Counter-Currents
656 words
Spanish translation here
Editor’s Note:
Ariana Miyamoto
The new Miss Japan, Ariana Miyamoto, has a Japanese mother and a black American father. No surprise that she bears her mother’s surname, not her father’s. Obviously, she does not deserve the prize, and because sensible Japanese have not been too intimidated by political correctness to object to crowning a mixed-race, non-Japanese looking individual as a representation of Japanese female beauty, Miss Miyamoto has responded that she is the vanguard of a racial revolution to erase Japanese distinctness, to the applause of the Jewish-controlled Western media.
Everything is political, even beauty contests, and if the globalists have their way, all higher races will be browned out of existence, except maybe the Jews who are egging the process on. Miss Miyamoto may not be representative of Japan today, but in 200 years, she will be, if the Japanese open their borders to immigration. Wasn’t there a time when the Japanese quietly shipped people like Miss Miyamoto, born of shameful crossings between American blacks and native Japanese, to Brazil?
“I want to start a revolution,” Miyamoto added with a laugh. “I can’t change things overnight but in 100-200 years there will be very few pure Japanese left, so we have to start changing the way we think.” (quoted here, emphasis added)
I’m no mindreader. But I have an opinion. That opinion is that the above quote is better rewritten as:
“I want to start a revolution,” Miyamato exclaimed with a snarl of hatred. “I can’t change things overnight but in 100-200 years I’m happy to say that there will be very few pure Japanese left and that these pure racist Japanese will have been eliminated, so we have to start changing the way we think, so everyone can be like me. Thinking about such a future, and contributing to make it come about, makes me feel better about myself.”
The mixed of race always seem to have a chip on the shoulder. Far from being “discriminated against,” this specimen was made “Miss Japan” in what does seem to be an obvious display of affirmative action racial groveling. But, you know, the truly privileged always want more; they are never satisfied. More to the point, no matter how they are catered to, the mixed race can never escape the frustrations of their own existence, the churning turmoil of jarring heredities, the conflicting blood (can one imagine mixing conformist robot-like Northeast Asian blood with that of Black Africa?), the fervent wish that one had been “pure” themselves. “If I can’t be pure, then no one should be,” is the vengeful cry of the mixed, who wants to drag everyone down to their level, so that there are no more examples of “purity” to make them feel bad about themselves.
Yes, they know it cannot happen overnight. They know that they themselves won’t see the “promised land” of the Universal Brown Man, the Last Man, the end of humanity’s highest hopes, the Death of the Future. No, they won’t see it themselves, but obviously they can imagine it, and they can work for it, and by imagining it and working towards it — with pure malice — they temporarily quell the rage and envy in their hearts. But, alas, one look in the mirror, and the burning anger returns, the realization of a fractured identity, the hate-filled animus.
It’s not the “pure” Japanese who are the haters in this story. They just want to be left alone. They just want their people to continue. They just want Japan to be Japan. Why is this wrong?
Now, I’m no fan of the Asiatic, but still, my sympathies are for the Japanese here. Why do they stand for this? What happened to the samurai spirit, the Bushido? Why must indigenous peoples always have to be lectured to by the likes of this thing? Why can’t the native people stand up and say NO?
Source: http://eginotes.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/the-mentality-of-mixed-race.html
39 comments
“..Now, I’m no fan of the Asiatic, but still, my sympathies are for the Japanese here. Why do they stand for this? What happened to the samurai spirit, the Bushido?…”
I’d say the Enola Gay happened to it.
I can’t tell if you’re comment is meant in a pensive way or suggests a more boastful attitude, but as for me I think our destruction of that noble spirit was a loss for humanity. I truly believe the European race stands at the apex of humanity and that it uniquely possesses all those qualities (the so-called “Roman virtues”) that make human life worth a damn. Still, the more I’ve studied Japan the more I’ve come to the realization that this race of people, alone among all others except our own, may have once been equal to the task of sharing that perch with us. It’s too bad things turned out the way they did. We should have avoided that whole costly war. (What did we win? We liberated Poland so the Soviets could enslave it?) But we can’t change the past. We must live with the fact that our country killed the best of humanity, in Europe and Japan.
