evils of the white man’s civilization. Maybe the majority of missionaries were not egomaniacs, maybe the majority were humble men of God. So let us say that the ones who gained influence in the West, who took pen in hand to write about the noble black savages of Africa, were indeed negrophile utopians. They excused every negro atrocity by bidding us look to the future when the playful childlike negroes, who just happened to like human flesh, would, in the words of John Paul II, “astound the world.” And the genuinely saintly missionaries (if you don’t like the world saint then just substitute ‘far ben’) such as Edmund Hodgson and Elton Knauf, were tortured and murdered trying to Christianize a people who had no word for charity and only knew brute force. Such men are heroes, but I wish they had stayed at home and worked to keep Europe Christian.

Whether the missionaries were mainly good or whether they were mainly liberal ego maniacs is not our ultimate concern. What should concern us very deeply is that the effort to Christianize Africa was a dismal failure. Evangelization turned into negro worship, and instead of Christianizing Africa the Europeans applied their missionary zeal to the negroization of Europe. Surely He who is our common hope does not want Europe to become Africa. How can any man, be he pope or peasant, call himself a Christian if he doesn’t oppose the negroization of the white nations?

It always comes down to one startling fact: the liberals, despite the fact that they are white, desire the extermination of the white race. You can’t find common ground with such creatures. You must fight them with a religious zeal greater than their religious zeal. Once the European everyman comes to believe, as his ancestors believed, that the love of God and the love of one’s people are intertwined and not opposed principles, he will have the spiritual fortitude to fight the negroization of the European nations. And the European must fight this new world of darkness because of all the horrors that exist on this earth the greatest horror is a world without charity. Such a world is the one we all face if the European people do not invoke their God and turn back the colored tide from the European nations.+

_______________________

(1) There is nothing in the Bible to indicate that Christianity equals racial equality. In fact, the opposite seems to be the case: the story of Noah and his three sons is the primary example to the contrary. And the fact that racial equality soon turned into negro worship indicates to me that there were serious flaws in the African missionary movement from its very inception.

You would think that educating people about the negative consequences of race-mixing would be gratefully received and seen as similar to giving warnings about the dangers of smoking or fast food. And yet, when the subject does get brought up and you do try to warn people, they don’t thank you for it, but accuse you of ‘hating’ bi-racial people instead. If people knew the facts about race and the differences between them, they would realize that it is actually the parents of bi-racial people that are hating them, by forcing this genetic status on them in the first place.

Herein, I hope to give people a better understanding of the real life consequences of race-mixing. There is very little around on the internet that is specifically devoted to the subject and most people I find have never even really thought about it before.  The fact is, one quick fumble between the sheets can have a lasting negative effect on all successive generations.

Genetic Similarity Theory

There are two genetically directed instincts within us regarding choosing a mate.

The most powerful one is explained by ‘Genetic Similarity Theory.’ This is the drive that makes you seek out a partner with a large amount of the same hereditary genes as you. This is to ensure that the features your combined genes contribute to in your children, physical and mental, are the same as the ones your ancestors had. This is the reason why there are people that look like you from far back in your family past, like grandparents or great grandparents. This is not just because you are related to them, it is because their parents choice of partner was similar to your own parents choice of partner. Your hereditary genes will have stayed the way that they were in your ancestors, being continually passed down from generation to generation, molding descendants in the likeness of their predecessors. This is why you get musical families, where each generation has musicians in it. The parent instinctively finds a partner with the same genes that their parents had and the talent for music can be passed on. It is also why people say that husbands pick wives who are similar to their mothers. If there were no drive to find partners with similar hereditary genes then there would be no distinct races. If you are mixed race, then there will be no-one in your family past that you resemble. They will all have been prevented from having an unobstructed influence on your form and character.

The second, lesser instinct is for variety, and this is there to ensure that you don’t mate with an extended family member, encouraging you to look for someone who is unlike you. This will add novel DNA to your offspring’s genome, leading to less chance of genetic disease. It is the source of the phrase ‘opposites attract,’ and works well when you are living among your own race, creating a healthy, disease-resistant population. Unfortunately, if other races are living among you, it can turn into a genetically destructive desire to mate with them and will result in a weakening of disease resistance. Different races are susceptible to different diseases and this susceptibility will then be passed on to the mixed race child, giving them both races’ weaknesses instead of just the one.

