Print this post Print this post

Interracial Marriage & White Genocide

2,555 words

There continues to be a debate within the Right over whether miscegenation is a threat to white racial survival. There are few voices on the Right strongly promoting the thesis that amalgamation is a great threat, and there are no voices – as far as this writer is aware – that would argue that it is the greatest threat. Instead, there are many voices urging us to turn a blind eye to it, and to keep confidence that miscegenation is actually rare and not likely to greatly affect the white populations of diverse countries. Instead, when the subject of white demographic decline (or “white genocide”) is raised, the Right typically focuses on issues of immigration and birthrates.

I argue that these voices are incorrect. I have performed many numerical simulations to analyze the demographic evolution of the United States which suggest that, even in the absence of any immigration, miscegenation will create a population in which, after about 340 years, there will be no more people who are even “predominantly” (defined as >50%) European by descent. I will argue that there will be virtually no “pure white” (defined as >95% European by descent) people in the US in 6 generations (168 years), irrespective of immigration conditions.

I hope that this article at least begins a discussion on this topic.

Historical Examples of Racial Amalgamation

Before looking at the simulations, the reader should strongly consider the hypothesis of genocide through racial amalgamation, as it has happened across the world many times. The racialist Right’s poster child is Egypt. From Wikipedia:

The study was able to measure the mitochondrial DNA of 90 individuals, and it showed that the mitochondrial DNA composition of Egyptian mummies has shown a high level of affinity with the DNA of the populations of the Near East. A shared drift and mixture analysis of the DNA of these ancient Egyptian mummies shows that the connection is strongest with ancient populations from the Levant, the Near East and Anatolia, and to a lesser extent modern populations from the Near East and the Levant. In particular the study finds “that ancient Egyptians are most closely related to Neolithic and Bronze Age samples in the Levant, as well as to Neolithic Anatolian and European populations”.

Genome-wide data could only be successfully extracted from three of these individuals. Of these three, the Y-chromosome haplogroups of two individuals could be assigned to the Middle-Eastern haplogroup J, and one to haplogroup E1b1b1 common in North Africa. The absolute estimates of sub-Saharan African ancestry in these three individuals ranged from 6 to 15%, which is significantly lower than the level of sub-Saharan African ancestry in the modern Egyptians from Abusir, who “range from 14 to 21%.”(When using East African admixed population as reference) The study’s authors cautioned that the mummies may be unrepresentative of the Ancient Egyptian population as a whole, since they were recovered from the northern part of Egypt.

Overall the mummies studied were closer genetically to Near Eastern people than the modern Egyptian population, which has a greater proportion of genes coming from sub-Saharan Africa after the Roman period.

As is common knowledge to most of us by now, the current European population is actually itself a hybrid of proto-European races: the “Early Farmers from Anatolia,” the “Indo-Europeans” or “Yamnaya Culture,” and the “Indigenous Western Hunter-Gatherers.”

The Native American peoples are hybrids of ProtoMongoloid and Ancient North Eurasian races.

The South Asian peoples are hybrids of four populations: IndoEuropean, Dravidian, TibetoBurman, and AustroAsiatic.

And the story goes on and on.

Objections to the Amalgamation Hypothesis

Some mixings were “male-mediated”; there is a disproportionate share of Y-chromosome from one population relative to the share of overall DNA from that population. One common argument from deniers of the risk of miscegenation is that the mixing in the past only happened due to men forcing themselves on foreign women. The existence of this discrepancy does not automatically imply this, however; it simply suggests it.

But male-female discrepancies in interracial marriages are also happening in the US today:

. . . according to the United States Census Bureau, there were 354,000 White female/Black male and 196,000 Black female/White male marriages in March 2009, representing a ratio of 181:100.

Similar situations are happening with white-Asian couples, as Asian women outmarry at twice the rate of Asian men.

Thus, it is possible that “male-mediated” hybridization can happen without rape or force; that it is something that often naturally happens when races mix. And the hypothesis that amalgamation only happens due to rape should not be immediately granted due to Y-chromosome data.

Another common objection to the claim of white genocide through interracial marriage is that we have had decades of legal interracial marriage in the US which haven’t much changed the demographics, and that we should reasonably expect that the future will follow the past, and thus interracial marriage will continue to be a non-issue.

But the low miscegenation rates of the past were due to the shocking commonality of racist attitudes, which have been a bulwark against white genocide. As late as 1990, the general society was very much against interracial marriage. The millennial generation was the first in American history to be mostly raised by parents who did not teach them against miscegenation:

The Numerical Simulations

I have built some simple scripts that simulate semi-random demographic scenarios in the US. I set the initial population demographic to roughly what we have now (60% white, 13% black, 8% Asian/Other, 19% Hispanic), and give the data-persons created by my computer program racial preferences for mating and birthrates that correspond to what we observe in the US now. The result is an interracial marriage rate of about 15%, with random variance (new marriages in the US now are estimated to be interracial 18% of the time). The data-persons greatly prefer their own race, many times more than other races, but their ability to mate is also controlled by the likelihood of finding another person of their race to mate.

The racial preference schema for below simulations.

This corresponds to the real-life challenge of finding someone compatible to marry: We all have to pick from the limited number of people of the opposite sex we meet in our lives who are compatible enough to marry, and in an integrated country, the eligible members of the opposite sex could be of different races. Despite the fact that the own-race preference for marriage forces the interracial marriage rate between pure races to be only <15% throughout the simulation, full amalgamation is acheived by 12 generations, due to genetic drift through the mixed-race population.

My simulation treats the people in society as interacting with people of all races in the country. Of course, there will be enclaves in remote parts of the US (and other countries, I assume) of highly religious folk like the Amish, Hutterites, and so on who will not interact with people outside of their communities.

I bucket reproduction into generations. This is simpler and less computationally expensive than designing a population with an age breakdown that reproduces at certain rates on a year-by-year basis. I do not see how this would greatly change results.

I should mention that I treat mates as monogamous; I do not take into account people who mate with multiple people. This is important, as not all cultures in America maintain strict monogamous norms, and a great many children are born out of wedlock.

I realize black and Hispanic people are already mixed, but I am working with the racial groups we have with our sources of data (census, vital statistics, etc.) to make a simulation that best mirrors reality. You can shift the results over a bit if you’d like.

Thus, I have run simulations that involve continuous immigration into the US and others that involve a halt to immigration. The immigration rate is based on the rates we have now:

I do take into account that much Hispanic immigration from South America is white, and I treat immigration from Canada as being white immigration. In reality, there are likely many Asian Canadian immigrants. I also do not take into account black immigration from the Caribbean. As you will see, these little oversights are not going to affect the results greatly; the results of a no-immigration scenario are rather similar to an immigration scenario.

The future of African immigration is unclear; there could be much higher rates in the future, given the fact that the African population is growing so quickly. I can design more simulations to test these scenarios.

First, see the results of a no-immigration scenario. This is the future of America if immigration is stopped for good:

In six generations (168 years), there will be no people who are more than 95% “pure” black, white, Hispanic, or Asian. In eight generations (224 years), there will be no more whites who are more than 80% white, and in about 12 generations (336 years), there will be virtually no people who have majority European ancestry.

The Hispanic population holds on well due to their high birthrates.

The below is a scenario that includes immigration, with immigration rates that decrease every generation to 80% of the previous rates. The point of lowering immigration rates through time is to take into account that the world is improving economically, and therefore should be sending fewer immigrants over long timescales:

With immigration, you can see that the US population becomes a predominantly Hispanic population. The black population actually crashes worst, which seems incorrect to me. I will comment later on black reproduction.

The Asian population holds out better than the white. This is due to slightly higher Total Fertility rates (it is difficult to measure this correctly because of the age breakdown of Asian-Americans; different sources say different things) and high rates of Asian immigration, which replenishes the rapidly mixing existing population. Asians will still be toast within eight generations.

The white population still crashes within six to eight generations. This is only a bit faster than the no-immigration scenario. In conclusion, immigration restriction is not going to greatly improve the prospects of white survival in the US.

The Wisdom of the One-Drop Rule

It was mentioned before that race-mixing does not proceed predominately by interracial marriages between people of pure races (e.g., a pure European marrying a pure Asian). The below plot shows the forms of marriages over time:

In my simulation, the most important vector for amalgamation is actually the mixed-race people. I do not treat the data-persons as being equally opposed to marriage to a mixed-race person as they are to a pure-race person of another race. This is due to the fact that I treat mating preferences as being aesthetic and not racist in nature; I assume a generally liberal, anti-racist society, like the one we have now and are supposed to have in the future.

The reason I make this assumption is to test the thesis that race-mixing is not a threat to white survival because, supposedly, “people just find members of their own race most attractive.”