This yellow-brown something won’t catch on. I’m sure.
– The battle-boar –
This yellow-brown something won’t catch on. I’m sure.
Does that statement ever have a “famous last words” ring to it. If the history of planet Earth is anything to go by, unless physical separation is maintained all groups eventually succumb.
For the purposes of racial continuity it really doesn’t matter how gravely mixing is shunned by a society. Unless the mixed individuals are removed from the society in question (either voluntary or forcefully), someone will eventually mix with them – and thus the chain reaction begins.
Mixing occurs almost imperceptibly slowly, therefore the problem is never regarded as urgent. The number of people who are able to comprehend what the long-term results of unchecked mixing must inevitably be is miniscule – and of those, the number able to effectively communicate their concerns is smaller still.
If the problem of racial differences grows too large to be ignored, separation is seldom the solution proposed. Instead, the tendency is to attempt to ‘solve’ the problem by advocating mixing. Mixing is the past of least resistance – you only need sit back and let it happen – so it’s not surprising that people who don’t particularly care about their racial being jump on it as the ‘solution.’
Adding to the problem is that there are also those who characterize mixing as something far greater than a mere ‘solution,’ but rather place mystical significance on it. It doesn’t matter if only a few people are convinced – Latin Americans, for instance, may praise the ideology but prize their whiteness – because as long the focus is on the question of mixing’s mystical significance the real solution to the problem – separation – doesn’t get a look in. Mixers can win simply by waiting it out.
Obviously there are a lot of personality problems that originate within mixed race individuals – and an intense hatred and envy of everthing that is traditional and unmixed is probably the most common disorder. The question I find myself, as a white nationalist, asking is what is the correct attitude toward mixed race individuals who embrace our ideology? I assume at least some mixed individuals regret their parents’ poor decisions and would prefer a monoracial identity; some might even be willing to take an outspoken position against race mixing (based on personal experience). What should the proper intellectual response from white nationalists toward such individuals be?
For myself, I think that even 1st generation mixed individuals have EGI (mixed EGI, but EGI nonetheless), and that as long as they denounce the sins of their parents and advocate for racial nationalism, they are intellectually on our side (or on someone’s side) and at least potentially political “friends”. Refusing to denounce race mixing makes them political enemies and reinforces their otherness. This is a nuanced perspective, and absolutely not an advocation of further race mixing; indeed part of a mixed person’s renunciation of his mixed identity would entail a recognition that propagating his mixed genes is an unethical activity.
I think this is similar (in some ways) to Kevin MacDonald’s attitude toward homosexuality viz white interests (ie homosexuals should promote white interests by promoting traditional familial relationships that benefit whites generally).
My position is obviously part of the “big tent” approach to white nationalism, but I am curious what others think. Also, living as we do in the age of genetic testing, at what point does someone cease being considered “white” or European? These are all questions that our critics will certainly ask us when we eventually have a political movement in the US or at least a more threatening metapolitical movement. I would like to know what others at CC think about these complicated issues.
If a mixed race people support white nationalism they should choose not to have children.
Good question.
In my humble opinion, being roughly reductionist, we are a bunch of genes, i.e., we are a dynamic body, not a static thing frozen in time.
As a friend of mine says, miscegenation is some sort of original sin, but a curable sin. Of course I’m not talking at a ontogenical level, but phylogenetically, so, we have got a human mass able to be modified.
However, I am not advocating for including mixed individuals in our ranks (as part of a WN activist group), for one simple reason: we have an image to keep, because “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion”.
Someone ceases being considered “white” or European when the group recognizes another identity in such individual. Some kind of affinity permeates the ethnic relations. There are genes, but also those genes should express themselves through the genes bearers.
