Defining the “Individual”: The Ruler and The Ruled

While I am principally an individualist, unlike most sworn individualists (who often see all people as intrinsically, unequivocally equal; “the sanctity of the individual” and so on) and proportion their politics to this maxim, I believe that at a certain level of heritable intelligence (namely biological IQ: intelligence quotient) a person’s predisposition towards individualism declines sharply — and therefore the need for benevolent collectivism is an (inevitable) necessity in swaying these groups of people of lower intelligence that are going to take on the beliefs of someone or something sooner or later — the crux of my argument is that lower intelligence people are an ideological power vacuum — Why? It’s simple enough — they lack the reasonable individualistic capacity to be resistant to, and critical of malevolent, monolithic, collective thought and its resulting politics — they, quite simply, are lacking the intelligence to discern and exercise sensible, pragmatic individualism: an important factor in holding together a civilization and ensuring its sustainability. The history of these populations’ civilization concurs with this assertion.

The need for parity between ruler and ruled.

If an electorate lacks the intelligence to “connect the dots”, sees only its own interests (due to lack of creative and/or empathetic vision to see benevolent collective goals) — it both lacks comprehension of itself and others and falls prey to predatory politicians and rulers in all their forms.

These are rulers who will outclass such an electorate in intelligence, knowledge, practicality, conscientiousness, time preference, and just about every other trait that is a reliable predictor of success and influence in its numerable forms.

We are seeing this more and more, the Ashkenazi Jews currently rule over whites and all racial groups beneath measured by genetic IQ.

I believe, unlike the absolute assertions of Jordan Peterson that suggest it is only intelligence that accounts for Jewish influence, that, at least some element of Jewish in-group consolidation is the reason the highest echelons of power are dominated by them. There are simply too many smart non-Jewish ethnic whites for this to go unaccounted for me to believe Jewish dominance has no environmental causes whatsoever.

Peterson makes an assertion here about the nature of White-Nationalist’s outlook, one I feel makes an incorrect assumption. A White-Nationalist’s sobriety regarding race comes not from hatred, but acknowledgement of irrefutable differences between groups of humans that must be objectively taken into account, it’s white advocacy rather than white supremacy.

This, mixed in with the fact Jews came to occupy influential financial positions first before anyone else (due to Christian Europeans being unable to partake in usury historically) this helps to explain why Ashkenazi Jews dominate today — they got into positions first due to the lucky societal circumstances, and then consolidated their positions, with an element of persecution and the fact Jews were relatively ostracized, these positions likely were passed on in a nepotistic way; more so than not with the in-group in mind.

Also, most of the immoral, extraordinarily powerful so-called “Jews” are actually Judeo-MasonicSolomonic adherents — by extension, Satanists, this has served to totally mischaracterise Jews altogether. The people who are responsible for the Globalist agenda are not real Jews, they may identify as Jews publicly, but they have Masonic inspiration. For example, their very non-Jewish symbol, the “Star of David”, is a Satanic, Masonic symbol, many half-Jews have fallen for this false non-biblical imagery and have followed the so-called state of “Israel”; thinking it is a Biblical revelation.

See how the Judeo-Masonic elites are obsessed with Israel for non-Jewish reasons.

Stop opposing the broad ethno-religious group that is Judaism, it’s simply not the case that a broad group of some multi-million Jews are colluding against the world, to suggest so makes little sense. More accurately, a small sect of Solomon-praising, Satanic-Masonic “Jews” are to blame for the sheer misrepresentation of the Jewish community, and all conspiratorial behavior that has seemingly come from a broadly “Jewish” establishment.

“Masonry is a search after Light. That search leads us directly back, as you see, to the Kabalah. In that ancient and little understood medley of absurdity and philosophy, the Initiate will find the source of many doctrines; and may in time come to understand the Hermetic philosophers, the Alchemists, all the anti-Papal thinkers of the Middle Age, and Emanuel Swedenborg. Everything scientific and grand in the religious dreams of all the Illuminati, Jacob Boehme, Swedenborg, Saint-Martin, and others, is borrowed from the Kabalah; all the Masonic associations owe to it their Secrets and Symbols.”
— Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, 33° freemason and founder of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry.

This so-called “light” is, in essence, reverence of Lucifer not as the devil, but as a liberator, a guardian or guiding spirit, or even the true god as opposed to God (YHWH).

Judeo-Masons are obsessed with Israel in the context of Solomon; but look at how Solomon was addressed in the Bible:

“The Lord was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned from the Lord God of Israel.” — 1 Kings 11:9

The charge against Solomon was that ‘his heart was not perfect,’ or wholly devoted to the YHWH, that he ‘went not fully’ after the YHWH. His was a case of halting between two opinions, or rather, of trying to hold both at once. He wanted to be a worshiper of YHWH and of these idols also — It is clear to see how Satanic Freemasonry is a combined religion of pagan Gods and the Judaic God, this is why the elites identify as “Jews” today, but aren’t truly so.

Jewish Mysticism is not true Judaism, it’s a non-biblical offshoot of what is sanctioned in scripture. The entry of the Kabbalah— developed roughly around the 12th century, derived from the heretical, non-inspired text, the Talmud.

Solomon the Wise was an Israelite, he was a Jew, but he turned away from God (YHWH) and pursued Satanism. Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, a Goddess connected with fertilitysexuality, and war. Her symbols were the lion, the horse, the sphinx, the dove, and a star within a circle indicating the planet Venus. Pictorial representations often show her naked. She has been known as the deified morning and/or evening star (Luciferian symbology). Solomon also began to praise Moloch/Milcom/Molech (as the Judeo-Masonic Elites do annually at the Bohemian Grove). Solomon built a high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon.

Look at the chest of this portrayal of Molech, the “Star of David” is clearly embossed in the metalwork. The “Israel” we see today is NOT Jewish!