Mendelian Inheritance

In a mixed race relationship between two pure types, the children will not have a smooth blend of characteristics from each parent, but the characteristics will each separate out into their individual racial components forming a patchwork of features in the offspring. This is true for all hybrids, even ones produced from breeds of the same species, and is why plant breeders do not generally create seed from F1 hybrids; the finished plants will show individual features from each parental type, rather than a harmonious blend, with the majority of the plants showing more of the dominant type’s characteristics. If you crossed a recessive small leaf plant with a dominant big leaf plant, you would not get a medium leaf plant, but a mainly big leaf one, with a few small leaves here and there. If you bred the hybrid back in with the pure types, you would no longer be able to predict quite how the plants would turn out, as each formerly pure type would have been adulterated and every so often, it would produce a plant with wildly differing characteristics to the parent’s type. The same happens with animals; you cannot get back to a pedigree once you have been left with a mongrel.

Hybridization shatters the form entirely into separate units of characteristics, and these units get jumbled up again each time they get passed on. People see attractive half-castes and think that the children will inherit the same characteristics, but it is impossible for them to be passed on like that, as they separate out again into the individual races’ features ensuring there is no unity of form to be passed on. Since Black genes are dominant and White genes are recessive, Mulattoes will always look more Black than White. This is why the mixed race ‘Seal’ (Black/Mestizo) and the White Heidi Klum’s two children look nothing whatsoever like either parent: they do not have a harmonious brown blend of each parents features, but have predominantly Black features instead.

Species, Subspecies and Breeds

According to the evolutionary definition of race, races started out as the same species, but have diverged far enough apart from one another over time, to now almost be classified as separate species. In all defining categories man is composed of subspecies at least and by many standards, the variations are enough for the races to be classed as different species entirely. For example, if you saw two animals, one with feathers and one with fur, you would call them different species. The difference between Caucasian hair and Negro ‘hair’ is nearly as big a difference as between fur and feathers. The reality is that Negro ‘hair’ can be felted as it lacks the natural oil glands of real hair. It actually has far more in common with wool than it does hair and was defined as such up until the last century.

The differences between the races of man show more variance between them than even different breeds of dog do, which is why races are not called breeds. Human breeds are the separate strains within the race, Caucasian for example has Nordic, Alpine, Slavic, Mediterranean and others. Breeding between the human races is like breeding bulls with mares or goats with sheep; both of these produce viable offspring, so being able to produce offspring together is no guarantee of being the same species.

Differences Between the White and Black Races

People like to say that Caucasian man has only 0.5% difference in his DNA from a Negro, implying that there is only a very small difference between them; yet, there is only 1.5% difference in DNA between a Caucasian and a chimpanzee. A very small amount of change in the DNA makes for huge differences between species, due to the many different ways that the genes themselves can be combined. Unlike the Cultural Marxist lie that race is only skin deep, just about every part of the body is uniquely different among the races. They have different genital size, position and placing, different shape and sized feet, legs and arms, different amounts of teeth, eggs and muscle, different skull shape and thickness, in fact the bones themselves are so entirely different from each other that forensic scientists can tell what race someone is just from a tiny scrap of bone from anywhere in the body, by sight alone.

Blood transfusions are not possible between the races (yet they are possible between cats and dogs) and neither are bone marrow transplants. A mixed race person stands little chance of finding a donated organ that will not reject their mismatched body, since the organs are irreconcilably different as well. Obviously, the skin is different (the largest organ of the body), but so are the lungs, testicles, brain and kidneys.

Caucasoid brains are larger than Negroids and the frontal lobes have deep fissures associated with complex problem solving, whilst Negroid brains are smaller and have shallow fissures. Consequently the average Negro IQ is 15 points lower than the average Caucasian IQ. This result is found regardless of geography and social status. Negroes adopted into affluent White families and Negroes in Africa and in America all produce the same averaged IQ results. Obviously not all people have their average racial IQ and there are always exceptional individuals at either end of the scale, yet exceptions serve to prove the rule, rather than to negate it.

Different Rates of Hormones

From The Biology of The Race Problem using breeds of dog as an example:

‘It may be assumed that in two behavioural types the genetics of each system is different, and the interaction between the genetic factors and the glandular processes also differs. Within the pure behavioural types there is a harmonious relationship between behavioural systems and the other bodily organs. This holds both for the inactive and active types. Among the hybrids however, in which there is mixed physical form, there is also a disharmonious relationship between the bodily organs and the reaction systems. The factors which influence behaviour become mixed and varied, just as those which determine physical form. In the mixed types, the harmonious relationship found within each pure behavioural type is BROKEN UP, and the result is DISHARMONY among the systems.’