There are non-whites, including part-white non-whites, who support White Nationalism. There are whites who are married to non-whites and even interbred with non-whites who support White Nationalism. I think that is to their credit, but I certainly recognize the validity of your concern, namely that such people cannot be spokesmen for White Nationalism, because their commitment to the cause is somewhat different than the commitment of whites, particularly whites who have children and thus have a direct stake in the future of our race. But it is important to make distinctions between comrades (members of our ingroup), sympathizers (people who are not in our group but sympathize with our cause), and allies (members of groups with different interests whose interests temporarily align with ours). Non-whites, part-white non-whites, and whites who have bred with other races can still sympathize with our cause and support it without being proper comrades in our struggle.
I’m mixed and generally agree with you. It is objectively unhealthy, from a societal perspective, to mix races. There is no denying that race mixing creates unnecessary identity and morale problems for individuals and groups. Not to mention increased danger of conflicting tendencies.
However, I deny from experience all the supposed genetic disabilities that WNs attribute to race mixing. All of the mixed race individuals I know are physically and mentally healthy. I believe that all the diseases that appear on studies on race mixing are generally because, as Greg stated in an earlier essay, that a majority of mixed race individuals have parents of low class, poor genetic quality. But healthy mixed parents create healthy mixed individuals, from what I have seen. I am not condoning mixing, but the health problems with mixing, I believe, are largely a myth. All of the individuals I know are of at least equal quality (in terms of health) with whites.
There was a woman I tutored in English who was mixed Italian and Brazilian. We talked about immigration and she displayed an emotional resentment towards national identity and I could tell that she was distressed about her inward homelessness. Because lack of spirit, I think it is unfortunate to be born a mixed race women, as women tend to need a physical sense of belonging more than men.
I think my parents were ignorant, but I am proud of who I am, and I think this is reason I am an intellectual ally. Mixed race individuals should learn to embrace their homelessness and freedom. I agree with Evola (and I suppose traditional teachings) that the individual is a composite whole. The outward reflects the inward- therefore no one should ever long to belong to a group they don’t belong to, as what one truly wants is within one’s total self. The best way to prevent resentment is to encourage pride in who one intrinsically is.
We could utilize biology here. Take the principles of inclusive fitness. Eugenics is also a possibility. If the person of mixed race identifies white, and has white features, why should we exclude his or her commitment? Eugenics could separate the DNA, to exclude undesirable features and eventually through inclusive fitness undesirable genetics will disappear. We should conduct eugenics anyways to insure our ultimate survival.
The show is being run by gaijin jewess Inès Ligron. She has an interesting blog: http://inesligron.com/blogroll/did-you-know-that-the-future-king-of-england-will-be-a-jew.html
“if the Japanese open their borders to non-white immigration.”
You mean to non-Asian immigration, because mixing with Whites would do the job just as well. Or maybe even immigration at all, because Japanese are a very distinct racial group in South-East-Asia – due to their insular position. Actually I don’t worry about them much, they are so “racist”, even Koreans or Chinese won’t do it for them. On the other hand, I find it a bit troubling that even in a society like theirs such a mixed race hype is possible by now… this is not a good sign.
That was a slip of the finger. What can I say? I wrote it after giving a 2-and-a-half hour interview, and I was brain dead. Thanks for catching it.
Interesting and somewhat depressing considerations.
My wife’s sister is married to a Ugandan and they have two children. She met him doing overseas charity work as a graduate nurse. She’s from a fairly conservative Christian family and no one had a problem with it, not even the grandparents who were born circa 1930. The eldest child of the marriage is going on three and speaking with his father’s accent. Needless to add, he looks more negro than white.
My wife knows my racial convictions and the result is profound cognitive dissonance that sometimes spills over into painful conflict between us. Obviously, the proper way to deal with a situation like this is to lie to some extent. Adopt a relatively respectable paleo-con type position a la John Derbyshire and say “I don’t have a problem with miscegenation, I just want a curtailment of mass immigration, a nation with a strong ethnic core, etc.” But I’ve been foolish enough to tell her my real views. So now we just agree not to talk out it. Fortunately we don’t see a lot of her family due to geography.
The political question that I think comes out of nasty situations like mine is, firstly, what should be our fully articulated, esoteric policy towards mixed race people, and secondly, does there need to be an exoteric doctrine for mass consumption?