In this case, a pure-race person would be attracted to a biracial person who is midway between that of his or her two parent races. I do think that this is true in real life, in that a mulatto is, on average, far more palatable to marrying a white person than a dark-skinned, pure-black person. Their increased palatability is due to both cultural and physical factors. I feel that the same is true for white-Hispanic hybrids, but I somewhat doubt it for happas. Of course, there is no data for this, and I can test other assumptions, if desired.

But this finding should cause the reader to reconsider the one-drop rule. The reality that populations can merge, quite completely, without more than a small minority of them ever mating interracially is not a thesis that is often explored or tested. Given that it is true, the one-drop rule is not entirely a shameful disgust response to racial impurity, but also a legitimate and necessary strategy for racial preservation.

The African-American Reproductive Strategy

My simulations show that the African race in the US is in hot water, though this goes against the experience of those of us who live there. The reality is that the African race is growing in the US:

The reason this is possible is that African-Americans do not reproduce within the confines of marriage: About 72% of African-Americans are born out of wedlock.

The babies born to black mothers out-of-wedlock typically have black fathers. This is because African-American women strongly prefer African-American men for sex and dating, and men of other races strongly prefer non-black women:

Black women, then, drive reproduction by letting themselves be impregnated out of wedlock (often against the fathers’ wishes, as is often the butt of jokes by black comedians), which is the main source of the next generation of the black population. The illegitimate children are stereotypically “raised by the community,” which includes extended family members and the state, the latter of which provides free meals at schools.

Black men, however, do not greatly prefer black women for romance. This explains the fact that black men pursue marriage outside of their race, and marry outside their race twice as often as black women.

Whether black women are conscious of this or not, they need to become impregnated out of wedlock to reproduce their race. If the black race were to dogmatically insist on reproducing solely inside marriages, as do whites, their amalgamation would follow their interracial marriage rates and would proceed much faster:

The black way of reproduction is not accurately represented by my simulation. My simulation assumes that all people “pair up” and reproduce with their partner. In such a schema, the black intermarriage rates would be devastating. But they are not, because African-Americans do not marry nearly as often as other races.

When Africans do marry, they often choose members of other races. But their reproduction is not linked to their romantic activities. This allows them to “have their cake and eat it too”; they achieve both racial preservation and interracial love (or sexual conquest, if you prefer to frame it negatively). The downside is that African-American women bear a great burden in order to perpetuate this reproductive strategy.


The simulations presented here are not those of an expert or a scientist. A more scientific presentation of the results would, of course, present variations of the simulation, a detailed list of assumptions, and so on. To spare you the boring details, the variations of the simulation are not large, as I have programmed it to not have wild amounts of randomness built in.

Our best demographic estimates should come from the professionals. But even the professionals know that they must allow for huge error margins. And even the professional projections, regardless of whether they were from as late as 2010, might not have predicted the massive increase in interracial marriage rates we have been seeing recently.

We cannot know the exact extent to which interracial marriage is a threat to the white race. It is quite possible that the rate will go down, or that biracial people will not marry whites (i.e., whites impose a one-drop rule independently). But we can make an educated guess, based on the rate of mixing that exists now and the history of racial amalgamation in the past, that race-mixing is a great obstacle to the biological survival of the white race in diverse, liberal countries.


  1. Alexandra O
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 6:17 am | Permalink

    I definitely think that miscegenation is the greatest threat to white survival. Seeing mixed race couples right along now on major TV network shows and commercials on prime time is evidence that this is not only to be ‘accepted’, but it is an obvious ‘push’ into our society today.

    • Fenek Solere
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 9:22 am | Permalink

      Dear Alexandra,
      You cannot legislate for love but you can educate against total stupidity. The role models you speak of are being deliberately promulgated at an insidious rate. British royalty being part of the ‘push’ you allude to in your response.

    • Dr ExCathedra
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 9:37 am | Permalink

      In “White Extinction”, Dr Johnson included hybridization among the four factors that lead to species dying out, the other three being loss of habitat, invasive species and predation. We are suffering all of them.

    • HamburgerToday
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 10:21 am | Permalink

      Quite sot. It is almost impossible to watch any TV show and not have at least one ‘mixed race’ couple and quite often their miscegenate child.

  2. Anon
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 7:19 am | Permalink

    This article is interesting, but you do not need simulations to get answers to this question. Latin America shows what happens to whites in multi-racial societies quite well. That evidence, compiled over hundreds of years, does not point to pending demographic doom.

    Instead you end up with racial stratification, with white men and women located at the top of the dating market. Non-whites may want to marry whites, but both white men and white women prefer to marry their own kind (white women especially, which people on the Dissident Right apparently don’t know). No one wants to marry “down.”

    This in-group preference only increases over time. Liberal whites may be more likely to marry outside the race, but their genes are then swept out of the white gene pool, leaving the remaining whites (who remain at the top) increasingly resistant to out marriage over time.

    These dynamics have resulted in an intact, almost purely white elite in most multi-racial Latin American nations for hundreds of years. DNA studies show that these white elites remain purely or almost purely (90%+) white. Most of the miscegenation that took place in Latin America was white men interbreeding in colonial times because the Spanish and Portuguese didn’t being enough white women with them. Once there were enough white women, that was greatly reduced. See here:

    Polling results on this issue are irrelevant, since they are fraught with social desirability bias (people saying what sounds non-racist). It’s just virtue signalling. You need to look at what people actually do, not what they say they will do. Social desirability bias is why most polling on racial and immigration issues are utter baloney.

    • c matt
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

      Can’t remember if it was on this site or Unz (I think it was Unz) where they showed a collage of the “Miss India” contestants and the darkest one was perhaps like a light tan. As you point out, it is practically universal (with perhaps the exception of deepest Africa) that lighter skin, even among darker races, tends to end up in the higher SES. The cream rises to the top, as it were.

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 6:00 pm | Permalink

      ” Most of the miscegenation that took place in Latin America was white men interbreeding in colonial times because the Spanish and Portuguese didn’t being enough white women with them. Once there were enough white women, that was greatly reduced. See here:

      I did not mention Latin America in “Historical Examples of Racial Amalgamation” because of what you have said: the amalgamation there happened in a way that definitely will not parallel the situation the West is currently in. Spain and Portugal couldn’t get many white women to settle, and they simultaneously believed that the best strategy for ruling these colonies was through a hybridized elite (they arranged political marriages to Amerindian nobility).

      I have spent considerable time looking at race in Latin America, and the story there *would* be quite consistent with the picture I have painted. The standard story, for most of Latin America, is that the people are incredibly mixed, with the “white” people being quite mixed, themselves.

      Of course, it should surprise no one that whites would theoretically strongly prefer to marry whites in Latin America in the 1600’s, given the racist attitudes of the time. Nevertheless, they *chose* reproductive patterns that led to amalgamation. This should pique curiosity: how is it that amalgamation can occur even when people are preferring their own? It clearly has happened. My rudimentary simulations can help show how it happens, in an abstracted, simplified way.

      “These dynamics have resulted in an intact, almost purely white elite in most multi-racial Latin American nations for hundreds of years. DNA studies show that these white elites remain purely or almost purely (90%+) white.”

      I have read the articles you link in the past, but I cannot find actual DNA data showing that the “elites” are 90+% white. Could you point me to the actual study?

      I’m not sure it is a “win” for the white race in Latin America if whites reduce in numbers by 95%, but if the upper class remains white due to intraracial marriages driven not by racial identitarianism but by extreme classism. I suppose it is a win from the white supremacist perspective, which cares little about white well-being, but cares a great deal about relative power of whites vs. non-whites? Given that the upper class in the USA is heavily Asian and Fellow, the extreme classism will actually *NOT* prevent amalgamation among our elites.

      “This in-group preference only increases over time. Liberal whites may be more likely to marry outside the race, but their genes are then swept out of the white gene pool, leaving the remaining whites (who remain at the top) increasingly resistant to out marriage over time.”

      The whites at the top of society in the USA are not racialistic, though. Whites in the USA are roughly as likely to out-marry when they are upper-middle class as they are when they are low-class.

      “Non-whites may want to marry whites, but both white men and white women prefer to marry their own kind (white women especially, which people on the Dissident Right apparently don’t know).”

      White women are not much less likely to marry out than white men, according to our marriage data, so our reality in the USA is reducing to what is depicted in my simulations.

      • Anon
        Posted December 6, 2019 at 10:15 pm | Permalink

        This quote of yours is quite important: “Of course, it should surprise no one that whites would theoretically strongly prefer to marry whites in Latin America in the 1600’s, given the racist attitudes of the time.”