One of the most important differences between the races is the rate of hormones that each produce. Hormones control our emotions, our pain control, our sensitivity – all the different feelings that affect our behavior are correlative with various secretions from different glands. Mixed race individuals can have a different rate of secretions to that needed for the particular organs that they have ended up with, which can cause highly unstable temperaments. This is caused by the same conflicting racial characteristics that result in things like having a Negro skull but Caucasian skin, or a Caucasian skeleton with Negro skin. Rather than having each organ being partially Caucasian and partially Negro in a harmonious blend of the two, some of the organs will be Negro but some will be Caucasian. So you might get White testicles in a predominantly Black body for instance, or a Black brain in a White body. In a mixed race person who appears to be mainly Negro, there is no way to predict whether all his organs are too. Negroes have higher testosterone rates than Whites and are more aggressive and less emotionally-balanced because of this, but at least their organs are intended for that amount of testosterone. Hormone irregularities are also linked with depression and not surprisingly there is a very high rate of depression, as well as all other health problems, among mixed race individuals when compared to non-mixed individuals. There is also a much higher suicide rate among mixed race children – they are five times more likely to commit suicide than someone of a singular race.

Women, Children and Marriage

Children like to look like their parents.  Little girls especially like to look like their mother. It must be very upsetting for mixed race children to see someone who looks nothing like them, that they will not be growing up to look like. It must also be very upsetting to know that this was knowingly done to you, by your own parents. Beauty products to make Black people look White are a massive industry – from wigs to skin whitening creams, Blacks desperately want to make themselves look White. A mixed race child has to live with the knowledge that they could have been born happy with their skin color and content with their hair type, if only their parents hadn’t deliberately deprived them of this. Some people like to think that they ‘own’ their bodies, but you can only really own something that you have made yourself or that you have purchased.

The human body is formed according to it’s genes and you are just its trustee. The beneficiary is the race, and the genes are relying on you to replicate them in a way that they can continue to grow in the form nature chose for them. You are just the current captain of your gene-chariot, not the owner of it, and the consequent drivers are all counting on you to be a careful pilot.  Women who commit miscegenation are giving away something that is not theirs to give, since they owe their very existence to their ancestors, who laid down their lives to protect them and provided everything that they now benefit from.

As well as the permanent alteration to your posterity’s genes, mixed race relationships are also more likely to split up and even more alarmingly, White women are 12 times more likely to be killed by a Black husband than a White one, and White men are 21 times more likely to be murdered by a Black wife than a White one.

Conclusion

Race is more fundamental than gender, and yet gender confusion is acknowledged as a disorder that modern medicine thinks is so drastic that it requires physical mutilation to attempt to put right. How much more of a disorder is being mixed race? Does anyone seriously think a child would choose to have no ancestors, no people, no community? These unfortunates do the best they can with a bad lot, trying not to end up hating life and despising those who do have a family tree behind them. And there is nothing whatsoever that they can do about it.

Even three month old babies know more about race than most adult Europeans; they show a preference for the faces of their own race, even when they are of people they have never seen before. They instinctively know what race they are. Which race’s face is it that 3 month old mixed race babies find comforting? The natural state of babies and children is racist, and this lasts until they are old enough to understand and succumb to the liberal programming that all Whites are now subjected to.

Prior to the advent of Cultural Marxism, race-mixing was always seen as the ultimate sin against nature in our societies. We can see that this is, objectively, due to an in-born, biological drive to preserve the genetics of our ancestors, and prevent a decline in future generations.  Historically, there were rapes and unlawful marriages, as part of slavery, war and necessity, but genetic similarity theory shows that desiring people of a different ethnicity as a partner to produce children with is an unnatural aberration, and those who have engaged in this behavior in modern times prove that it simply does not work.

Currently, there is a massive brainwashing operation underway to encourage the races to mix with each other and blend each other out. I object to this because I cannot think of anything more selfish and destructive than breaking an unbroken line of an immortal type of man, for the sake of what is essentially a fetish – a fetish that will still be affecting all your offspring long after you are gone.

Since the basic purpose of all life, and in fact the gift given to all natural life, is to be able to recreate itself in the perfect form that God and nature chose for it, to willfully destroy that template and think you know better than nature is an active defiance of the basic order of the universe. To forcefully take away from your children the right that God and nature gave you, the right to pass on that divinely formed genetic torch, is a crime against life itself.

The highest duty of any living creature is to pass on its existence to the next generation.  There is nothing worse that a man can do in this life than to extinguish that flame of our ancestors.

As genetic science advances, it is becoming ever more difficult to push the already ridiculous-sounding lie that “all races are exactly the same except for they look different.”

This creates a serious problem for liberals, who have championed science as “the absolute answer to everything.”

Historically, they have been able to deny the scientific reality of race, while also claiming to support science, through simply refusing to fund or, if otherwise funded, to acknowledge, research into the topic.

However, with genetics, the specific purpose of the research was never to prove racial differences, it has merely become unavoidable. And with the high importance and value of genetic research – nevermind the hundreds of billions of dollars and innumerable professional careers involved – there is no option to simply shut it down.

