Race

The theory that IQ is not hereditary is not an anti-hereditity theory but an anti-racialism theory.

Curious about thoughts on these: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]



Since I am Italian, I do not fit into this picture of the future. I noticed a fair bit of interest in Vikernes here, so I was wondering what opinions were on this.

Nothing he said about fitness in the hypothetical situation of no technology or an ice age is incorrect.
He does not appeal to morality, he appeals to survivability and selection.
How much of a coping mechanism prevents you from one thing or another because of your breed, will affect your success.

Varg appears to me to generally concern himself with family over breed and breed over race and race over etc. etc.
Morality of the typical sort is not much an issue.
Whether or not he is correct statistically and naturally, you could try to check yourself.

My thoughts are: people will ally with their closest genetic cousins. Where the southern Europeans fit, is closer than Asians, Arabs, Blacks, and mestizos.
North Western Europe will need middle ans southern Europeans, probably.

Whether or not you have a future depends on your definition. Who is "you" in spirit? Some will sacrifice themselves for a black child, others will for only whites or family or no one. If you identify as a race, eventually you will lose the alliance.

Each environment promotes the traits that would optimize survival in them.
Indo-European man covers a wide range of environments.
Loss of skin and hair pigmentation indicates more northern environments.  
Less indicates, a more southern environment.
Further and closer to the original.

Stringent environments in comparison to the original African sub-Saharan are always referred to as "northern" because the populations that were forced to migrate had to move northward.
The further towards the north, the more demanding the environmental conditions became.
Natural selection would select for the traits that would be optimal within these more severe, and alien to the sub-Saharan...not only in pigmentation but in ingenuity, cooperative tendency, tolerance of need/suffering etc.
In all cases a move out of humanity's original environment would force an adaptation.
Cold and absence of sunlight is but one stress factor. It is not the only one defining European form non-European, even if it is the most easily discerned and therefore more easily argued for.
Another would be an absence of water, or fertile soil, or large game, or of nutrients that could be foraged directly and that do not require some form of processing, or domestication/taming.
Domesticating other species of life, plant or otherwise, is also an indication of ingenuity.
Each type of stress requires a particular adaptation that would then be naturally selected.

When I speak of Europeans I speak of them in the broader Indo-European genetic lineage.
 
Of the populations forced to emigrate out of Africa, or out of the sub-Sahara to be more precise, due to their weakness, the move north was then be followed by a migration southward, a re-turn, because of the Ice Age.
Some managed to remain in more northern environments, others migrated south into more climatically hospitable environments with their own environmental challenges.
Ingenuity, and the development of higher cognitive abilities, imagination, cooperation, was common to all, not only because they shared a common heritage before the Ice age forced them apart, but also because no matter where they went the environment was not a sub-Saharan one.
Race mixing, tribal mixing, must also be taken into consideration.
More northern tribes were less likely to become mixed.    

As an example I give the history of the Spanish and the Portuguese.
A sad story of ascent and decline.
Their exploration, ingenuity, helped them come into contact with inferior populations which they then mixed with, resulting in their present decline.
Same goes for the Greeks, and their mixing with the Turkish tribes, as well as their infection with Judaism, morphing, from this mixing, into Christianity.
The ancient Romans must have absorbed many alien to their own bloodlines, from across their empire.
Appearance always indicates the degree of dilution if we consider fair skin and blond hair an indication of adaptation to northern environments.

But if we consider ingenuity, intelligence, an ability to survive severe environmental conditions as the heritage of Indo-European cultures, from the Celts to northern-India, then cold and lack of sunlight is but one aspect of a demanding environment, but not the only one.
Considering all the fact we might explain why civilizations emerged around the Mediterranean basin and not in northern Europe.
There is no civilization comparable to Rome, Hellas, or Hinduism in the north, even if their spirituality is almost exactly the same.
The balance between stress and comfort is matter of cycles.
Too much stress and the branch breaks. Too much consistent stress and there is no time and no energies left to advance, to develop.
A period of stress followed by a period of comfort enables the sufficient release of accumulated stress energies to be applied towards thinking that is not directly involved with survival.

Too much leisure and you have atrophy.
Too little leisure and you have no time and no energy for anything but work.
A fine balance...a Hellenic ascetic one.