 

The Star of David, (David, the visionary of Solomon’s Temple), is intertwined with Freemasonry’s square and compasses.

Judeo-Masonic Agenda.

Judeo-Masonic Ashkenazi “Jews” closest competitors, those most genetically similar to them, are Caucasian European whites. If whites are removed from the equation as a major demographic, then the genetic (and thus influence) gap will become wider than ever — this is what those in power are attempting to do; diminish “whiteness” in all its forms — they know the significant predictive role of race in political influence and socioeconomic systems, and are (understandably) putting all of their money into brainwashing people to be blind to this reality while carrying out their dysgenic agenda behind the scenes.

As a result of this agenda, such a dysgenic electorate will be more susceptible to emotional arguments, logical fallacies, compartmentalization, designed dialectics, irrationality, superstitions, hysteric trends, and so on — the funny thing is, we can already see how these “minority groups” are already predisposed to all of these things, yet are protected groups nonetheless — and, right before our eyes, are rapidly replacing whites in Western nations as the new dominant population with an army of liberal “progressives” employed to assure us that this will “enrich” us, all the evidence points to the contrary.

Varying intelligence: why collective thought will always have a place in human society, whether we like it or not.

It’s about mitigation — rather than hoping for a sociopolitical Utopia, I believe reasonable mitigation and sensible policy-making is enough to deliver a society that can flourish.

TL:DR — Just as individual thought will always exist relative to collective thought and vice versa; it’s a seesaw based on aforementioned factors. The further towards base consciousness a population gets the more negatively collectivist it becomes, taking on often bad ideas in lieu of their own.

The role of benevolent collectivism (such as the group-think religiosity of cultural and ethical Christianity) for susceptible groups is deliberately overlooked in postmodernist society — because certain globalist forces want to unilaterally over-represent in society genetically and/or culturally limited “individuals” that, on average, simply lack said mental faculties, know-how, background etc (due to numerous factors including historic inbreeding among many others) to represent themselves as capable individuals, and thus are more receptive to collectivism and the centralization of the state. They’re bending over backwards to represent these people: granting copious welfare, slanting society to the their defense against all sensibility, bringing in compelled speech and taboos, white guilt and so forth — it’s quite simply a bubble for a protected group, that, without such an outrageously preferential bubble – would not get very far at all.

The globalist elite want us to believe that “everyone is equal” to all other concerned citizens regardless of significant civilization-defining traits such as intelligence. Hence the ideological over-representation of Cultural Marxist ideology across all institutions owned by the trendsetters.

In lower IQ people — traits such as gullibility, a lack of receptiveness to rationality, and a predisposition towards unthinking group-think collectivism abounds, all this has a biological basis in race. Populations that operate at a more basic consciousness, i.e. concerned with R-brain matters such as sex, domination, resources on the group or individual basis, lacking the empathetic foresight to perceive and act upon wider concerns.

It is not entirely environmental as the Jew-funded Cultural Marxist institutions will insist.

Guess what? Europe will become a continent dominated by low IQ “individuals” that have just as much of a right to vote as rational, moral, and savvy individuals — the UK alone will become a Muslim country by 2050 if current demographic trends persist due to the proliferate compound nature of R-selective populations: by which point, proxy-totalitarianism will have a firmer foothold than ever.

This is bad news for the individual but great news for the centralized state.

If we look back to the societies that are today deemed “antiquated” and the “wrong side of history”, we can see various successful, influential classical societies and groups that practiced eugenics, Rome, Ashkenazi Jewry, ancient Greeks incl. Sparta, and so on. Even one of the Godfathers of philosophy, Plato, suggested the benefits selective mating to produce a guardian class.

Furthermore, we can see how Western Christian societies averted dysgenics by making legal provisions against birth of inferior human beings, this was notably promulgated in Western European culture by the Christian Council of Agde in 506, which forbade marriage between cousins. Something dysgenic populations never really did to an effective extent, the genetic rift thus widened.

Up until the mid-late 20th century, genetic discrimination such as compulsory sterilization of persons with genetic defects, the killing of the institutionalized and, specifically, segregation and genocide of races perceived as inferior was a wide societal norm, the accepted norm was that there are differences between certain groups of humans, whether we wanted to accept that or not for humanitarian reasons was, quite rightly, a secondary matter.

This article, while cautious to frame such practices and conventions as supremacist, malevolent, or otherwise, hopes to illustrate that a dysgenic society will lead to more suffering and conflict than a society with eugenicist practices ever will; and the evidence supports it.

Drawing the line as to what defines an “individual” in relation to sociopolitical systems.

Because a comprehensive system of natural selection no longer exists, (even culturally now) — the distinction between genetics that are passed on by merit and genetics passed on with the help of welfare and so on — is nonexistent, we have R-selective groups being able to pass on their genes where in a truly open, decentralized society this wouldn’t be able to happen.

In simple terms in application to political systems — smart people are often more individualist (thus, conservative and nationalistic), lower intelligence groups are less individualist (more predisposed to group-think, socialism), the role of mass-indoctrination may be able to net some fringes of higher intelligence groups but generally the core principle remains.

I propose we can relatively reliably categorize people into “capable individuals” and “incapable individuals”, largely reliably on the five racial groups and dysgenic/eugenic traits, gender, background, but also (albeit somewhat less reliably) within these groups based on class. (Cultural Marxism is all about denouncing the terms “categorical” or “general” but these are perfectly fine terms, used in the correct context).

While these assertions of justifiable partition certainly sounds collectivist and an affront to individual rights — race realism and the taxonomic significance between biological groups is founded in science; and a factor worthy of serious consideration when regarding any system of social and political arrangement.