        I agree that timing and changing culture are huge. Whites in the past did not live in the same cucked world we do with a cucked media, movies, and advertising all preaching interracial harmony. You could easily argue the past — no matter what country we are talking about — tells us nothing about the future.

        But I would disagree. The past tells us a lot. When you look at Latin America and South Africa, you find that whites there are far more realistic about race than Americans are because race is unavoidable there. Whites in Latin America have never been woke. SA whites were cucked for various reasons in 1994, but then reality hit them like a brick. In short, I am suggesting that “the racist attitudes of the time” (you mentioned the 1600s) will be coming back big time. Reality is about to hit us like a brick too. The readers of Counter-Currents are the front edge of the spear.

        “The whites at the top of society in the USA are not racialistic, though.” I disagree with you here. 90% of American whites marry other whites. Most of the non-whites they marry are Latinos, most of whom are at least half white themselves. Whites at the top may claim they are not racist, but in reality they resist integration in their schools and neighborhoods. It’s all lies and virtue signalling. Things are going to start getting very real for all whites in this country over the next 10-20 years as we start losing political power. Whites in this country will be forced to confront reality, just like they do in Latin America and South Africa.

        There are a lot of genomic studies out there. Argentina is below. Most whites live in or around Buenos Aires (BA). As in other Latin American countries, the genome is primarily mixed for historical reasons – because white men were screwing the natives and their black female slaves during the 1500s-1800s. At that time, the white women were having white babies with the white men and creating what would become the white elite. Once the white men and white women were in rough balance, miscegenation dropped.

        • Phineas Eleazar
          Posted December 8, 2019 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

          Argentina is the worst Latin American example for you, because its white population is largely descended from recent immigrants from Europe, in about the 1900’s. That is certainly the reason they still have sizeable numbers of nearly pure whites. So this does not contradict my examination of the time scale of racial amalgamation, which is itself calibrated to modern US willingness to intermarry, which itself is probably (we would agree) greater than the willingness to intermarry in the 20th century, given that racialism was more acceptable in that time.

          Given that racialistic whites like us aren’t exactly achieving replacement birth rates, I am not too confident that *our* genes are the ones that will survive, in the end. That is, unless we make a change.

          IMO White flight, generally, really is about good schools. Jared Taylor is a little wrong on this (probably because he is stuck in his generation’s mindsets). If there was so much secret racialism, we should expect our ideas and our “movement” to have a lot more support in society.

          We should clarify: racism (not racialism) will stifle interracial marriage if the Other races are lower in class (especially with class-minded women who do not want to marry a poor man), but if the Other is successful, racism does not hamper intermarriage. We see this in the USA with white-Asian couples, and in GB and California with the prevalent white-black couples (black Brits are economic/academic equals of white Brits). This is a serious drawback to the myopic focus on race-IQ, which is the dominant way of thinking in white-positive spaces right now.

    • TJ
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

      Marriage maybe, but noone gets married. The filthy whores are screwing everybody. Their rapsheet of partners look like a UN convention. Thanks to hypergamy most men aren’t even getting sex anymore. This idea that men share responsbility for miscegenation, despite the regularity with which women open their legs these days (but only for the top 15-20%), is simply nonsense.

      • The sad one
        Posted December 8, 2019 at 3:18 am | Permalink

        Your comment can be translated: “I want only and only very good looking woman, who is also much younger and who will actually almost worship me without putting any effort from my side”. You will get this with asian women(or maybe others too), no problem, they’ll will chase you down. But to expect this behavior from a good looking white woman is idiotic.
        Are you just bitter for lost fun? Maybe go to gym, or something? Or just chose from your own age, looks and weight department? Well, of course unless you can compensate this with money, fame and power? I mean the game goes both sides, it’s reality deal with it.

        What matters and that is the most important thing-who do you have children with.

        • TJ
          Posted December 8, 2019 at 11:01 am | Permalink

          Hypergamy is a characteristic of all women. I already have a gym membership – for myself – not women. And I’m quite well off for my age, thanks. Your assumption about me says more about you. Im a millennial. Modern women under 35 do not want children. The rest are at the end of their fertility window and are a health risk per late pregnancy statistics.

          • Greg Johnson
            Posted December 8, 2019 at 11:21 am | Permalink

            You are painting with a very broad brush here. There is an edge of hysteria to this sort of MGTOW apocalypticism. I can’t help thinking that communicating such attitudes, even subliminally, must make a man less attractive to women.

      • The sad one
        Posted December 8, 2019 at 2:05 pm | Permalink

        I “joined” this movement in autumn 2015, not because, but despite people like TJ (I’m referring to conclusions of another article here). The main reason was: mass importation of muslims to Europe. I have seen and felt (as in groping hands) in many capitals of Europe what happens when there is a significant number of them. At that time I felt hope and there was a feeling of oneness, spirit of youth, certain momentum. Many things have changed since, not for the better I fear. What is happening on legal basis and in real life is not encouraging at all.
        My life otherwise is quite perfect, I am and I have everything that I ever wished for and if not the topics we discuss here(total extinction in few generations), maybe I would not be interested in politics at all. Well I’d still be displeased with the culture of death, some aspects of modernity and other now seemingly so minor things. If only the borders were in place and sane policies were in place, but it’s nowhere near that. But as I think now, no it would not be enough-asian migration and amount of mixing would still be the same, other trends too, just a bit slower. Now the push and the grip to die and disappear is only getting stronger by the day(I challenge you to buy a children’s book without diversity, what is not vintage, even if a book is about animals!). I sincerely wonder could I just forget it all and just live a “normal” life? How do “normies” live? Is everyone blind/insane?

  3. A Prins
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 7:26 am | Permalink

    I guessed it would take a couple of centuries, surprised it happens this quickly. There may be a core of the white population that decides to keep the marriages between our own people as racial consciousness increases, but for how long, since only a small minority of us have to abandon this preference every generation…

    Thanks for putting this together. Would it be a lot of work to tweak the inputs for Europe or individual countries?

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 5:10 pm | Permalink

      It would be easy to tweak inputs for Europe!

      From the racial perspective, most European countries are in good shape. The language barrier keeps the levels of immigration of non-Europeans *very* low for most European countries. However, good data on these European countries is hard to come by.

      Most Asian or African immigrants are not about to learn Polish or Italian to live a *slighly* more enriching life in Poland/Italy, if they can just move to the Anglosphere using the second language they were taught in schools from a young age.

      But for Northern Europe and Great Britain, it might be more interesting to run the simulations, as GB has higher immigration rates than the USA.

  4. William Wallace
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 8:06 am | Permalink

    Won’t this inevitably result in more ethnonationalism since ethnocentrism is a heritable trait and distributed on a bell curve? Less ethnocentric Whites will marry out, making the core White population more ethnocentric. It will probably create fewer, but better Whites in the long-run.

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

      This is a hypothesis JF Gariepy puts forth, in an even stronger form. He would claim that there is virtually no chance of full amalgamation because genetically racialist people will inevitably emerge. He is very committed to this hypothesis.

      The quick answer to this is that there *have* been many full racial amalgamations in the past, some of which I mention in “Historical Examples of Racial Amalgamation.” In fact, we European are the result of one. This proves the JF Gariepy theory to be false: we cannot assume that our racialist genes will save us, just because there are some genes that influence ethnocentrism.

      Maybe whites will get more racist, maybe not. There are many environmental pressures on this trait, which I’d guess are far stronger than whatever genetic controls we have. I’d ask JF Gariepy for proof that the racialist genes are distributed in such a way, and expressed in such a way, as to produce humans psychologically incapable of interracial marriage, because I simply am not willing to put blind faith in that hypothesis.

      • Phineas Eleazar
        Posted December 8, 2019 at 4:38 pm | Permalink

        I have to correct a few things in my last comment, and add to it further, because this line of thinking is the main alternative hypothesis.

        “This proves the JF Gariepy theory to be false: we cannot assume that our racialist genes will save us, just because there are some genes that influence ethnocentrism.”

        My words are jumbled. I do not prove JF’s “theory” (it is not a “theory,” actually, it is nothing more than a hypothesis) to be “false.” I simply show that one should not accept the hypothesis as fact automatically, just because it sounds plausible or possible.

        There is an issue of epistemology on the Right. Right-wingers readily place faith in hypotheses that are not well explained. In science, this is not allowed; you must create models and formalize your hypotheses into mathematics, and then test them, for them to be granted the dignity of a “theory.” And only then, will other scientists give them their precious, guarded faith.

        But on the Right, people hear a madman talk about the currency crashing, or the Federal Reserve being a scam, and accept it automatically without any economic knowledge at all about the topics at hand, and without even checking if the madmen promoting such theories has sufficient expertise.