The ancient Greeks are a good example.
The geography is inhospitable. The weather might be optimal but not from a nutritional standpoint.
Large populations cannot be supported, and the nutrients require hard labour and domestication to be consumed.
The Athenians, for this reason, turned to the sea, bringing them in contact with a multiplicity of peoples and traditions.
The Spartans chose a more austere strategy, embracing need/suffering. They embraced severity, adapting their behavior to the severity of the land, explaining why they never became a great empire, but a legendary spiritual attitude.

Environmental severity is not only about cold and lack of sunlight.

Concerning degenerates and their Dysgenics

When it suits them the human race is far too complex to understand.
Mystical it becomes.
Magical supernatural, divine, void of all natural determinations.
Pure idea(l).
But when it does not, humans become simple, are reduced to pigmentation, a feeling, a sensation.
Of course this is never applied consistently. fro example these same degenerates do not reduce the category of animal, named cow, to its skin pigmentation, or to the smell of its feces - they do not deconstruct a cow to then selectively pick and choose how to reassemble it to suit their delusions, and what to disregard for no reasons at all, but only to ridicule it, based on prevailing cultural norms...then considering themselves ahead of the herd.
Uniformity forces a psychosis with standing apart. To reduce all to a uniformity, necessitates a desperate desire to be seen, and appreciated within that which you've constructed to hide within.
A need to show only what you want to, and be seen only as you wish to see yourself....making fashion, and hyperbole in expression, dress, attitude a matter of being noticed among the herd you place yourself in, willingly.
I suspect a similar psychosis with all bovines. They want to disappear in the herd when the predator lurks, but when they feel safe, they want to be recognized as an individual, as someone worthy of procreation, and recognition.
Anxiety forces them into uniformity, and a reduction, sheltering, makes them 'bold' again.
But this boldness becomes exaggerated, to compensate for their desire to disappear. It becomes pronounces, hyper.

So, the Human Race is divine, mystical, but races are about pigmentation, hair texture.
Everything that applies in distinguishing and categorizing world, does not apply to human, when it has become a mystical abstraction.

World = humanity
Humanity = world

When the concept 'human' has been detached from nature, it is made sexless, raceless, has no past, nothing that determines it, that limits its potential.
Locke is behind this Americanism - tabula rasa...all shall be judged by their production potentials, which is called their "character" (caricature)...meaning their social role, their social performance.
How they relate to other humans.
Humanity becomes another word for world.
To seduce, manipulate, exploit and dominate humans, is equivalent to being god.
Ergo, word.
'...and the word was with God.
and the word was god'
It has become pure noumenon....pure idea(l).
As such it exists only in the minds of those that share it.
As pure idea(l) it has no existence outside minds, so quantities, conviction, shared ideas, are a matter of survival.

The idea first...and then to be made real.
Noumenon to phenomenon, inverting nature's phenomenon to noumenon.
Not Right makes Might...but Right makes Might.

Repeating myself.......

Eugenics in relation to Natural Selection
Imagine....you meticulously and painstakingly breed a specific kind of dog. A dog perfect for a specific task, With he right mixture of traits, nurtured and balanced, to produce a perfect specimen.
Then, some careless, degenerate takes all those years of careful breeding, and mixes it with just any other breed, relying no chance, to produce something it took years of willful focus to make.

All that work, effort, pain and suffering; all that time destroyed....like breaking off a piece of a stalagmite that formed over millions of years of mineral deposits.
And for what reason?
Because to the degenerate anything beautiful, strong, virile reminds it of how ugly it is....reminds it of what natural selection has failed to produce, when sheltering and the memetic di-sease took over.
What does the degenerate replace a natural phenomena with?
Symbols...declarations, words, piling up as if they were mineral deposits, to create what?
A theory?
A hypothetical ideal?
A monstrosity pretending to be what it can never be?

"The Enlightenment included a range of ideas centered on reason as the primary source of authority and legitimacy, and came to advance ideals like liberty, progress, [and] tolerance ..."
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

When reason says there's differences between capacities for reason between human breeds/kin, so one's own personal ability for reason may be less than someone else's... Well, that's when reason has gone too far and it's time to start being compromising/agreeable ('reasonable').