I’ve written a whole article (called “the truth about racism”) detailing the significance of race and intelligence, so I won’t go into too much detail here, but here are a few points that help illustrate my argument:

If we cannot see the influence of race and IQ on upholding individual representation, we will fall to absolutist collectivist politics, especially as the “migrant crisis” rapidly undermines Western population of capable (higher IQ) individuals with incapable (lower IQ) individuals.

Representing the voting rights of incapable (low IQ) people is dangerous, I propose an IQ and general/applied knowledge test for eligibility to political vote. While this kind of test cannot determine moral character, at least it can determine intelligence.

Lower intelligence groups are almost always going to organize towards the characteristics of the mob, fragmentation, and group-think, whereas higher intelligence groups tend to represent their own thoughts and interpretations and have awareness of benevolent collectivism, thus shaking-off most inclinations to representing monolithic thought.

They will almost always make irresponsible, hysterical, passionate, and irrational decisions with their rights to liberty, democracy, and self-determination, by extension empowering the state; not themselves or the wider capable individual.

At a higher level of intelligence, the ability for someone to think for themselves increases, hence the commonality of individualism and democracy in Western nations occupied by races of higher overall IQ (even if Western democracies and systems that champion the individual are often subverted — the general attitude towards individualism is more common in people of higher intelligence than without).

In my opinion, this is where the role of independent collective thought such as the Bible comes in, while you can absolutely take on the teachings on your own terms, regardless of your intelligence — the importance of casting a collectivist thought process that engages with several fundamental principles such as “do not not steal”, “do not kill”, “do not lie lie”, etc based on the threat of eternal damnation is the only way to communicate to a group of people not (easily) able to operate on a rational level of thought, the Bible does this exquisitely, it uses the threat of death mixed in with something that cannot be possibly tangibly understood (a deity), the perfect enforcing combination for keeping susceptible populations in line.

The decline of Christianity as a (mostly) positive force of collectivist thought has spelled disaster for the West.

As Christianity has been mocked and destroyed in Western culture at the hands of Jewish influence, we see susceptible (lower intelligence) populations previously protected by the positive collective standards of the Bible now become receptive to new “progressive” hive-mind ideas, it really is one religion exchanged for another more materialistic one, this new nihilistic religion as Christianity’s replacement lacks any direction.

Instead, it opens vulnerable populations up to sophistic ideas that, ultimately, reduce essential liberties, that, without the safeguarding ideals of collectivist Biblical faith, have now been able to infiltrate and infect Western culture.

 

 

Digital Book-Burning: Huge Mass Censorship Underway

Globalist-owned and influenced social media giants Google and Facebook, which together soak up nearly 80% of all online ad revenue, have declared war on conservative, alt-right, and classical liberal accounts, and are actively using a variety of underhand censorship techniques to impose their will to stifle and stamp-out undesirable free speech — all under the guise of “anti fake news”, “anti-extremism”, “anti Russian propaganda”, and “anti-terrorism”.

Recent changes in the companies’ algorithms that allegedly were made to weed out ‘fake news’ instead have been weaponized to weed out independent media and right-leaning voices that don’t comport with the Marxist Left ideology of the sites’ owners.

Calls for baseless censorship from huge multinational Globalist fronts only highlights the economic and political forces driving the censorship campaign: an alliance of the military/intelligence apparatus, giant technology firms and the corporate-financial oligarchy — if you follow the money, it will lead to the Globalist banker families who own all the corporate fronts for Globalism.

Techniques such as shadow bans (bans that affect the user without them knowing), traffic re-direction, parental “restricted mode” which blocks ‘controversial’ or ‘inappropriate’ content (which includes alternative media), preemptive flagging based on tags, description, thumbnail, and titles, as well as demonetization and ad revenue sanctions.

“Google is a monopoly, and its anti-free speech policies are beginning to erode the sanctity of civil discourse. We need some kind of constitutional amendment or mass movement, such as the one against SOPA, in order to re-assert the supremacy of free expression.” 

Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars Editor-at-Large

The ever-growing, ever-intricate censorship machine is a threat to free speech.

In February, Facebook launched a new algorithm to ensure that conservative news would not spread on the social media platform. The algorithm change caused President Donald Trump’s engagement on Facebook posts to plummet a whopping 45%.

Some sites and conservatives that have Facebook pages have seen their traffic drop anywhere from 75% to 95%.

Juniper Downs, global head of Public Policy and Government Relations at YouTube, boasted that Google uses “a mix of technology and humans to remove content,” adding that YouTube relies on a “trusted flagger program” to provide “actionable flags” based on the flaggers’ experience with “issues like hate speech and terrorism,” words that imply that these “trusted flaggers” are connected to US intelligence agencies.

  • “Machine learning is now helping our human reviewers remove nearly five times as many videos as they were before,” Downs said, adding that Google’s censorship machine is virtually automated. She said that this year there will be “10,000 people across Google working to address content that might violate our policies.”
  • YouTube has “removed 160,000 videos and terminated 30,000 channels for violent extremism.” The company has “reviewed over two million videos” in its collaboration with “law enforcement, government,” and “NGOs.”
  • YouTube has openly admitted on Twitter that it is censoring videos based on content, stating, “if the video is also not suitable for a wider audience then it might see poorer performance.”

Downs stated that Google is actively engaged in promoting what she called “counter-speech,” that is, the promotion of propaganda narratives. She also pointed to Google’s Jigsaw program as deploying “targeted ads and YouTube videos to disrupt online radicalization,” and “redirecting” users to content that Google approves of.

Small-scale alternative content producers face uphill struggle.

The requirements to file an appeal against demonetization are extremely demanding, leaving most small producers with zero recourse. To file an appeal, the channel must either have more than 10,000 subscribers, or the video in question must have at least 1,000 views within the past seven days. Producers are also not informed of when or what in their video the system finds inappropriate. Both small and large producers have complained on Twitter of double-digit percentage drops in new views after their videos have been demonetized, making it even more difficult to meet appeal requirements.