        This is what the alternative hypothesis SHOULD show, in order to be strong enough to be accepted:

        1. The distribution of ethnocentrism genes in whites is such that there is a sizeable percentage of us who have enough genes that we almost would never marry a non-white person
        2. The ethnocentric whites will be *able* to make marriages occur and have decent TFR, such that they themselves do not decline and die
        3. The environmental controls will not be able to overcome the genetic controls on ethnocentrism. In other words, the trait needs to be *very* genetic. I doubt that. If not, the environmental controls on ethnocentrism, which are clearly working at nearly full power, will dominate the genetic predisposition.
        4. The imprinting effect (when you raise people in diverse elementary schools) will not untrain the ethnocentric impulse by scrambling people’s understanding of “us” and “them,” or by scrambling people’s beauty preferences. There is good evidence that this does happen. The academic establishment is strongly supporting Contact Theory, and that motivates a great deal of policy.
        5. Ethnocentrism will motivate people to NOT intermarry (probably true for a small, aggrieved minority)
        6. Belief in another race’s inferiority will motivate people to NOT intermarry

        Here is a personal anecdote showing why I strongly reject this idea. JF, and other genetic-determinists love to talk about the extreme ethnocentrism of the East Asians. Indeed, the surveys show it. So we can automatically conclude that it is genetic, kind of like IQ! /sarcasm/

        But in the USA, US-born Asians marry out 50% of the time!

        I was the token white friend to a number of Asian friends groups in undergrad. In fact, I exclusively hung out with Asian groups for more than half of my undergrad time. It was this that forced me to really think about race. The Chinese kids were raised in super-Chinese households; they were forced to go to Chinese school a few days a week to learn to speak/read/write in Chinese and socialize with other Chinese kids. The Korean communities largely centered around Korean churches.

        It was shocking that about half of these guys flatly admitted that they strongly preferred white women, often even exclusively. Many of them had almost entirely stopped caring about their culture, and resented their parents’ attempts to force them to go to Chinese school while the white and black kids were frolicking around. One of them was all about his Asian heritage, and so moved back to Asia, tired of living as a minority in the USA. One of them joked about his desire to “corrupt” a freshman girl, which left me dumbfounded at the time. But she was a tall blonde, and I believe that he meant to racially corrupt her (he was a particularly un-PC guy). This might might be a contradiction of point 5 from above.

        Many of them had un-PC racist beliefs about Asian intellectual superiority. In other words, they were “red-pilled” racists, though I can think of a few that were good liberals. Being red-pilled was unanimous in the Asians who pursued white girls the most, contradicting point 6.

        So much of my experience with Asian-Americans does not stack up with the JF Gariepy/Steve Sailer/Ron Unz idea about how increasing ethnocentrism and racism of whites will save the white race. I prefer to think that obsessive adherence to genetic determinism, and in the case of JF, to the dogmatic libertarian faith that leaving individuals to act freely will somehow always solve every issue, motivates them to place their faith in this half-baked hypothesis.

        • S
          Posted December 9, 2019 at 7:19 am | Permalink

          This is a much needed critique. If Asian’s are so incredibly ethnocentric, then why do they have the highest out-marriage rate of all?

          I don’t know how you could test this idea, but maybe they feel, even at a subconscious level, their culture is expanding and their “core” in Asia is secure enough that it doesn’t matter if they marry out? They probably also sense that white’s being, well, superior, will only improve their racial hygiene. Blacks sense this in their bones, for sure.

          • J
            Posted December 9, 2019 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

            It is probably the ‘ethnic core is safe’ aspect of your comment. It is a way to feel certain of the future of the main race, enabling them to take a few risks.

            Like the R&D department of a large corporation.

    • Anon
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 7:05 am | Permalink

      I think this is the key comment. Is ethnocentrism heritable? My understanding from reading Edward Dutton and KMac is that it is.

      If ethnocentrism is heritable, that implies the white population will become more resistant to out marriage over time as less ethnocentric whites marry out (or don’t have kids). If this is true, then there will be an initial bump up in intermarriage, like we have now, but then it will decline.

      I still believe that the experience of whites in nations where there is a lot of diversity (Latin America, South Africa) give us reason to be more optimistic and less “black pilled.”

      • S
        Posted December 9, 2019 at 7:23 am | Permalink

        I don’t understand how this makes you optimistic. In South American countries with large amerindian populations, the whites have overwhelmingly blended in. What’s developed is a mestizo civilization which is probably unsustainable in the long run without white technology.

        • Anon
          Posted December 10, 2019 at 5:34 am | Permalink

          That’s why it’s important to know how mestizos and mulattos were created in Latin America. They are overwhelmingly the product of white men mating with the locals, black and Amerindian, during a period when there was a shortage of white women. It is a product of a very specific time (1500s-1800s) which is no longer applicable in Latin America (nor here in the United States).

          Once there were enough white women, and once white men no longer had the option of forcing themselves on POC women, the notion of racial hierarchies kicked in. From that point forward whites tended to date their own kind.

          This article suggests that most whites will completely disappear within 6 to 12 generations. But there have been whites in Latin America dating back to the 1500s, and they are still around. Most whites came in the 1800s to mid-1900s (same as in the US), but that is still 60-100+ years. Whites are not being bred out of existence.

          If it’s not happening in Latin America or other nations where whites are a minority (like South Africa), then it won’t happen here either. We will experience a brief surge as liberal whites with low ethnocentrism breed out, and then it will drop off. We will end up with the same racial dating hierarchies that exist in these other countries — with whites overwhelmingly sticking to their own kind.

  5. Mike Dolphgren
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 8:59 am | Permalink

    I take several issues with this, and I admit I’m someone who doesn’t think miscegenation is really a threat at all.

    “As late as 1990, the general society was very much against interracial marriage.”
    The question asked was changed in 1994/1996, I think it originally asked about blacks and then was changed to something less “offensive” that coincided with the ‘opinion change.’ I’m no fan of miscegenation obviously, but lets be entirely honest – if you add attractive asians or even hispanics that can pass as white into the equation, the number of white people who will be “okay” with interracial marriage would of course shoot up. There simply weren’t many of these people in the country before, and now that there are – plenty of these ‘interracial marriages’ wont involve whites at all, and so shouldn’t be our concern. Keep in mind that a large number of white x native american ‘interracial’ marriages probably involve “natives” that look like Elizabeth Warren.

    “The Hispanic population holds on well due to their high birthrates.”
    Which has crashed since 2007 and is still crashing. Black fertility is also converging on white fertility rates despite the efforts of recent somali imports. The birthrate for Hispanic women fell by 31 percent from 2007 to 2017. There’s no signs that the decline is going to stop, either. Our problem is again, back to immigration.

    Lastly, looking at the OKCupid statistics you used, I need to point out something that wasn’t really mentioned. Claiming to be okay with interracial mixing and actually doing so oneself are two separate things. For example, a very small (hovering around 10% I believe) of people on OKCupid say they would NOT be okay dating outside of their race. However, a much, much larger amount of people will not even send replies or messages to people of different races, despite being ‘okay’ with it. You can also see this effect with an increase in people saying they’re okay with interracial marriage, and then promptly refusing to marry anyone who isn’t white themselves.

    How much of this is genuine disgust for interracial relationships and how much is simple NIMBYism is impossible to tell, but the end result is the same. Approval, faux or not, does not translate into interracial couplings.

    • c matt
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

      Claiming to be okay with interracial mixing and actually doing so oneself are two separate things.

      There are quite a few “talk like MLK” but “Live like KKK” people out there, so this is a fair point. The Hispanic thing does complicate matters as a racially white/ethnic German from S. America gets tossed in with meso-american indigenous as “Hispanic”. Granted, there are probably more of the indigenous, but the white Hispanics are not negligible. Oddly, while I see stats that shift Hispanic Whites into the Hispanic group, I have yet to see any stats doing the opposite – shifting White Hispanics out of Hispanic and into White (it’s always “non-Hispanic Whites” and never “non-White Hispanics”).

      • Phineas Eleazar
        Posted December 6, 2019 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

        I take into account “white hispanics” by treating half of white South American immigrants as white. I found a source online that guesses that this is roughly correct (although the definition of white in SA allows for people who are like 60% white to count, I let it slide).

        Our immigrants from SA are few, as you can see, and our immigrants from Central America are many, so it is kind of a moot point.

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 4:43 pm | Permalink

      I disagree on all points.

      “The question asked was changed in 1994/1996, I think it originally asked about blacks and then was changed to something less “offensive” that coincided with the ‘opinion change.’”

      No, this is not what the graphs I presented showed. The Pew research center graph asked specifically about willingness to marry different races, and you can see that the percentage of people who would oppose marriage to black people, specifically, has dropped from 63% in 1990 to 14% in 2016.