Only the human animal can reject the input of his senses and opt to replace them with abstractions based on ideas constructed in the brain, entirely independent from reality, and as a rejection of it.
Only the human animal can reject what it perceives to replace it with an idea it has yet to validate, based on the assumption that what it sees is too complex to make sense of, or that what will validate its idea is out there, somewhere, waiting to be discovered, in the meantime dismissing what is present as superficial.

An animal does not question its perceptions when it perceives difference and similarity.
It has evolved to do so as a matter concerning its survival.
The human animal can do so because it places its survival within a group it must accommodate and be accommodated by.

All anti-race arguments begin from the post-modern social constructivism, and end with a psychological accusation.
In between they ignore the contradictions in their own absurdities.

What of appearance, and how would evolution apply to the human species if appearances and intermediate stages are blamed on social factors?

Was there no evolution before humans invented social systems?
From where to memes come from, if not from genes interacting with environment?

Why does appearance mean nothing only when it comes to humans?
Why did genetic isolation only result in a physical divergence, but had no significant effects on intelligence and psychology?
Why would evolution produce such obvious physical differences, and have no significant mental or psychological effect?

How small must an effect be before it is, conveniently, ignored?

How did intelligence evolve if genetic isolation only affected humans physically?
Why do some races produce complex social systems and cultures, whereas others only produce primitive social systems and cultures? If it's all about luck, then genetic drift ought to be considered the most decisive evolutionary force.
Why do the same races, the same noes that never developed sophisticates social systems and cultures, also fail to compete intellectually in the present system? Is this a coincidence?

Why do Negroes mature a full year, on average, before Caucasians do?
Is their dominance in track and field also a matter of upbringing and social factors?

How do species evolve if genetic isolation is not a part of the explanation?
Do they magically pop into existence, or do species gradually diverge, over time, until they are separate species?

Race is a sub-category of species, which is a sub-category of life.
To love, loving, or will willing, are linguistic twists to the expression of to identify with being alive - to love and will life, or to the condition that allows willing and loving to become probable.

Race, like species, like life, is about potential, and potential is another way of saying what is probable, or a qualification of what is possible - what is made more possible.

Will and love, and value, and need are expression of living. It is what differentiates, distinguishes the living emergent unity from the non-living congruity.
To will is to express living, as is loving and needing, and due to needing valuing, judging, evaluating in relation to need/suffering.

Self can only refers to the sum of all that is part of an organism's past - sum of all nurturing being its essence, its nature.
This is its identity.
An individual is nothing, or is reduced, if it identifies with the immediate, the most current, what is trending, or popular, or what is pieces together from the immediate environment.
Identity is the sum of all past, manifesting as presence, as appearance, which must be re-called, re-affirmed, not constructed.
Know Thyself...thy Self.
To know what you have forgotten, rejected.

Self can only refer to living organisms, for they reaffirm their past, with every breath, every feeding, every reproduction, every increase in their being, growth.
Will to Power can only refer to living organisms, as a will of what is lacking - the absent-absolute.
Willing in power, as a relationship of individual to other - power being a relationship, a juxtaposition, of self with other, or of the current self to previous self.
Freedom is about detaching from such relationships, where they no longer matter...the absolute, God, being a complete detachment form otherness.
Individual is another word we use to describe self, distinguishing it as a emergent unity, among many others - the individual emergent unity, rather than the collective out of which it emerges.
Individual is an expression of species, the one is an expression of the collective.

Breed, race, kind, {ειδος} is a movement towards, or away from the collective, that distinguishes itself with this movement - motive.
The movement can project its goal as an idea(l), to focus and to orient itself within the Flux.

Most degenerates will consider the extinction of Indo-Europeans as a 'positive'...living in their naive, win/win universe.
They only see the benefit of uniformity, and the reduction of differences....and cannot see or accept the loss, the costs of this uniformity.

Is the only thing lost is a human distinction?
No...because this distinction evolved over centuries of naturally selected traits that gave rise to Civilizations like Hinduism, Hellenism, Rome...
What is being lost is that ingenuity, spirit of masculine rebellion against authority, producing art and philosophy and technologies.
That loss will not be recuperated with education.
When it is gone, it will require centuries of stress and natural pressures to cultivate it anew.