Creeping barrage of censorship now significantly affecting the top end of alternative media.

They seem to have been mainly targeting the numerous mid and lower-level content producers — but are now starting to make bold moves against some of the bigger alt-media personalities and outlets.

Kim Dotcom, the renowned internet entrepreneur and political activist warned Twitter owner Jack Dorsey over the censorship — threatening to fund an alternative platform, saying that “Twitter could be toast within a year”:

Globalist EU, in fears of rising nationalist-populist sentiments is advocating increased censorship under various guises.

On March 1st, the EU Commission called on companies and EU states to ensure “the detection and removal of illegal content through reactive (so called ‘notice and action’) or proactive measures.” It also identified a vast amount of material targeted for censorship. According to the Commission, its recommendations apply to all forms of “content ranging from terrorist content, incitement to hatred and violence, child sexual abuse material, counterfeit products and copyright infringement.”

The EU justified its policy with misleading claims about the fight against terrorism.

“While several platforms have been removing more illegal content than ever before … we still need to react faster against terrorist propaganda and other illegal content which is a serious threat to our citizens’ security, safety and fundamental rights.”

— Andrus Ansip, European Commissioner for Digital Single Market

Martin Armstrong of Armstrong Economics said full censorship by the German government is on its way:

“There are those in European politics that are now advocating full-blown censorship fearing the collapse of the EU.  State propaganda is acceptable, but anyone who disagrees is somehow now an agent of Putin. This is one of the last rungs a government breaks before it becomes the enemy of the people.”


Here are some alarming censorship moves recently made:

  • NaturalNews: A very prominent health website and the world’s top source on natural health. The site receives tens of thousands of readers every day. On Saturday, YouTube wiped out over 1,700 videos covering everything from nutrition, natural medicine, history, science and current events.
  • Independent Journal Review: A massive conservative website based on Facebook audience.  The Independent Journal Review (IJR) terminated a number of its employees on Thursday, leaving an unclear future for the millennial-focused conservative website that has recently faced a declining audience. IDF was also shadow-banned and blacklisted.
  • American Renaissance: Jared Taylor’s prominent race-realist alternative media platform has sued Twitter for its bans on Taylor’s account and that of American Renaissance, his journal and website. Taylor’s accounts were wiped in December last year as Twitter began specifically excluding what they call “violent extremist groups”. Jared stated that he “constantly repudiated any suggestion of violence”, and maintains that his plans for a separate white homeland “are all about freedom of association”.
  • Breitbart.com: Breitbart was the most influential conservative news source in 2016 with a massive audience. Since the election Breitbart is constantly targeted and smeared by far left operations. Breitbart advertising was targeted by Sleeping Giants and other Soros sites.
  • Infowars: Infowars is another dominant conservative site with enormous traffic.  After several years of video production and tens of thousands of video YouTube gave Infowars its third strike this week and threatens to shut the YouTube Channel down, not to mention significant sanctions and boycotts on Infowars’ ad revenue.
  • Rightside Broadcasting: This YouTube Channel had millions of views before the election.  Since 2016 YouTube has shadow-banned all of their videos.  YouTube has classified its videos of President Trump at a rally as hate speech.  YouTube has demonetized hundreds of its videos.  YouTube hides its videos.  Income for the site is down 95% since the election.
  • Low and mid level alt-media content producers: Less active or inactive conservative YouTube channels are being “accidentally” deleted by Google.
  • Young Cons: Extremely popular conservative news site and received millions of daily readers during the election.  The website received nearly all of its traffic from Facebook. Since 2016 Facebook shut down stories to Young Cons.  Each algorithm change meant less traffic for the popular website. YoungCons was blacklisted by Facebook and struggles to maintain readers.  The site regularly switches domains to save traffic.
  • SarahPalin.com: With over 4 million fans one of the popular conservative pages on Facebook until Facebook blocked all traffic to the website. The page was forced to change the domain to save traffic numbers.
  • Right Wing News: Right Wing News grew to an enormous website in the past few years thanks its popularity on Facebook. In July of 2015, in just a week, the Right Wing News Facebook page reached 133 million people. Because conservatives were sharing content they were interested in, Right Wing News (with 3.6 million Facebook likes) was driving the same amount of web traffic as some of the biggest newspapers in America. Since the 2016 election Facebook blocked traffic to the website. Owner John Hawkins announced he was shutting down the website in January.
  • Western Journalism: Newsweek reported that the site has grown from receiving 1,000 page views a day in 2009 to more than 1 million during 2016. The website was averaging around 6 million page views a day according to Quantcast during the election. Today it is down to around 500,000 a day. Western Journalism was blacklisted by Facebook.
  • The Gateway Pundit: TGP was ranked as the 4th most influential conservative news source during the 2016 election. The site in 2016 received nearly a third of its traffic from Facebook. This past weekend Facebook blocked all traffic from recent stories to the website. TGP advertised with Facebook and is another top conservative website blacklisted by the company. TGP is also shadow-banned by Google and frequently attacked and smeared by the liberal media.
  • President Trump Facebook page: A recent algorithm change has caused President Donald Trump’s engagement on Facebook posts to plummet a whopping 45%. In contrast, Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) do not appear to have suffered a comparable decline in Facebook engagement, reported Breitbart’s Alum Bokhari.
  • Prager Report: PragerU, a conservative educational site, is suing Google and its subsidiary YouTube, accusing the video site of censoring its online videos because of their political leanings. YouTube has banned several of its videos including segments on abortion and Islam. PragerU has a massive conservative audience in the millions.
  • Pamela Geller.com: Pamela is well-known for speaking out against radical Islam.  ISIS has threatened to behead her several times.  During the election PG had over 100,000 daily views from Facebook.  Today Facebook has shut down most of her traffic. Her website suffered serious losses in revenue since the election.
  • Diamond and Silk: Pro-Trump YouTube sensations have a suit against YouTube. The Trump supporters announced in August 2017 that 95% of their videos have been demonetized on YouTube.
  • Ron Paul: The videos of Ron Paul’s Liberty Report were demonetized after a “manual review” by YouTube found it “unsuitable for advertisers.”
  • RT & Sputnik: Google admitted to “demoting” content from the Russian RT and Sputnik news in its search engine and news service, confirming allegations by the World Socialist Web Site that the company engages in mass political censorship in the name of fighting “fake news.”