      “plenty of these ‘interracial marriages’ wont involve whites at all, and so shouldn’t be our concern.”

      Of course not, and my simulation does a fair job of accounting for demographic changes of non-white groups. But to answer the idea with the data, from the wikipedia summary of the 2010 Census report on interracial marriage:

      “Among all newlyweds, 9.4% of whites, 17.1% of blacks, 25.7% of Hispanics and 27.7% of Asians married someone whose race or ethnicity was different from their own.
      Among all newlyweds, intermarried pairings were primarily White-Hispanic (43.3%) as compared to White-Asian (14.4%), White-Black (11.9%), and Other Combinations (30.4%). Other combinations consists of pairings between different minority groups, multi-racial people, and American Indians.”

      The interracial marriage rate has, as I have mentioned, skyrocketed in the past ten years. More whites are intermarrying now. But a rate of 10% is high enough to be significant.

      “The birthrate for Hispanic women fell by 31 percent from 2007 to 2017. There’s no signs that the decline is going to stop, either.”

      To be fair, even if the Hispanic birthrates perfectly converged to white birthrates, their population would still grow for the next few generations, and we would settle at a country that is somewhere around 50% white (reflecting the demographic makeup of younger American generations). And so, the genetic makeup of amalgamated Americans, 300 years from now, would be less Hispanic, but still would settle at something like 50% white, assuming no immigration. I think that is still a problem.

      ” Lastly, looking at the OKCupid statistics you used, I need to point out something that wasn’t really mentioned. Claiming to be okay with interracial mixing and actually doing so oneself are two separate things. …

      I actually did not get my statistics on opposition to interracial marriage from OK Cupid, I was looking at opinions on “personal opposition to interracial marriage” from Pew and Gallup. I agree that OKCupid would not be a representative sample of moral opinions. I only used it for “romantic preferences” because it is the best and only data source we have for that.

      “Approval, faux or not, does not translate into interracial couplings.””

      Approval does not *cause* the couplings, but disapproval will *strongly* dis-incentivize them. Remember the context of the reference to approval of interracial marriage: I was explaining why the *lack* of amalgamation in the USA’s past is not proof that lack of amalgamation in the present and future (a few people actually do make this silly argument). This argument need not be made, as the rising interracial marriage rates speak for themselves. But nevertheless, it is informative to see how the old barrier to amalgamation has lifted.

      “You can also see this effect with an increase in people saying they’re okay with interracial marriage, and then promptly refusing to marry anyone who isn’t white themselves…”

      In my simulation, people’s “preferences” lead some people to end up wanting to marry whites, and some not. You can, if you’d like, interpret the data persons that marry intraracially in my simulation as the ones who “refuse” interracial marriage, and the others, as the opposite. It doesn’t matter. The point is to extrapolate the interracial marriage we have now into the distant future. Could you elucidate your point of disagreement with the methodology?

      There is absolutely no reason to believe that whites who marry whites (in the year 2019) are actually “refusing” to marry people who are not white, rather than following one of many forms of preference. Why not take them at their word? We will never get inside their heads. What we do know is that it is incredibly against the moral fabric of our society to say such a thing. And given that, I believe that most people are *attempting* to extinguish such racialist feelings in themselves, too. Why punish and push so hard against a belief you hold, yourself? It makes no sense. I would be shocked if there is secret racialism all throughout society, given the many voluntary expressions of desire for interracial unity, and given the expressions of hatred for any form of white racialism (even just immigration restriction), and the less common but still existing expressions of disagreement with non-white racialism.

      It is true that I am not actually taking into account closeted racialists, such as myself. I don’t think we are many. But I think we’d agree that our birthrates are well sub-replacement, and unless we fix that, we won’t change the outcome of racial amalgamation.

      One of my original goals was to test the argument that amalgamation in a multiracial society does not occur because “people just prefer to marry within their own race.” This contention is incredibly common among people who reject white-positive ideas reflexively. I think there is merit in showing that this half-baked hypothesis is false. My simulations definitely do this, at the least.

      I personally, however, believe that there is little in urban America – besides preference – keeping interracial marriage at bay. The only thing truly stopping the full amalgamation would be the whites in WV, Idaho, Amish country, etc. They will definitely “hold down the fort” for the white race, for a while in the future, simply because they have no contact with the Other.

  6. Exile
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 11:42 am | Permalink

    For those like Anon above who don’t see “demographic doom” in mixing b/c Latin America, consider what you mean by “doom.”

    Mixing may not wipe out Whites as a distinct caste but any reduction in our IQ will hit hardest on the extreme right edge of our IQ Bell curve. Look at some of Dutton’s work and that of similar thinkers regarding the “death of genius.”

    While an 80% White population may serve to prevent our outright extinction, how many Newtons or Mozarts do we lose along the way? A great deal of past White achievement has been accomplished by a small fraternity of our best and brightest.

    A happa nation may be able to keep the trains of the past running or make some incremental improvements for the future, but by over-mixing our unique genetic legacy we’re tampering with alchemies whose subtleties we can only see in the great sweep of history.

    If genes mean as much as science increasingly suggests they do, miscegenation on a mass scale is probably the surest way to snap the delicate historical thread of sublime White achievement.

    • Anon
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

      I wasn’t saying that mixing does not have adverse impacts. I was saying it won’t happen, at least not as much as suggested in this article. We have real world examples where whites have lived among large non-white populations for hundreds of years. Whites have not been bred out of existence in those nations.

      The current (high) intermarriage numbers in the US won’t be sustained. Most Americans are still living in blue pill world, but that will end within a single generation or less (10-20 years). We will become more like Latin America and South Africa, with racial hierarchies.

      Intermarriage and interbreeding will drop off as: (a) liberals marry out of the white race and/or don’t have kids; (b) whites become more red-pilled (as they have in Latin America); and (c) whites increasingly begin to understand racial dating and racial hierarchies, which are well understood in other parts of the world. Women, especially, don’t like marrying “down” under those circumstances.

      I don’t mean to be disrespectful toward the author’s projections. I applaud such forward thinking. Kudos. To be fair, the author does point out “It is quite possible that the rate will go down.” Real world examples from other nations suggest that is exactly what will happen.

      Of course, being a hated minority is no joke. The end result will either be separatism or the end of democracy as we know it. But we won’t be bred out of existence.

      • DrewTexan
        Posted December 7, 2019 at 11:11 am | Permalink

        I agree with this comment that essentially, the future is not a caramel colored people (no judgement). Most mixed people will be reabsorbed by one or another major race in a couple generations. This will be aided by the fact that many of the drivers of interracial reproduction are unsustainable characteristics of no more than one or two generations, as Anon has suggested. Admittedly it is hard to see this from within the subject generation.

        • Franklin Ryckaert
          Posted December 8, 2019 at 3:32 am | Permalink

          “…Most mixed people will be reabsorbed by one or another major race in a couple generations…”

          The facts on the ground show otherwise. In Brazil the demographic called “pardo”(literally “grey”, i.e. mixtures of Whites with Indians and Blacks) constitute with 82 million 44,2% of the population (census of 2010, was 21,2% in 1940).

          Nearly the total population of the Indian subcontinent consists of a mixture of Caucasoids with Australoids. Pure Caucasoids and pure Australoids are very rare.
          Miscegenation means the death of a race.

  7. C Rhoters
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

    It’d like to throw in my perspective. I despise the way the (((media))) promotes miscegenation, anyone with their head not buried in the sand can see the agenda that is at play.

    However, as an under-30’s man who has been in the dating market in the past, unfortunately a lot of white women are pedestalized and become corrupted by culture/society, and thus become horrible potential mates. This is why you get guys traveling to Asia/Eastern Europe/Latin America to get foreign brides because they are feminine and better mates. My own girlfriend is from South America and is very light skinned/has European genes/essentially identifies as white. Her parents have encouraged her to marry a white man. She is far beyond a higher quality woman than a lot of white girls I’ve known/dated unfortunately. As much as I care about the preservation of my genes and ancestral legacy, to drop a high quality woman because she isn’t 100% European stock seems like a risky gamble, and I have seen several cases of men in the same boat. This is something I’ve been mulling over a lot lately because I’m not getting any younger (ha) and for all you folks that aren’t single and dealing with the twisted dating culture, I’ll say in this day and age finding a quality woman is like trying to find a diamond in a septic tank.

    • anon
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

      That is a unique perspective.
      I would say consider going to Europe. Lots of Europeans still there, surely someone that you can get along with.