Is race only about skin color?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Some assert that believing race realism is a way of an insecure person flattering themselves. That is not how I see it. It would be great if everyone were equal because it would relieve the responsibility on my part to concern myself with the future of: my children, myself and my society with eugenic considerations.

I actually look forward to criticisms of the position so the evidence can be shown to be of nil effect.

I cannot concern myself fully with just this one aspect of my life, though, so I rely on people who demonstrate better skill in the field to have a clarifying debate on the subject; especially when it involves more specialized ideas I'm unfamiliar with. Until one of those more advanced ideas bear some fruit, I'll believe the simplest explanation for the evidence that conforms with the behavior and patterns I see right in front of my face and in raw data.

Slaughtz wrote:

Some assert that believing race realism is a way of an insecure person flattering themselves.

Because they use ideas for that reason...so they must believe that everyone is like them....otherwise they expose how self-serving, and idiotic and infantile they are.

Moderns unload what they fear they are guilty of, upon another, the antagonist, to leave them clean and innocent, in their own eyes.
It's part of salvation theology.
Everyone is a sinner...or as guilty of sin, within their own delusional morality, as they are.
The possibility that there is no sin....eludes thir retarded minds.

EVERYONE is a equally a sinner....just as EVERYONE is equally subjective.
All are guilty, to the same degree.
This is the all-leveling premise.
Degeneration, degradation.
Lowest-common-denominator.
Uniformity in mediocrity.

Degenerates evaluate ideas on how they make them feel, serve to achieve their desirable utopias, or are flattering....so they must also believe EVERYONE uses the same criteria.
All are as degenerate as they are.
Parity through ignorance.
Nobody knows the absolute certain truth, therefore all are equally ignorant.

It's not that race and sex, are the only aspects of human nature...but when they are rejected as being fundamental, by hypocrites with a social agenda and no arguments, other than deference, and allusions, and personal assaults, and insinuations....then they become central to the dis-ease that is infecting the west.
If we fail to understand why this is occurring, now, at this time, then we will never diagnose the dis-ease....and we will fall ill ourselves, or, if already infected, we will never get well.
Presently, in the west, the infection is expressed through genetics....because it is rejecting, attempting to detach from memories, from the past, from nature.  
The virus is becoming noticeable in maters of sex, gender and homosexuality, and in matters of race.

These are the weak point the virus enters the host.

For degenerates this is a matter of life and death....be infected and survive a bit longer (survival at all costs), or commit suicide, or suffer a lifetime.  
Sex and race...where genetics appear most obviously...and what the degenerate must escape through.

Race, sex and homosexuality are the front lines of this War like no Other.
It is where the abuse of language becomes viral.

Degenerates want us to believe that this photo...[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]./..can be explained as a social effect.

But the intellectual advantage and dominance is easier to ignore, or dismiss as a product of prejudice, because who wins the intellectual aces can also be accused of being the product of social factors.
That tiny genetic difference in inherited potentials, make man dominate chimpanzees, and Negroes dominate in track and field in events requiring little talent and brain.

2017...and not a single Caucasian, or Asian.
It's all a coincidence, or a social effect, of course...just as the absence of Negroes from the finals in intellectual competitions is also a social product of upbringing.
Either that, or Caucasians are the "inferior' race, despite their world dominance, because when they win it's because someone is being repressed, and when they lose, it is fair play, and hard work.

Race, like species, is a category describing genetic inherited potentials.
Nature.
Nurture is the sum of all such determiners.

Nurture describes the immediate cultivation of inherited potentials.
Inheriting a higher potential does not necessarily mean the cultivation of such potential to its fullest.

Species is the gradual splintering of populations along the lines of potentials, in all traits, when divergence makes breeding outside such a population impossible, or a negative outcome, such as a mule, or a liger.
Specialization means that a population begins to diverge along the lines of specific traits, identifying the population's specialized form of survival.

Breeds, a product of human intervention, and in the wild a product of genetic isolation, is what race is within the human species.
Negro is a population that has experienced a degree of genetic isolation that resulted in a distinct apparent difference of physical and mental traits.
Body does not evolve independently from mind.
Environment does not affect body and not brain.