The Truth About Racism

Race relations is one of the biggest globalist social engineering efforts of the past fifty to sixty years, race has constantly been taken out of context and called an ‘issue of skin color’ by the race propagandists; civil rights figures fought the ‘good fight’, while the opposition; always equated to ‘racist extremists’; were the ‘baddies’.

I will open with two powerful quotes:

“We need to get rid of our liberal preconceptions. Men are not born equal, this is something which has not yet got through to the politicians, and it is by no means clear that all races are equally gifted.”
Dr. Francis Crick, Nobel Prize winner and co-discoverer of DNA

“All the evidence to date suggests the strong and indeed overwhelming importance of genetic factors in producing the great variety of intellectual differences which we observe in our culture, and much of the differences observed between racial groups.”

Hans Eysenck, Professor of Psychology at London University

In a survey from 1985 only 16% of biologists and 36% of educational psychologists disagreed with the statement “There are biological races in the species Homo sapiens“.[88]

The two main sides to the race argument (from Metapedia):

‘Race realists’ view race as a natural phenomenon to be observed, studied, and explained. They believe the human race is a valid biological concept, similar to sub-species or breeds or strains.

On the other side, those I term the hermeneusticists view “race” as an epiphenomenon, (like gender as opposed to “sex”) a mere social construction, with political and economic forces as the real causal agents. Rather than actually research race, hermeneuticists research those who study race.

The race-realist approach is empirical and employs a myriad of scientific methodologies, including surveys, social demography, IQ and personality tests, and behavior genetic analyses (e.g. twin studies).

The hermeneutical approach relies on textual, historical, and political analysis. The race-realist viewpoint is descriptive, explanatory, and typically avoids prescribing policy. Because the hermeneutical viewpoint sees inexorable links between theory and practice, its writings are often prescriptive and assume an advocacy position.

To their opponents, the race-realist approach comes across as cold, detached, and suspect of hiding a “racist” agenda. Hermeneuticists appear to race-realists as muddled, heated, and ideologically committed to an anti-racist activism.


Scientific race realism is not racist. Racism requires hatred. So the belief that some races are better than others is not racist: it is simply the scientific truth.

This article will put race into scientific context and expand on the deliberately suppressed and underrepresented information surrounding the topic.


Globalist migrant agenda (numerical IQ): high net movement from r-selection, low IQ regions to K-selection high IQ regions will spell disaster for the integrity of liberty-oriented Western civilization, lowering the (human development index) HDI and thus creating a more docile, controllable population.

These numbers came from a work carried out from 2002 to 2006 by Richard Lynn, a British Professor of Psychology, and Tatu Vanhanen, a Finnish Professor of Political Science, who conducted IQ studies in more than 80 countries.

Richard Dawkins, ethologist & evolutionary biologist on the topic of racial classification:

“However small the racial partition of the total variation may be, if such racial characteristics as there are highly correlated with other racial characteristics, they are by definition informative, and therefore of taxonomic significance.”
Richard Dawkins, The Ancestor’s Tale

Yes, we’re all human, we must love one another, but that should not stop us accepting our biodiversity as something to be seriously taken into consideration.

The weakest of us should not be arbitrarily ‘represented’ as the best of us against all natural authority; that isn’t wise or meritocratic, it is dangerously delusional.

Research on ethnic heterogeneity has found that divided societies have numerous and severe problems.

It is sometimes argued that “race is just skin deep“. This diagram from a 2011 study shows how much three populations (from Africa, East Asia, and Europe) differ genetically from one another (according to the genetic measure used) and regarding gene groups with different functions. Red lines (additions to the original image) mark gene groups stated to be involved in pigmentation, hair development, and skeletal development (physical appearance). There are numerous other gene groups including many involved in the nervous system or potentially involved in the nervous system (including the brain). The gene group showing the largest population differences was involved in pituitary gland development. The pituitary gland is the part of the brain which controls the hormone system which has many effects on the whole body (including the brain itself).[8]
Lifetime risk of incarceration for different racial groups in the United States. The lifetime risk for Black males is around 1/3. The relationship between race and crime is one example of a topic where many important aspects are not covered in mainstream sources.
Past and predicted future population numbers 1950-2100. One issue relevant to White demographics with Whites quickly becoming minorities worldwide.

What we have in modern times is forced redistribution of resources to lower IQ groups, allowing them to r-selectively breed, this drags the whole of society down, benefiting only the rich Jewish oligarchs who stand to gain from the weakness of a genetically decaying population.

The human racial differential phenomenon.

On the other hand, if this natural selective process is allowed to act out on its own, certain racial groups, depending on the extent of their differences, will, on the whole, remain separated.

What is naturally effective will be represented accordingly, what is not naturally effective will not be represented, this is not racism as we’ve been told (i.e. whites being more wealthy and better represented), this is natural selection in action, without it, the human race, and civilization, would simply not survive. 

This natural segregation phenomenon is being deliberately suppressed, multicultural societies are mainly living apart (with bell curve to be accounted for), this truth is being kept from you.