I am not overly hopeful that a distinction can be maintained, as anyone pensive enough to be receptive to our ideas will sooner or later follow them to their logical conclusions. My personal experience has also mad me aware of the massive stumbling block that this issue represents. How many people are willing to sacrifice the individual to the group to the extent required by the task of cleansing the white gene pool? At times, I must confess. I feel morally defeated by the challenge.
I favor a single doctrine about race-mixing, although it is not a simple one.
1. I believe in an “amnesty” for distant past miscegenation. If people think, look, and act white, and it turns out that they have a small admixture of non-white in their genetic woodpile, I do not think we should be concerned with that on a political level. They are part of the white racial community. But some people within our community might wish to remain aloof and not breed with such people, and that is perfectly OK with me.
2. There is a notion I call the son-in-law fallacy, which is basically to constrict the people you consider white to the people you would like to have as in-laws. I think that is a foolish notion. There are plenty of perfectly white people with whom you might not wish to breed, including some with distant non-white taints.
3. Some races are more different than us, and this must be taken into account. Being one-eighth black is far worse than being one-eighth Asian or Amerindian or non-European Caucasian or even very primitive groups like Australian Aborigines, Hottentots, Papuans, etc. whose racially distinct traits tend to be recessive and thus leave little visible taint. Russell Crowe, for instance, has some Maori ancestry, but it certainly does not seem to have harmed him in terms of looks, talent, or intelligence.
4. That said, recent race mixing — being a quarter or an eighth or a sixteenth non-white, depending on the source of the alienage — should be enough to qualify people as non-white. They are not us. They might be fine people. I wish them well. But they should not be allowed to mix into our gene pool — the white race that we are creating. Whether or not we need to physically separate from them is a pragmatic question. In my “The Slow Cleanse,” I make the point that non-whites past child-bearing age are certainly no demographic threat, and there is no reason why we should wish to send them away, since in a few decades all of them will die out anyway.
5. Just as I favor an amnesty for distant past race-mixing, I favor a complete moratorium on present and future race-mixing. I have flat out told white men who are married to non-white women that they should either remain childless or find white spouses if they wish to have children. There will be a whole wide world outside white ethnostates for such people, so they will not lack for options, but if our race is to have a future, they cannot be a part of it.
Whether you as an individual want to be completely frank about such policies or not is of course a matter of prudence. But as a metapolitical movement, we need to be clear and open about such policies.
I have 50% White European/Nordic ancestry, 25% Levantine White ancestry, and 25% mixed ancestry which includes African, Chinese, and White ancestry. My skin is white, my eyes and hair colour are light, but I have a somewhat large nose and larger lips. I had blonde hair and blue eyes when I was born, but my eyes and hair colour darkened a bit over time, although it has still remained quite light. My hair colour now is basically auburn. I have always felt White and this was reinforced by the fact that foreigners (North African muslims and Negroes) have always cast me out as a ‘White’ and ‘discriminated’ (to use that word) against me as such. But do I classify as White in your opinion?
No you are not a European, although you might look like one. You are a person of mixed race, and quite a heterogeneous one. (Being mixed is a problem, and it strikes me that being very heterogeneously mixed is a problem in addition to that.) I would not want you to marry into my immediate family, or to be part of the gene pool of the white race going forward. But there will be a big world outside white ethnostates where you can make a home for yourself, and I wish you all the best.
My eight year old cousin is half black. Her father is half Ivorian. He’s a pretty decent guy. A dope smoking, illiterate cheat, but still a nice guy. My aunt is vermin. Certainly the most unpleasant person I’ve ever met. I’m not going to pick on a child but my family know my position. I don’t see her as part of the family. My much older cousin has married and divorced two Pakistani men. Luckily she has never had any children. Interestingly, a few months back I asked her if she could repatriate all the non whites, from England (she was born in England to Irish parents and considers herself English), would she? To my surprise, she said she would.
Greg, when is your interview with Martin Webster going up?