There are retards on both sides of the debate.
On the right, we have the redneck moron, who sees a difference, does not know how or why, but it feels good to associate it with something flattering, something pleasing, something that offers what he is missing, particularly in the United states, a sense of historical substance, an identity, belong to, and feel proud of.

then on the left, we have the emotional degenerate, who simply dismisses difference as a product of society, because that's part of his Marxist idealism, which he is ignorant about.
It feels bad, so it must be wrong, whereas stopping on the social excuse feels good, is simple and easy enough for him to wrap his tiny needs around and settle it all down.
If you ask such a degenerate to bring it 'down to earth' to the soil, to the beginning, before society, before man, and explain how his delusion works tin Evolution Theory and is not more in-tune with Creationism, he cannot, will not even try....h will ignore your challenge, and repeat the mantra, hoping that lie a prayer, if you repeat it, it eventually becomes convincing.

How do species evolve without an intermediate state, that does not exclude mind, does not imply that environment only affects body...because then there's the problem of consciousness and how intelligence evolved at all, if this were the case.
What is race....what is species/
The retard right wingers knows as much as the degenerate social warrior, the delicate butterfly who feels progressive because he, at least, is in fashion, part of a trend, a popular/populist movement, and what lies and delusions he accepts, to support this social construct, is at the very least all-inclusive, embracing, with love, everyone - it offers pleasure to all, and this is the advantage the deciding criteria for accepting any theory as plausible in this modern age of sheltered delicacies and pampered hedonists.

Why should not a school of philosophy develop from this?
A school following the rules of the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
there is an idea for all desires, satisfyingly all needs, as long as it does not deny it to others.

A cherry-picking farmer's market, where you can pick a bit of this, and a bit of unblemished that - commodities produces in quarantine environments - "perfect", shiny, promising taste, to hungry eyes.


If you do not buy it, it goes away, it disappears....no market value, no need for it...the customer is always right.
A product goes away if it fails to become popular, and it stays on the shelves only as long as it remains so.

This is Marxist culture.
The Capitalist/Marxist dualism, of the market paradigm.
What sells, is true...is valuable as an idea....what does not is not.
There is no other criterion....world is humanity, humanity is world.

How can we judge the validity of race, or breeds, or species, with no objective standard?
We can't.
We can only judge it on subjective standards - popularity, amass appeal...seductive value, promises, whether true or false, does not matter.

The commodity market repackages what has sold in the past.
Recycles and renames, and then with commercials repeats the brainwashing, over and over, triggering emotions, manipulating what is unknown, denied existence....exploiting the consumers needs, his erotic desires, his hopes and dreams.
Philosophy on the market.
There is on for everyone. Fabricated and sold, by an expert, a talented technician, a professional liar.

Nine in ten experts agree....this product does what it promises.

I was once confronted with a black man, after I had presented by justifications for race, with the implied threat:
"You wouldn't say that to my face"...when he could not respond to what I had said.

The ones who present the most absurd theories, then resort to the physical to deal with what the noetic has failed to produce.
As if telling a Negro the truth about races sufficed to prove it, and him assaulting me physically was enough for him to disprove my claims.
If so...not entering a cage with a gorilla, and not provoking him, is evidence that the gorilla is a superior species, when, in fact, not entering the cage and provoking it, is evidence that it is not.

26:55 - The speaker makes a point worth repeating.
you do not need to know the genetic code of an apple to see that it differs from an arrogance.
Organisms evolved to perceive difference, without having to understand it, just as they evolved to be driven by the sexual impulse and fight and compete, and go through flirting rituals, without understanding the relationship of their behavior to the outcome of a offspring.

We perceive races. They are obvious.
we do not deny our senses to return to an ideology that we prefer. We do not dismiss and slander our own senses.
We explain why we perceive a difference, and then what caused it.
We perceive its outcome, its manifested presence, as appearance as performance.
We don't need to know the chemistry that makes a grape, or how it differs from a stone.
We see it....out brains evolved to interpret successfully on that level.
We know, and then we proceed to understand...to connect the cognitive dots, to discover the meaning of our interpretations..

I liked the sports video, the shorter body segments of whites provide a big advantage in moving weight as it equates less total body movement under load over totality of body, the lower and centre of the body is where most power comes from which he explained is less developed in Western Africans... clarified a lot for me, what would be interesting is an honest assessment on how influential intelligence differences are in more complex sports.