Groups of people with similar IQ levels are able to integrate, hence why many east Asians are able to perfectly integrate in the West, as the IQ point difference increases it drops down to just assimilation, and then finally full segregation.

The fact that there are no culturally divided societies that are even remotely like the multicultural harmonious utopia we are being sold should cause concern (but is instead ignored).

“This multicultural approach, saying that we simply live side by side and live happily with each other has failed. Utterly failed.”
Angela Merkel

  • Segregation – Different cultures are kept separate from one another.
  • Assimilation – Minority cultures adopt the culture of the majority.
  • Integration – All cultures blend into a common culture. Sometimes described as a melting pot.

Multiculturalism assumes there are no important biological forces keeping different groups set apart. It envisions a world where all cultures live in peace and unity. Opponents hold that this is an impossible fantasy that leads to alienation and anomie, especially when different ethnic groups are together.

Historical observances: most historical, non-socialist empires having many cultures have if anything practiced extensive self-segregation. The different cultures are usually allowed very extensive autonomy to manage their own affairs (including having separate law systems) as long as they pay taxes to the empire. The different groups to a large degree self-segregate from one another in the empire.

For example, in modern day Britain, Islamic migrants have evidently not integrated or even assimilated to the presiding Western culture. What underpins this is a combination of genetic, social, and environmental factors.

Results from various surveys in Britain on British Muslims have been described as stating that:

  • 62% do not believe in the protection of free speech.
  • 58% believe insulting Islam should result in criminal prosecution.
  • 68% support the arrest and prosecution of anyone who insults Islam.
  • 61% want homosexuality punished.
  • only 7% think of themselves as British first (81% say ‘Muslim’ rather than ‘Briton’).
  • 31% identify more with Muslims in other countries than with non-Muslim Brits.
  • 11% find violence for political ends acceptable.
  • up to 52% believe a Muslim man is entitled to up to four wives.
  • 51% believe a woman cannot marry a non-Muslim. Only 51% believe a Muslim woman may marry without a guardian’s consent.
  • 1 in 10 support killing a family member over “dishonor”.
  • 1 in 5 young British Muslims agree that ‘honor’ violence is acceptable.
  • 28% want Britain to be an Islamic state.
  • 40% want sharia in the UK.
  • 40% of British Muslim students want sharia.]

On the other hand, the native population feels as follows:

A 2017 US survey found that is asked if the United States was “losing its culture and identity,” 55% of respondents said yes, with 68% of white working class Americans feeling that way. Almost half (48%) of white working class Americans also feel that “things have changed so much that I often feel like a stranger in my own country,” while 62% believe that immigrants arriving from other countries threaten American culture.

A 2017 UK survey found that 56% believe that local culture was threatened by ethnic minorities.

Research on biological/genetic mechanisms related to racial genetic interests has found that different groups tend to feel more empathy for and favor their own group which makes group conflict very difficult to avoid. This research also implies that assimilation/integration may not work unless the different groups are genetically similar. Thus, the different immigrant European groups to the United States could be assimilated/integrated but this may not work with immigrant groups that are more genetically different.

Stefan Molyneux elaborates as to why this racial segregation phenomenon occurs:

Other leading sources on race realism:

  • David Duke,
  • Steve Sailer,
  • Jared Taylor of American Renaissance,
  • J Philippe Rushton of the Pioneer Fund,
  • Charles Murray of “The Bell Curve”,
  • HBDers, the scientific wing of race realism. If race is a fact of nature, then it can and should be studied by science.

Also see:

Globalist cultural-Marxism is a method of undermining the success of natural systems of genetic selection, et al, for personal gain.

Cultural Marxism: the gradual process of destroying all traditions, languages, religions, individuality, governmentfamily, law and order in order to re-assemble everything under the Globalist model for world governance.

Race manipulation is just one part of this agenda. I will focus on race realism and genetic engineering as a powerful tool for population control.

Anti-meritocratic minority representation.

Anti-white minority ‘representation’ is afoot across school, media, professional, and political spheres.

Many globalist-owned workplaces are offering jobs exclusively, or with great bias towards minority groups. For example, the BBC has been called ‘anti-white’ after stating that “offering (exclusively) black, Asian and minority ethnic schemes is ‘right thing to do’.”

ITV’s ‘Peston on Sunday Show’ was also found guilty of anti-white job advertisement.

They want to exalt desirable minorities and repress undesirable whites.

Minorities are grossly over-represented, while ‘white guilt’ and other cultural-Marxist social engineering ploys have been used to destroy the order-based western mindset and genotype, replacing it with the chaos-based third world mindset and genotype as a methodology for dysgenic population control.

Minority representation is a deliberate illusion.

The <1% remains majority white Ashkenazi Jews; nothing changes for them, yet everything changes for the population they want to control.

This graph gives a general idea for the race power index, although this is based on mainstream rich lists, not taking into account numerous Ashkenazi Jewish trillionaires, i.e. Rockefellers and Rothschilds.

By ‘representing’ minorities in high-earning and highly regarded roles as a ‘progressive’ social justice statement in a ‘post racial’ world, those in control gain more obedience, and create yet more popular acceptance for mass-migration and multiracial societies. Meanwhile, they still hold onto the real seats of power; having given away mere symbols of power, and not substantial power.

Average vs. extreme groups differences.

Another point is that only looking at average differences between groups may be misleading. Many characteristics that are influenced by many factors (like by many genes) will (due to the “central limit theorem”) have a “normal distribution” (a “bell curve” distribution). However, a characteristic of this distribution is that differences will be amplified at the extremes. Thus, group differences will be more pronounced at extreme values than they are at more average values. In practice, this means that racial differences will be more pronounced at extreme values (such as at extreme IQ values). Furthermore, in some situations these extreme groups may be particularly important. For example, it may be extreme rather than average persons that make most inventions. Thus, only looking at average group differences may in some situations be misleading.