    • Esoteric Du30ist
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 10:50 am | Permalink

      At the risk of boring everyone by repeating myself, I would say that I am unequivocally a white-positive right winger who is nevertheless married to an Asian woman. I’m in your same age range. I don’t have kids yet but I suppose in time my wife and I will as both of us want a family. My only advice to you is to seriously consider whether or not you can live with your decisions as to who you will be married to. Divorce and broken homes are no advantage to anyone, and conflicts related only to racial differences between yourself and a spouse you willingly married are not good reasons for breaking up a marriage. Speaking from experience, you CAN have a happy marriage, but you – as a white-positive right wing man – will inevitably have more problems or rough spots in your marriage if you are married to a non-white woman than if you are married to a white woman (although neither you nor I am under any illusion about the troubles dealing with white women in our day and time). I suppose it is possible that a mixed-race couple could avoid all problems of that kind if the woman was self-hating in some way, but a healthy woman of another race who doesn’t hate her own people will obviously not love whites more than her own people’s, even if she understands our position or respects it. However, that doesn’t even get into the question of children. As one other commenter said, only white women can have white children.

      I’ll conclude with this: think carefully about your decision to marry. I was not as conscious racial issues at the time I made my decision, but if you – who appears to be further along than I was – then I would strongly urge you to remove your emotional attachments and think about things soberly. I hope that helps.

    • The sad one
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

      You mean: “I’d rather be a race traitor, than risk…” Risk what? Oh how weak and pathetic the men became, once they would fight battles, crusades (some against those), defend families, clans, countries. Now a possibility of a what? Moody or poorly educated (can you really blame her?) , or… just a female is so scary that he’d rather just be a traitor and commit plain and simple genetic suicide…
      Or is it inability or unwillingness even to TRY? And yes, of course, every non-white is trilled to date and mate with a white person.

      • Another Ghost
        Posted December 7, 2019 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

        I agree with you. There was an article I believe on this website that stated white men whom date outside their race often do it out of lack of confidence.

        And if you’re both racially conscious and choose to have mixed children . . . . they’re in for a troubled life. The reasonable conclusion in your case is to rejoin the progressive engine otherwise you will likely harm your family. And if you don’t rejoin it I don’t see how your mixed children wouldn’t.

        To truly care about something you have to be part of it. And it’s much more meaningful and encompassing if you cannot choose it (the dumbass ‘values’ crowd will never understand this.)

        I have empathy for other groups like most do . . . but my caring only goes so far. That’s why 99% of ‘based’ minorities can understand that its wrong to hate white people, but refuse to allow them their own homelands because then it disrupts their lives/families personally.

        Nobody actually cares about American Indians. They just use it as justification to hate whites.

        • DP84
          Posted December 8, 2019 at 8:19 am | Permalink

          @Another Ghost:

          “And it’s much more meaningful and encompassing if you cannot choose it (the dumbass ‘values’ crowd will never understand this.)”

          I’d like to respond to this common argument among WNs with two points:

          1. Values/Choice communities are, unfortunately, much stronger and more passionate about their community compared to Natural/Blood communities.

          There are three examples that demonstrate this: The Charles Manson family, the Jim Jones cult, and, as a broad example, the Evangelical Christians. I bring up these three examples because all of them are/were homogeneously White communities, which actually bolsters the point I’m going to make:

          The White Race explicitly doesn’t want to form a community centered on race. The communities that we form are de facto White communities, but they are always centered on some sort of system of shared values, shared beliefs, or shared tastes. I do not believe it’s possible to reach our race by trying to explain to them how blood is thicker than water. Our race apparently decided long ago that they want communities centered on water, so to speak.

          Additionally, these shared communities, particularly the ones I mentioned, are very passionate about what they believe in and have much more cohesiveness and dedication to their group than movements dedicated to Race and especially Ethnicity. In America, we’ve demonstrated how ethnic groups who were in conflict with each other have learned to live peacefully together. Granted, all those ethnic groups I speak of are English, Irish, German, French, etc, which means they all belong to the same Race. Still though, it’s not wise to underestimate the power of shared values. Which brings me to my second point:

          2. Values and Race are not mutually exclusive

          In the case of White guys like me who came from a culturally conservative background, I would say that a powerful reason to conserve the White Race is because by doing so, we will also conserve the values we hold dear. This is easy to demonstrate by pointing to the voting statistics among non-whites groups, all of whom vote for Democrats by 75-80% margins. Right Wing Normies want to believe that non-whites will support their values, and well, that’s never going to happen. Non-whites have no reason to vote for Republican politicians or support Republican policies, as they are objectively against the interests of non-whites no matter how much white normie conservatives complain about the “Democrat Plantation.”

          However, this opens up WNs to the obvious counterpunch: What about White Liberals? Aren’t they just as much at war with America and the West – if not more so – than any non-white group?

          We should grant them that point and respond with this: Race is necessary for a united national community, but not sufficient. There also needs to be an ideological/values component that explicitly excludes White Liberals who won’t turn away from their Bolshevik beliefs in racial egalitarianism and social justice.

          Simply put: Conserving the White Race is the means by which we conserve our values, which for most Whites will be their true end goal.

          By the way, that also works in the inverse with sane, old-fashioned White Liberals who support environmental protections, single payer healthcare, good schools, functioning roads and infrastructure, etc. I’m a conservative, so I don’t have a bone in that fight, but it might work with some liberals who haven’t sold their souls to communism.

          • S
            Posted December 8, 2019 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

            White women not being submissive or feminine enough is no excuse. That’s weak. Non whites merely pretend to be this way because they’re gold diggers, anyway. They use stereotypes to their advantage to sucker you. You can ask any hooker from Cambodia to Monrovia.

            Think of it this way: take one for the team; put up with a white wife who is a bitch and have some white children. Maybe you won’t get as many blowjobs as you would from a Thai hooker, but at least you’ll be contributing to our society in the most minimal way possible.

            If you can’t do that, then consider something like celibacy or suicide.

          • Another Ghost
            Posted December 10, 2019 at 10:36 am | Permalink

            I honestly believe the number of minority Conservatives will increase in the future if only because the Left is becoming so absurd. But then accompany that with the way Conservative Inc. is adopting homosexuality, transsexualism, lack of tradition, multiracialism, safety of warped Constitutional beliefs etc. etc. and in the future you will likely have even more minorities whom vote Conservatively. Then add onto that the fact that more minorities are easily given high paying employment/scholarships and they will keep going right as to protect their wealth.

            I do believe whites are important in that they came up with all the values and traditions that moved the world forward, along with all the inventions and philosophy . . . but a foreign people can imitate us. It may never be as unique or growing or original but they can replace us even if they are lesser imitations. The society and system being put in place really only requires imitations now with a global elite presiding over them.

  8. EF
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

    ONLY a white woman can have a white baby.
    That is bottom line. Just look at the Media and how it pushes the interracial sex for white women.
    Dr William Pierce a number of years ago wrote about SAVE THE LAST DANCE a film put out by Murray Rothstein aka Sumner Redstone. It was aimed at 13- to 17-year-old White girls. Its message to these teenaged White girls is that sex with Black boys is the BEST. The father who protested was depicted as an evil racist.
    The commercials were AIMED at the white female demographic I mentioned.

    If gay men are discreet that is not an issue. The issue is White Women engaging in interracial sex.
    Andrew Anglin, naughty as he may be, has a fellow write a column called “RACE WAR” and I must tell you that that alone, is worth a visit to the website. The number of White women, ATTRACTIVE WHITE WOMEN, who have sex with people of color and who end up MURDERED is breathtaking.

    The MEDIA is a pollutant aimed at the destruction of our people.
    Yet parents let little white girls bathe in that filth.
    I think as long as people Greg FIGHT the fight we may yet win.

    • The sad one
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 11:52 am | Permalink

      I would like to re-frame this: only white man AND white woman can make a white baby. Trying to blame women on race mixing solely is incorrect, in my opinion, also as supported by the data of this article. Every male choosing an asian or south American or whoever is removing himself from dating market. It means one more desperate woman who will stay childless (most likely scenario at the moment) or will race-mix. And maybe even worse than that: a few extra non-white people in existence competing for everything also for white blood to ruin.

  9. Bob
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

    Miscegenation is a threat, and there’s no doubt that the anti-whites are encouraging it because they know that a mulatto is unlikely to take a pro-white stand. Unfortunately most white people are still falling for propaganda promoted by a mass media that hates them.

  10. Lovely Phenotypes
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    People continue to deny the rise of interracial marriage and mixed race couples/children. . . .

    Each year it is a growing number and you need look no further than top down power and influence. Every single show, commercial, academic, politician is promoting it or engaging in it. I’m tired of people denying intentional propaganda/social engineering with some obscure or ambiguous “natural progression” theory etc. Macron specifically said he wants interbreeding for France.