Soon
Cameron Announces Totalitarian State For Britain:
https://endzog.wordpress.com/2015/05/14/indigenous-white-nationalism-in-britain-today/
”Cameron Announces Totalitarian State For Britain:”
Oh, as he only just caught on…..We already have one.
On the above article. From the Media, Television, Marketing and Advertising Media, Global Companies, to the British Dental Associaton are Propogateing daily, Genocide of Whites by Miscgenation
This woman is effectively advocating the genocide of an entire race. Haven’t people been executed on that charge?
My mixed-race wife (from whom I am separated; she is slightly more dangerous than ISIS) told me that her Caribbean mother never, ever allowed her to date black men. Ever. Autognostic?
Great article, I think the organizer of this sham of a beauty event was a French Jew as well. As someone who is very fond of Japanese culture and cuisine this is quite upsetting to me, but not very surprising considering the UN have Japan and South Korea on their list of countries that need en masse immigration to replace their aging populations. Long live glorious Nippon!
When I was a child my older brother had some behavioral problems, something like hyperactivity. While in the market with my mother one day, my brother proposed that she purchase four chocolate eclairs, which were on a little tray sealed with plastic wrap. My mother responded in the negative, and told him to put the eclairs back where he’d found them. I followed my brother, and as he put down the eclairs he punched them and declared that if he couldn’t have them, nobody could. I was shocked, being of a rather different temperament. It strikes me that individuals such as this travesty of a Miss Japan hold the same bitter, immature, selfish and ultimately destructive attitude that my brother showed towards those helpless confections.
“If I can’t be racially pure, nobody can!”
These people are nothing more than racial vandals. I commend the mixed-race commenters who support ethnonationalism. In some cases I’d be willing to host some whiter varieties of mixed people in a White ethnostate if they agreed, under penalty of law, not to mix. I’d also happily support them in seeking their own ethnostate, if for example people who are some mixture of White and Asian wanted to have their own land, rather than be cruelly left with those of racial mixtures that are less likely to result in peaceable and prosperous societies.
“I’d also happily support them in seeking their own ethnostate.”
I think this touches on an important point. If we believe in universal nationalism, the danger is that there is nowhere left for mixed race people to go. In the real world I guess that would not happen; de facto there are plenty of mixed-race or non-fussy states around who would take the human run-off of the aborted white genocide project–but can we say that in principle, in our worldview, there is a place for mixed race people? I want to say yes, and I think we need to be able to say yes in order to keep (no, not win!) the moral high ground.
If we envisage some global wave of racial irredentism, corresponding to a Kantian universalisation of our own principles as racial nationalists, then mixed race people are squeezed out. Why should China take our half-Chinese, half-white rejects, for example? But then, the more realistic scenario is that we don’t succeed in, or even attempt to, win back all of the lost ground. We let South Africa go, and most of the USA, probably, and just keep Australia (where I live!), and obviously all of Europe. Mixed race homelands could spring up in the wake of our concentration in selected areas, and that would be right and proper. No genocide of anyone.
Of course this makes me sound like a fantasist, but that is better than sounding like a movie-villain Nazi. And again, “sounding like” is only a risk of secondary importance.
One thing more. This raises the issue of which lands we can and should rightfully claim for a white homeland, or white homelands. Although I’ve never been there, I naturally feel that Europe entire is a non-negotiable demand. As far as the former colonies go, it’s tricky because everyone wants to wash the mud out of his own gutter.
Jewish Holo-Psycho-Terrorism Against White Children:
https://endzog.wordpress.com/2015/05/18/jewish-holo-psycho-terrorism-against-white-children/
Blacks destroy every place they colonize. Look at any majority black area and you will see the mayhem and suffering they bring.
A lot of the animosity mixed race people have towards normal people is due to the way society interacts with them. In mulattoes, for example, they sometimes inherent some degree of white intelligence but with a black appearance, and this tragic contradiction and self-realization is what fuels them to go on and become cultural Marxists and white hating college professors like that woman Saida Grundy. The mongrels are always more viciously anti-white than the full blacks and what not, because they are in it for emotional (exacerbated heavily by Jews) rather than ideological reasons.