See also the article on the Smart fraction.

Hiding the genetic ceiling with the glass ceiling.

Nothing changes at the very top of the hierarchy, but the general public are led to believe that the future is ‘minorities in high places’, i.e. Barack Obama, Sadiq Khan and so on, that minority groups were held back by a social glass ceiling, rather than a biological genetic one.

The Globalists have intentionally undermined natural selectivity, because they control corporate forces that are powerful and influential enough to overwrite the natural order that has ruled for so long and stood in the way of controlling populations.

Now they drive the direction of humanity’s genetic future, by rewriting the human genetic and epigenetic DNA they can pull the biological strings of the human race at their will.

Their false racial paradigm was and continues to be drilled deep into the minds of new generations to indoctrinate an irrational liberality founded in emotion rather than in scientific truth surrounding the subjects of race, colour, and creed — and the truth about biodiversity.


The stigma of being called a ‘racist’.

The fear of being labelled a ‘racist’ is one of the biggest mass-hysteric trends of our time, it is a designed social stigma that aims to suppress discussion and acknowledgement of the rational race discussion, this allows social engineering and race-mixing to take place with minimal popular resistance.

There’s a reason the migrant crisis heavily favors African and middle eastern migrants; they have the detrimental genotype and mindset they want to mass-introduce in the West, to create a worker subclass accustomed to poverty, corruption, and illiteracy. They use the welfare state and ‘open-door’ policy making as a magnet for these migrants.

This reality is consistently censored in the West as we are spoonfed the emotional narrative of the race discussion everyday; that those who challenge orthodox race and immigration ideas must, without question, be motivated by an extremist and irrational racist ‘hatred’, and whatever they have to say ought to be dismissed.

Race is not a social construct, it is biological.

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

— Martin Luther King, Jr.

Martin Luther King, Jr. at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom on August 28, 1963.

Martin Luther King, Jr. offered a beautifully idealistic, yet token concept in his famous Washington speech in 1963.

“The idea that race is ‘only skin deep’ is simply not true.”
Forensic anthropologist George W. Gill, in 2000

He claimed that our differences are not biological, but a result of hard graft, merit, and self-determination. He made an argument for environmental causes defining the ‘content of our characters’, but ignored the biological factors that also define who and what we are as human beings.

Environment plays a partial role in defining us, not an absolute role.

“If only environmental factors were responsible for the different IQs of different populations, we should expect to find some countries where Africans had higher IQs than Europeans. The failure to find a single country where this is the case points to the presence of a strong genetic factor.” Richard Lynn


“Regression would explain why Black children born to high IQ, wealthy Black parents have test scores 2 to 4 points lower than do White children born to low IQ, poor White parents.” Arthur Jensen

Today, to even consider race in a non-collectivist light is heavily opposed, both legally and socially. We stand to lose resources, friends, our reputation, or our ego if we stand for what seems to be an idea already beaten by what we are told is the ‘consensus’, that race is a social construct that divides us.

As an individual, it makes sense to go with the ‘politically correct’ herd, to avoid the headache; because it’s the path of least resistance. But the dire implications of doing this are overlooked. Our biodiversity shapes the qualities (or flaws) and the rise or fall of civilization itself, understanding race is understanding ourselves and what it means to be human.

Civilization is made up of human individuals, but speciation can bring on collective racial traits.

Civilization is made up of biological human individuals, our environment is an extension of ourselves; our biology precedes everything we think of, everything we produce, our inclination and reception to certain persuasions, and every trait that enables the group to flourish, or to flounder.

IQ and good genes creates success and progression, poor genetics causes regression, environmental factors play a role too, but the genetic role is understated.

This is an imperative dynamic to successful civilization, a nation of the genetically healthy is going to be a nation set for success.

 Garett Jones states in the video that:

“Smarter people are more likely to see the ‘invisible hand’, having smart, informed voters is crucial to a functioning civilization; to support market competition, to support some degree of long-term thinking, looking at the unseen versus the seen.”


Natural selection is everywhere, except in social justice ideology.

If you accept evolution, you accept race realism.

In the animal kingdom, successful genes always outlive weaker genes, stronger traits are passed on while weaker traits are cast aside, this process ensures the success and continuation of a species, it is a natural safeguard that has stood the test of time.

Humans follow these fundamental laws of nature too.

For example, in choosing a mate, or in a professional setting where a company hires on positive traits; a hardworking nature, punctuality, composure, adaptability, and creativity is favored over the slacker, a better candidate will net more resources and boost ‘survival’ chances — we can all agree to this common system of meritocracy; a nation is simply that on a larger scale among the mean genetic average of the associated group; it’s group awareness of what has worked for survival in the immediate environment, and a desire to preserve and embolden that.

Yet today, in the name of tolerance, we insist on immigration policies that bring in people that do not have the necessary traits, both biologically and environmentally, to both maintain and further western civilization.

Historical context: race and lineage has always been recognized.

Before the 17th-century scientific revolution, ideas about race were inchoate and unsystematic — “Folk anthropology.”

To the degree they included notions we would now consider biological, those notions came from:

From these, by the time methodical science arrived on the scene, civilized peoples had a fair, but unorganized, stock of knowledge about inheritance and genetic similarity.

In modern times, these ideas about inheritance have been proven true.

“Genetic differences between human groups (in particular, differences in average native intelligence) have been an important factor in human history.”

— A Real Diamond: Michael Hart’s Understanding Human History

With the Enlightenment, systematic biological classification was attempted, most persuasively by Linnaeus.  Philosophers also took an interest — Kant, for example.

In modern times, the race debate is branded as ‘low-brow’ and nonintellectual, yet these leading thinkers partook in deliberating on race.