    I also don’t think the shrinking gene pool of racialists (theory) is a positive. It simply means less diversity and less opportunity in mate selection in a white society. I do not want to see white people become neurotic, obsessed, unattractive Jews. That cannot be our destiny.

    A healthy white people are diverse in their own right without having to include other races. Diverse in thought (many of us were Liberals), in phenotype, and genotype.

    But my god, go to any area with a high population of non-whites and you will find plenty of interracial dating. The Midwest, North East, Texas, California, etc. are all prime examples. It’s not all just recent immigrants. Catholicism has always been diverse, but now I see much more diversity among Mormons and Mennonites as well.

    A population with no homeland and people forced together will breed together. Slowly but surely.
    The blackest pill I have always swallowed since 2015 is that blonde/blue eyes people will be such a minority that they will be highly fetishized and sought after by very wealthy minorities in their own countries and around the world. It’s already the case in places like Brazil, Mexico and parts of the Mediterranean and it will only get worse. In my University business classes there were quite a few Indian students who were utterly OBSESSED with the blonde women there. It was so disturbing.

    • Richard
      Posted December 6, 2019 at 11:22 pm | Permalink

      The Midwest is excessively bad — especially throughout the Kansas City metro area. I’ve became aware of this a couple of years ago after often traveling through the region — and I was shocked. I don’t believe that many of people realize how racially diverse middle America has become. Overland Park, KS is inundated with cultural Marxism. Churches throughout Johnson County had large signs out front signifying that “All are welcome” and rainbow flags were flown at full-mast near their entrances. A couple of hours north, many of the independent coffee shops throughout Lincoln, NE had signs plastered in their front windows indicating that “Hate is not welcome here”. So much for conservative, White America?

      Where have you seen miscsegeneration within the Mormon and Mennonite populations? I’ve witnessed some amongst Mormons in Sandy, UT — but none anywhere amongst Mennonites. My observations in Sandy included a surprising amount of stunning, higher-class blondes in company of thuggish, lower-class Negroids. Sandy is an affluent area that’s predominantly White.

      Fortunately, racial and ideological matters are much better across the northern states ranging from Idaho to the Dakotas. Nonetheless, things are slowly changing as non-White immigrants are being placed into Ethnic-European enclaves such as Fargo, ND. This is worrisome, but not surprising as it’s become a favored strategy by globalists to expedite the Great Replacement.

    • K
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 1:42 am | Permalink

      This is something exhibited by every minority man. They scream and cry for our blood, but my god do they want access to our genes. It is a farce to me it is almost like every other race besides white people believes whites are “superior.”

    • Bill Jones
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 5:08 pm | Permalink

      “that blonde/blue eyes people will be such a minority that they will be highly fetishized and sought after by very wealthy minorities in their own countries and around the world.”

      in the same way that Albinos are eaten in Africa.

  11. anon
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 7:58 pm | Permalink

    Great article. Hybridization is definitely a major issue.
    “I will argue that there will be virtually no “pure white” (defined as >95% European by descent) people” – a minor detail but how did make the decision to set it as 95% ? Why not 99% for example?

    • Food for Thought
      Posted November 2, 2020 at 5:17 pm | Permalink

      A couple of cautionary notes: Whites have been mixing for centuries in small numbers. No one is 100% European in the western hemisphere. If you marry a white Latin, you are almost certainly getting some black, native indian, etc in the mix. Heck, Spaniards in Europe have traces as well (Moors) mixed as well. Greeks marry middle easterners some. DNA isn’t going to tell you anything. Best way to deal with it is the 1600s approach: if a 50%+ percent white person assimilates into the culture and marries a white person, their kids will be 60-70% white. Their grandkids, should they continue the pattern, will be 80-90% white. In 3 generations, you’ve lost the token minority traits by breeding solidly back in. Get less hung up on how DNA percentages and more on culture and willingness to marry in and raise kids as white.

      Stay away from “Hispanics” or other groups that break away from the white label in hopes of being a pet minority. They have drunk the Kool-aid of the globalists, and can’t be trusted. Also anyone bragging about being 100% this or that. Unless they are a recent immigrant, they are not being honest.

      • Greg Johnson
        Posted November 2, 2020 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

        Historically, you are just wrong. North of the Rio Grande, most whites are of unmixed ancestry.

        When the white population was growing, a bit of race-mixing on the frontiers was no threat. Now that white populations are collapsing, we can’t take a blase attitude about race-mixing. Non-white populations are exploding. We won’t absorb them, they’ll absorb us.

        Beyond that, even mixed-race populations still have identities and interests, including an interest in not being replaced with some other kind of population. They too need to erect barriers to miscegenation, or they will be genetically absorbed by more fertile populations.

  12. ECD
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 9:17 pm | Permalink

    We would have to get down to the level of the alleles to really figure this out. Previously, the Sahara had been a major bulwark against what was to the south of it—and the Mediterranean another moat ahead of that. This begins to explain the marked uniqueness of Europe.

    On top of this, we must admit that that the strong taboo regarding Africans probably has real-life implications: there must be some dominant alleles in the sub-Sahara that quickly destroy what is unique to the North of it. One’s own experience probably informs them of this. In contrast, Far-East Asians have been found to be more genetically similar to Europeans.

    One of my grandmothers was of Moorish descent, and the other of was of distant Cherokee descent, yet their grandchildren have green eyes with auburn hair; their great-grandchildren blue with blonde. This means something to me: The presence of other Eurasian genes does not preclude the expression of the European-type.

    However, clearly the presence of certain African genes blocks the expression of the European-type. This is how phenotypes can quickly disappear from a population in the face of mixing.

    Interesting article!

  13. DP84
    Posted December 6, 2019 at 10:05 pm | Permalink


    I share the concerns and fears that you raise here in your study, and I agree that racial hybridization and amalgamation resulting from the widespread public acceptance of interracial relations is arguably the greatest threat that faces the White Race. However, there’s something that’s been gnawing at me for years now, and you summed it up perfectly in a comment below:

    “There is absolutely no reason to believe that whites who marry whites (in the year 2019) are actually “refusing” to marry people who are not white, rather than following one of many forms of preference. Why not take them at their word? We will never get inside their heads. What we do know is that it is incredibly against the moral fabric of our society to say such a thing. And given that, I believe that most people are *attempting* to extinguish such racialist feelings in themselves, too. Why punish and push so hard against a belief you hold, yourself? It makes no sense. I would be shocked if there is secret racialism all throughout society, given the many voluntary expressions of desire for interracial unity, and given the expressions of hatred for any form of white racialism (even just immigration restriction), and the less common but still existing expressions of disagreement with non-white racialism.”

    My question for you is this: For regular guys like me who don’t publish Pro-White content for a living like Greg Johnson does for CC and like Jared Taylor does for Amren, is there even a point to sharing Pro-White views with regular White people?

    My experience with Whites has been the same as yours: They sincerely feel in the bottom of the hearts that anyone who opposes interracial marriage is a monster and an evil person. Whether they have a White spouse and White children or not is irrelevant, because they don’t have any loyalty towards their race or any positive feelings for their race.

    I’m never said it this bluntly before since its very unpopular, even in Pro-White circles, but here’s how I really feel: Social Darwinism MUST triumph. Otherwise, a bunch of weak, useless people will inherit the earth. I cannot think of anything more disgusting or abhorrent. But I’m not talking about non-whites here. I’m talking about White people. We are losing the war for Darwinian survival, and increasingly, I believe that Whites who refuse to take sides with their own race deserve to lose, and that we shouldn’t lift a single finger to save them when they are screaming in our faces that they don’t want to be saved and don’t even need to be saved. I say we oblige them. I say we take a flippant libertarian attitude and let them reap what they sow. They get what they effing deserve.

    Let me know what you think.

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 10:20 pm | Permalink

      I agree that there is little point in talking about our issues with “normies.” I would suggest we do our best to be “crypto-normies.”

      My main strategy would be the creation of white-positive communities, preferably in rural areas, where we will not interfere with the interracial cultural mission of the mainstream US society, and will not draw enough attention for our enemies to be frustrated enough to destroy us.

      We just have to hold down the fort ourselves, and make a place where we can live in peace, enthusiastically participate in the society we are in (people like us are going to need homogeneity to enthusiastically participate in society), and find women who might accept us, as we work towards salvation from the damnation we have received from the generation sins of the white race, which ultimately must be independence from globalist civilizations.

      If we build communities, I do not think it would be polite or proper for us to impose ourselves in major cities. The people in the USA want de-racinated urban areas, and I do believe that all cultural minorities should respect/defer to the cultural ideals of the majorities, and certainly should not impose themselves in ways that would wreck the society’s stability/solidarity. In the USA, the presence of any white-positive community in urban America would be catastrophic for the social stability of these places. I don’t advocate that we be assholes who do this kind of thing.