For the middle class mulattoes, they often live in white liberal communities where they are patronized, given special leeway, and talked to in that child-like tone white leftists and especially Jews have when interacting with blacks (in order to account for their intelligence). Imagine being one of those rare mulattoes of normal intelligence but going through the world and having people talk to you like you have down’s syndrome because of how you look. The smarter mulattoes perceive they’re being treated different, hate it and erroneously attributes this behavior to “racism”.
On the other hand, as others have pointed out, we should differentiate with races. Amerindians for example, are on average between 15-40% European (according to DNA tests) to begin with, since they come from a Euroasian population in Siberia, so people who are 1/8 indian are even less than that in reality. Ditto for non-European caucasians (except Jews) and certain types of East Asians.
If you want to have a genuine movement capable of popular appeal, you have to lean towards pragmatism on these questions, just like the Nazis did. It’s estimated 50% of Ango-Canadians in the Western part of the country have some degree of Amerindian ancestry, but most of them don’t identify as “Metis”. 10% of the Dutch, who most of the time look, act, and feel indistinct from their countrymen have recent Indonesian ancestry. No clue how many British people have Indian (dot) or other colonial peoples DNA, but its probably understated due to how easily it dilutes (is Kate Beckinsale going to wreck the white genepool?). No idea what the American south looks like genetically, but whether it’s true or not, most of the whites down think they’re part Native American and are not going to join your movement unless you give them some kind of amnesty to put their minds at ease (William Pierce did). Having known New Zealanders for example, quite a few of them who look and act completely British claim to have some Maori ancestry.
The Nuremberg laws were less stringent than the requirements to attend a Jewish day school (must be fully Jewish or Jewish on mothers side only) in NYC for example. There ought to be 0 tolerance for negro or recent Jewish ancestry, for both genetic and political reasons. With that said, someone with slight Jewish ancestry that dedicates himself to exposing Jews on behalf of whites should be given honorary Aryan status.
Personally, I wouldn’t want to reproduce with someone that has very recent non-white ancestry like 1/6 Chinese for example, but I also realize how easy it is for the Jews to “deconstruct” whites using their pilpul in this regard. We need to be practical like the Germans, not dwell on semantics like the Anglo-Saxons (who for all the one drop talk, miscegenated and continue to miscegenate almost as much around the word as the Iberians in the Americas they hypocritically lambast)- historically one tendency steamrolled the Jews, while the other catapulted them to power and squirms helplessly as Hymie kicks Rupert while he’s down.
This is more of a New World question. Colonial whites can live in the world that should be or live in the world that is. Frankly, debates like this won’t even be happening because European caucasians will no longer exist in any form unless people get their act together and start making some LIGHTNING fast strides in the political arena and SOON.
I would like to add one more thing. Too many WN’s join these politics for self-esteem or personal validation reasons, almost like it’s a pedigree club for special snowflakes. There is a strong minority of WN’s who have nothing else going for them except being white, and so are fueled by this psychology, which grants a grain of truth into how Jewish academia interprets contemporary racial politics. If someone whose got a Burmese great grandmother wants to share a barricade with me, I have no qualms with it at all, in fact I’ll consider them a comrade. There’s other types of people, mostly with no experience in real world activism or interaction, who would feel offended at the same scenario, because they feel like its some kind of social club or frat rather than a greater political fight and survival for existence-which at this point is survival to ANY degree. You’ll find the latter types are in it for entertainment value.
Afrikaaner Jack Sen from UKIP for example , claims to have an Indian great grandfather. UKIP is a detestable Jew run conservative organization, and he is the only figure throughout that entire group that has openly advocated on behalf of whites against our Jewish tormentors. Yet too often, instead of debating the openly racialist ideas he espoused in his campaign, and the massive success they achieved (12% in a Labour stranglehold, even after a media smear campaign against him and Nigel Farage personally disowning him) , commentary on his achievements revolve around him having an Indian great grandparent, which somehow totally invalidates the strides he made forward in the very difficult British scene. Is that conducive to the fight? No. It’s irrationally rigid, especially since he wouldn’t be putting all the pure British Jew- ass lickers like UKIPs vice president to shame were he not especially possessed by the Aryan spirit-which almost exclusively comes from the genes. Give me one selfless fighter against our genocide and greater displacement over 1,000 Nigel Farage used car salesmen, even if the latter can trace his lineage undiluted back to charlemagne.