Race in the modern sense was salient in the 18th-century Americas and the Caribbean, which had long made use of black African and (to a much smaller degree) local indigenous peoples as slave labor. It was salient, too for the small minority of Europeans who had first-hand experience of Europe’s overseas empires.

This did not lead to much scientific theorizing, but it did cause a lot of noticingThomas Jefferson can be taken as representative.

The “long” 19th century (i.e. to 1914) saw the end of race slavery in the civilized world, and the rise and acceptance of evolutionary biology. There was much theorizing about race, most of it not very scientific. Charles Darwin was of course an outstanding exception — a great scientist.

Darwin observed clear differences between the races.

The 20th century saw the rise of population genetics (Wright, Fisher, Haldane), the neo-Darwinian synthesis (Dobzhansky, Mayr) in evolutionary biology, the molecular structure of DNA (Watson & Crick), and rigorous psychometry (Burt, Eysenck, Jensen).

All these developments had implications for the understanding of race as a feature of the human world. Modern science has allowed us to prove many of these historical theories and observances.

Race Realism and Race Denialism.

Let’s start by defining ‘race’ itself, modern society has been taught to see race in terms of color, that we are ‘all the same underneath’. Race actually means something else altogether:

“The biological definition of race is a geographically isolated breeding population that shares certain characteristics in higher frequencies than other populations of that species, but has not become reproductively isolated from other populations of the same species.”

BiologyReference.com

‘Race realism’ is the scientific point of view that:

  • Like any other widely-distributed species, Homo sapiens are divided into local varieties – races – that differ in their biology.
  • Where races show different statistical profiles on heritable traits – physiognomy, metabolism, disease susceptibility, and the BIP traits (Behavior, Intelligence, Personality) – it is reasonable to infer that biological differences are causal factors.
  • Biological race differences work together with adscititious factors (history, geography, epidemiology) to shape social outcomes.
The ‘Bell Curve’: the science is clear, the races have classifiable differences, we must accept this uncomfortable truth and adapt ourselves accordingly.

The opposite of race realism is race denialism, and race denialism is the social ideology and practice promoted by Zionist Globalism in order to gain popular acceptance to subversively sully the races as a part of their agenda of dysgenics; to create the lowest common denominator as the average human being by promoting deleterious alleles.

‘Race denialism’ is the hypothetical point of view that:

  • Observed group differences between local varieties of Homo sap. are superficial and inconsequential, like the hair color of individuals.
  • The different statistical profiles of races on BIP traits and social outcomes are entirely caused by historical and social factors. Biology plays no part.

Poor genetics for the many means more power to the enlightened few, by lowering the genetic (and epigenetic) ceiling for average humans you can easily assert a designed eugenicist race above a designed dysgenicist slave race. If the average person lacks the mental faculties to conceive of their own enslavement then those in control have succeeded.

This agenda is promoted through race denialist, dysgenic-promoting propaganda which is widely seen across globalist controlled mediums:

  • The commanding heights of Western societies – media, schools, politics – are held by race denialists, mainstream anything promotes race denialism in the most one-sided way imaginable.
  • Race denialism is a social dogma. All respectable people are required to affirm it.

 


The geographical impact on race and IQ.

Early humans settled different landmasses, these landmasses held different environmental characteristics, which, in turn, affected their occupants.

Harsh northern hemisphere climates forced its occupants to become more adaptable and resourceful, surviving in colder, less hospitable climates (especially in antiquity when the northern hemisphere was even colder) required the development of larger intelligence faculties compared to survival in sub-Saharan Africa where an abundance of regional wildlife and flora meant biological adaptation was less necessary for survival.

Other factors that influenced racial differences besides environmental acclimatization include inbreeding and a lack of genetic variety in closed groups; an often cited rule is the 50/500 rule which states that for wild animals a minimum of 50 individuals is needed to avoid inbreeding depression due to recessive alleles.

Furthermore, a minimum of 500 individuals is needed in order to avoid decreasing genetic variability within the population. This since otherwise the number of new mutations will be lower than effects of random genetic drift which decrease genetic variability. It has been questioned how important a high genetic variability is. For example, there are species of albatrosses which have survived for nearly a million year despite extremely low genetic variation.

A 2010 article stated that couples related as second cousins or closer and their descendants accounted for an estimated 10.4% of the global population. Such marriages were most common in Africa, the Middle East, and west, central, and south Asia. Also, in these regions even couples who regard themselves as unrelated may exhibit high levels of genetic relatedness, because of a long tradition of marriages within clan, tribe, or caste boundaries.

The five major races correspond to major geographic barriers between human groups: the Oceans, the Sahara desert in Northern Africa, and the Himalayas mountain range in Central Asia (and the deserts and the mountain ranges bordering on the Himalayas). These geographic barriers can be distinguished in the above satellite imagery of Eurasia and Northern Africa.

The prevalence of bacteria in warmer climates as opposed to colder climates and the implication on human biology.

One theory for the IQ differences between racial groups comes from how in warmer climates there is more bacteria, in colder climates there is less.

The theory outlines how populations in bacteria-rich environments developed better immune systems rather than better mental faculties. Whereas in colder climates the development of the brain was given more emphasis. This may explain how racial groups from colder climates have weaker immune systems than racial groups from warmer climates.

“Caucasoids and Mongoloids who live in their homelands and in recently colonized regions, such as North America, did not rise to their present population levels and positions of cultural dominance by accident. They achieved all this because their ancestors occupied the most favorable of the earth’s zoological regions, in which other kinds of animals also attained dominance during the Pleistocene. These regions had challenging climates and ample breeding grounds and were centrally located within continental land masses. There general adaptation was more important than special adaptation. Any other subspecies that had evolved in these regions would probably have been just as successful.”

 Carleton Coon (1962)

Read more on arguments concerning biological race.