Thus, liberals have gone into psychological breakdown mode, completely incapable of knowing how it is they are supposed to respond to this conundrum.

A recent article from news.com.au typifies this confused, frantic reaction to the coming storm of justification for scientific racism.

Please note that anthropology is not an actual science.

New forms of discrimination, known as “neoracism”, are taking hold in scientific research, spreading the belief that races exist and are different in terms of biology, behaviour and culture, according to anthropologists who spoke at the annual American Association for the Advancement of Science conference in Chicago.

This comes despite decades-long efforts to reverse attitudes that were used to justify the slave trade and the Nazi ideology.

“Genome science can help us a lot in the individualisation of medical practice,” said Nina Jablonski, an anthropology professor at The Pennsylvania State University.

But she warned that science could be “misused” to propagate the belief that people inherently have different abilities based on skin colour or ethnic background.

She cited new research urging that children be identified based on their genetically predetermined educational abilities and then put in separate schools that could be used to foster different kinds of learning.

“We have heard this before and it is incredibly worrying,” she said, recalling the segregation era when blacks and whites were schooled separately and African Americans were considered inferior.

“The educationalists who are proposing this meant this in a positive way but it is something that could be easily distorted if it were implemented.”

There you have an admission that if an educational program dividing people based on their genetic aptitude were to be implemented, it would amount to a form of racial segregation. That is, effectively, an admission that certain races (blacks, Arabs, Indians, Mestizos) have a scientifically identifiable lack of intellectual capacity, when compared to other races (Whites, Asians… and Jews).

So, these people understand that the science exists, and are not even trying to question it. They are saying that “social justice” should override science, even when it is to the determent of society.

Continuing.

Many distinguished scientists in the United States recognise that race itself is not a biological variable, but they still buy into the notion that shared ancestry can impart certain biological characteristics, said Joseph Graves, an associate dean for research at the University of North Carolina.

Published research has shown that blacks are more likely than whites to have a blood type that causes sickle cell disease and can protect against malaria, and are more likely to have a certain gene called APOL1, which protects against a parasite that causes sleeping sickness.

While Prof Graves did not dispute these findings, he said it is wrong to imply that genetic differences account for the vast health disparities between whites and blacks.

“The assumption is that African ancestry predisposes one to greater disease and mortality profiles in the United States,” Prof Graves said at the conference.

“This is what I call the myth of the genetically sick African.” Instead, social factors are more likely to blame for poorer health among blacks in the United States, he said.

So, genetics prove that blacks are born fundamentally different than us, but somehow, that doesn’t matter, and it must be “social factors.”

Right. Makes sense.

This is going to be a huge issue in the coming years.

Even before genetic coding, scientific racism was just that – scientific. Not based on whatever obscure, vague “hatreds” they wish to accuse us of, but on the absolute fact that people are born differently, and these intrinsic differences cause differences in behavior, resulting in an incapacity of the races to function on an equal playing field, along with natural hostilities between people of variant genetic backgrounds.

But now, the Jews and their liberal lackeys have been literally backed against a wall. There is nowhere to run. Eventually, they are going to have to concede that indeed, Hitler was right.

It has sometimes been suggested that whites are more altruistic than other races. Whites welcome other races into their homelands in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia and New Zealand, but blacks do not welcome other races into their homelands in Africa. In fact, in Zimbabwe blacks have expropriated whites and in South Africa blacks murder whites on an extensive scale.

Recent evidence for greater altruism in whites than in other peoples has been published by Lisa Leslie and her colleagues at the University of Minnesota. They examined race differences in charitable giving as an expression of altruism (Leslie, Snyder & Glomb (2013).  They studied charitable giving in a sample of 16,429 employees in a university. 54% of participants were female. Most participants were staff (78%) rather than faculty. The breakdown of the sample was Asian (6%), Black (5%), Hispanic (2%), Native American (1%), White (84%), and non-resident alien (3%). They gathered data on the amount each employee donated during the organization’s annual month-long charitable giving campaign.

Employees were invited to donate to charities for alleviating or eliminating poverty, the support of education, and the treatment of illness. In examining the race differences in the amount of charitable giving, they controlled for salary, position, and age because these are likely to affect the amount of charitable donations. They found that women donated $31 more to the workplace charity drive than did men, consistent with other research showing that women are more altruistic than men They also found that all the minorities donated less to charity than did whites by an average $26. However, blacks gave more than whites to the black charity. These results show that whites are more altruistic than other races in giving more to charities that support all races. Blacks support their own race through charitable giving but provide less support than do whites to other races.

Leslie, L.M.,  Snyder, M. & Glomb, T.M. (2013). Who gives? Multilevel effects of gender and ethnicity on workplace charitable giving. Journal of Applied Psychology,  98, 49–62.

The original paper is available here.