“Amerindians for example, are on average between 15-40% European ”
No, they’re not. Unmixed Amerindians are 100% Amerindian. Shared (very) ancient ancestry does not equal identity.
Some of all this in the comments thread remind me of the “Pace Amendment” and its attempts to parse different types of recent racial admixture, some being “acceptable.” The constant emphasis on stressing the acceptability of Amerindian and Asian mixture is interesting. From the standpoint of genetic interests, Amerindians and East Asians are really not much less distant from Europeans than are Negroes. From a phenotypic standpoint, maybe a difference, but then I remember Lawrence Dennis “passing” among racialists, even German Nazis.
In general, I agree with Greg’s take on this issue, as outlined above; however, I don’t like any mindset that would increase the acceptability of the Derbyshire clan. All of us “latrine flies” can be as discerning with respect to Asiatics as are the Asiaphiles to WNs.
“No, they’re not. Unmixed Amerindians are 100% Amerindian. Shared (very) ancient ancestry does not equal identity. ”
Amerindians are between 1/3 and 1/2 West Eurasian. That doesn’t mean equal identity, but it does explain the sophistication of civilizations like the Aztecs and Incas. This is reality.
“Some of all this in the comments thread remind me of the “Pace Amendment” and its attempts to parse different types of recent racial admixture, some being “acceptable.” The constant emphasis on stressing the acceptability of Amerindian and Asian mixture is interesting. From the standpoint of genetic interests, Amerindians and East Asians are really not much less distant from Europeans than are Negroes. From a phenotypic standpoint, maybe a difference, but then I remember Lawrence Dennis “passing” among racialists, even German Nazis.”
Actually, I think anyone who is in a relationship with an Asian or any other non-white like John Derbyshire should be shunned without exception unless there are very compelling reasons to do otherwise. You get into a murkier gray area of what’s acceptable when you’re talking about say, a Chilean or an Iranian, but if your wife is a full blown Asian (or Jewish, etc) you shouldn’t be in the white nationalist movement.
“From the standpoint of genetic interests, Amerindians and East Asians are really not much less distant from Europeans than are Negroes.”
I agree to a point, especially when men marry Asians and have mutant looking children. But this debate is moot if 50% of Western Canadians either have or think they have Amerindian ancestry. What then?
Nobody is asking you to marry or reproduce with them if the thought if someone being 1/32 Amerindian really keeps you up at night. All we’re saying is that if you live in the Americas , South Africa, or even Australia and New Zealand, treating this like its some kind of pedigree club rather than a serious political movement with a realistic bar when recruiting is not going to get you anywhere.
“Amerindians are between 1/3 and 1/2 West Eurasian. ”
Citation please. I can’t help think this is a misunderstanding of the complexities of population genetics.
Apparently, the work in question is this:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v505/n7481/full/nature12736.html
which is hardly a comprehensive analysis of the ancestral components of extant Amerindians. Of course, the problem is this: if you want to take an ancient racial entity such as recently unmixed Amerindians, and then assert a mixed heritage due to these very ancient demographic events, then you should be consistent and consider Europeans as a two-way or three-way mix of ancient peoples as well. I’m concerned with the genetic interests of peoples today, and what will obtain in the future, not so much about the putative ancient mixing events that created modern populations.
Whatever their origins, Amerindians are genetically and phenotypically highly distinct from Europeans. And no, if a person is “1/32 Amerindian” doesn’t induce agonizing in me. But then why assert that “1/32 Amerindian” is acceptable, but that similar or less % of “group X” is unacceptable? There has to be some rationale other than waving hands around making comparisons of the relative assimilability of different racial groups at percentages so small that there are no discernable phenotypic consequences and extremely small consequences for genetic interests. At these levels, you begin to get into the ranges of statistical error, at least for individual testing. I agree that it is not a big deal, But if some folks are getting to get all worked up about it, be consistent. Don’t make special exemptions for Amerindians. It seems that this is all post-hoc justifications based on the fact that folks have these “Indian princess” stories that may or may not be true.
The problem here lies in your fixation on cold scientific definitions of race rather than complete ones. Genetics are the foundation for any culture, this is our stance as racialists, but there are other factors that decide how racial life will manifest itself as well. A rural Kentuckian may be a 100% genetic match with someone living in Belfast, but at the end of the day, if you ask him to side with an invading Northern Irishman against his neighbor or best friend who may only be a 92% match, he most likely will think you’re crazy.
Race is half science and half conditioned/spiritual/whatever you want to call it. It makes no difference to me one way or another on a personal level, but on a socio-political one it matters. Lots of white people (millions) think (true or not) they’re part native american or maori or aboriginal or indonesian, but still consider themselves to be white and as members of the Western racial community. There is probably a scientific rationale for this as well, since traits of the above mentioned groups most of the time don’t manifest themselves physically or intellectually after a certain point (unlike Jewish or Negroid genes).
You might have a point semantically and to a lesser degree scientifically, but being practical is more important in this stage of the struggle. It appears you agree, so what’s the issue?
The issue in this particular case is one of consistency. To make post hoc justifications for people with their “Indian princess” stories (in many cases, pure fantasy), we have some who apparently take the position that, say, David Yeagley good,Lawrence Dennis bad. Both could “pass” (to an extent), both were presumably genetically distinct from the original White stock that had admixed, both were men of the “Right.” So, what’s the difference? Why? Why not exclude both? Why not include both? This might be nitpicking, but it strikes me as odd.
As far as Sen goes:
http://eginotes.blogspot.com/2015/05/a-double-fail-for-mainstreaming-51715.html
But, hey, South Asian is good, it’s all real-like “cognitive elitist” and “high-IQ” and “culturally assimilable” etc. So, what? A person who is 1/4 South Asian is good, but a person who is, say, 1/4 Amerindian, 1/64 Australoid, or 1/128 Kenyan, is not? Is a person 1/4 South Asian better or worse than someone 1/32 Amerindian? It would seem the only objective way is to ascertain genetic distances and calculate damage done to “child equivalents” a la Salter.
I would like people to be clear about their rationale. If the rationale is: lots of White folks at least think they are part Injun, so for political reasons we need to make a special exemption, then state this, but understand it is purely political. And it does set a precedent.
This is a EVIL PLAN!! In the world are many Humans, and many Races!! And this is good!!
And the nature, dont like the ideology of race-mixed. Every human Need a Identity!
The Genetic of Mix Parents, is not good for the Healthy from the Children!!
I think this is a plan from the new world order!! Mix all the races ( Special the White Peoples) and we have the controll!!
I think Lady Miamoto speak about the Jews the controlled the media!! In my Coutntry i dont cant speak about the jewish media controll!! But in Japan is this not a Problem! And this is good!! The Jews want mixed all Races, and want destroy, this identity from the human Nations!!
The original yahoo article is written in english with no link to source material written in japanese, no source to any of the alleged reactions, nor does it make any reference to the beauty contest decision being politically motivated. This seems like very shoddy reporting, at best fodder for political pundits on right and left.
Petronius brings up a good point. What if she had been euroasian?
To all you nagging on her because she’s making her case while simultaneously embracing her heritage from her father:
I know you don’t like blacks mixing with Japanese, but what about whites mixing with Japanese? Do you support these people?
If you do, would you still claim moral superiority over those not promoting racial purity?
If so, exactly how are you morally superior to the racist Jews who would die to preserve their own race but not care an inch for and maybe even applaud the dilution of others?
Is it impossible to reply to peoples comments on old posts like this?
i wanted to reply to EricStrikers comments.
Particularly about “It’s estimated 50% of Anglo-Canadians in the Western part of the country have some degree of Amerindian ancestry”
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Edit your comment