      In parallel, some of us can be closeted cypto-normies, who do not interfere in public life of political life (I strongly disagree with Richard Spencer’s attempts to influence the Republican party’s policies).

      I tolerate some people’s desire for multiracial civilizations; the world clearly demands them. And also, creation of such civilizations would take pressure off of other civilizations to be multiracial, as the citizens in homogeneous civilizations who hate racial identity will simply be able to opt into the de-racinated world civilization. (“Go to the USA, if you’re too special to be Norwegian!”)

      I don’t think that normal whites are beyond saving, entirely. But no one single person can change a normie’s mind on these issues. If you try, you will only burn your reputation. I STRONGLY recommend not trying to proselytize in IRL conversations. If a normie is to change, it will be through a long process of some kind.

      Here is why I have hope for normies. I find that normies simultaneously hold two beliefs: that interracial marriage is negligible and not going to lead to much racial amalgamation, and that we should strive for more interracial love, interracial friendship, and globalism. Obviously, the second belief is undermining the first. But liberals are often of two minds on other issues, such as homosexuality. They are like the Holocaust Denier who believes that the Holocaust nevertheless *should* have happened.

      Still, when they deny that amalgamation will happen, they are (probably) admitting that they find the idea of amalgamation too terrible to fully accept (some of them do fully accept it, I am aware). For this reason, I think that we should steadily maintain (on the internet, or with family members who won’t disown you) that this *must* happen, and provide the most powerful arguments as we can for this. The more powerful our proofs, the less they will be able to let themselves get away with squirming away from this issue, as it will be clear that our side is the most informed.

      We should keep our arguments stockpiled in special corners of the internet, and follow the advice of the Bible (even though most of us are not Christians) to “always have an answer ready.” So, when you do discuss with people on the internet, you need not grasp for straws in your counterarguments; instead, you can simply refer to the latest and greatest analysis on amalgamation. We should constantly refine them. We should seek to push them into new intellectual spaces. At the moment, I have not yet conquered our own space. That is a necessary starting point. From there, we can invade the alt-light, the American Nationalists, the Asian identity spaces, the African American identity spaces, etc. I think there is great promise in reaching out to other races on this issue.

      Eventually, the idea of racial amalgamation will gain a life of its own, and the entire educated society will be grappling with it, instead of plugging their ears and singing “LALALALA.”

      THAT is how we reach the normies.

  14. K
    Posted December 7, 2019 at 1:50 am | Permalink

    The push for miscegenation in the media just comes off downright malicious. It isn’t hispanics and whites or asians and whites, but it’s blacks with white women. Literally, deliberately the most humiliating mating partner one can have. I don’t want to sound so mean, but the genes speak for themselves and the whole thing feels like we are purposely being dragged into mud.

    • TJ
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 8:40 pm | Permalink

      Jews owned most of the slave ships transporting Africans to the U.S. They also legalized (in the U.S.) , invented and run the porn industry. They put these people in proximity and then worked overtime to break down the barriers preventing this abhorrent activity. Of course it’s designed to humiliate whites on course to extinction.

  15. The sad one
    Posted December 7, 2019 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    This topic turns my stomach. Yes, I fully agree, that the miscegenation is the biggest threat to the white survival. The problem is not that it happens in principle, but the amount of it and how it is supported by virtually anyone and aggressively promoted by almost any media available.
    You , Americans, are lucky as you can even be white. However in Europe the situation is different, there is no such thing as “white Swedish” for example, there is only Swedish. Most of countries about 5 years ago altered their legal base, so that everyone with one local parent and one from abroad is considered “without foreign background” or in other words exactly same as a non-mixed person. Race is kind of non-existent and non-topic. But legal base is another question.
    I am on the front lines of this war: going to prenatal screenings makes me desperate for weeks or forever… I live in Helsinki, and I have a habit to count heads for statistical reasons, as there is no official statistics on race, so I kind of make my own. I live in the best area of the city (I’m sure the government will have to take steps to “fix” it soon) so my perception can be a little bit skewed. Adults: predominately white. Children groups: I guess it depends from where they come from, they range from 100% white to 1 out of 4 or 1 out of 6 non-white, (this ratio is quite common), usually the non white in the group is pure black. But the prenatal screening is the worst: more than half of the visitors are some sort of mixed race couple or plainly non white. White femaleXblack male is common, but the most common hybrid breeders are white maleXasian female, male asianXwhite female are also common, hybrids hybridizing: pure white with some sort of hybrid, of course Somalis, other blacks, arabs, just asians…. and few pure white couples for a change. I’m telling you: seeing this, I see no future. I feel despair. There is nowhere to run. Asians (male and especially female) shamelessly flood for dating reasons and there is no end of that considering their sheer number, Africans are being shipped to Europe by the thousands everyday. What is the future for my children or grand-children? Maybe so far we can mange, but generations after?-the end? When white person is one in 400 for example, what are the dating possibilities? And the numbers not unrealistic at all, climate migrants-notice not anymore refugees, just migrants-are being prepared for the best trip of their lives. Willing males and females, as someone else stated, totally obsessed with blonde people, how strong one has to be to resist? Formative years, youth in mixed environments, every advertisement, every movie, every textbook, every toy shamelessly pushing the same: mix young white person, mix. Kindergarten material (in Finland, mind you) yes, it MUST be with diversity…
    The population is supposedly declining, but the city is full of new construction (and so many in the plans) every new area has 20 or 25 % of government funded social housing, who is going to live in these new areas (if supposedly population is in decline) and who is going to live in those social apartments next door to those expensive apartments where people actually paid for it?There is no escape…

    • Steven JW
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

      This is the most depressing thing I have read in some time. . . . I’m sorry you have to witness such a thing. I can only offer my condolences. . . .hope is something I struggle with as well. I didn’t think things were changing so fast.

      At least know that you have volk worldwide, friend. We are in this together.

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 10:47 pm | Permalink

      It is those of us who have lived in liberal cities, and seen the prevalence of interracial couples, who know this to be true.

      My best advice for the European is to try to get into a less successful European country that uses an uncommon language. I don’t think there will be great immigration to such countries.

      ” When white person is one in 400 for example, what are the dating possibilities? ”

      That actually is one of the most important drivers of racial amalgamation, which I am able to capture well in my simulations. Also, it is an idea that “normies” do not process well.

      When talking with my brother, he could not get past the idea that if interracial marriages happen x percent of the time, and the TFR is T, and the original population is P, the “pure” white population should evolve, in ‘n’ generations, to

      ((1-x) * T)^n * P

      But this is false. We are not going to be in this sort of logarithmic population decline. (If we were, we would be in decent shape, as it would take virtually forever for whites to really disappear.)

      This is because, as your percentage of the population drops, your intermarriage rate increases (for the reason you mentioned). And the “pure” white percentage always drops, since every generation adds more mixed-race people.

      This is how so many complete racial amalgamations have been able to occur in the past.

      • Phineas Eleazar
        Posted December 7, 2019 at 10:50 pm | Permalink

        I should have done T/2, instead of T. I should have said that x is the fraction of interracial couples, not the percent.

      • Svea Svensson
        Posted December 8, 2019 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

        My best advice for the European is to try to get into a less successful European country that uses an uncommon language. I don’t think there will be great immigration to such countries.

        Such selfish behavior only makes it worse for those compatriots who stay and defend our countries in which our ancestors have lived for thousands of years.

        Large migrations within Europe also destoys the ethnic diversity. So what should be encouraged is to stay and fight for our countries – not to betray them!

        • Lars
          Posted December 8, 2019 at 7:33 pm | Permalink

          Devotion to country is commendable. But, if I must move to another locale in order to escape dangerous anti-White forces over which I have little or no control and to secure a future for White children, then so be it. Preserving my race takes precedenece over retaining territory.

          • Svea Svensson
            Posted December 9, 2019 at 9:45 am | Permalink

            Fortunately, no country in Europe is in that situation yet. While there are huge problems in many major cities, most parts of the countryside are very white. So what nationalists should do is to join like-minded people and move out to small towns or villages, instead of fleeing their countries.

    • Alexandra O
      Posted January 11, 2020 at 10:08 am | Permalink

      Yes, your letter is depressing, but it is also a massive wake-up call to the rest of us. I live in Los Angeles, and I am often the only white person on the bus, with the rest of the riders chattering away in Spanish or Tagalog or Vietnamese. Yes, each individual is a fine person (well, not the drug cartel gang members seen from time to time), but in large groups and enclaves, and rallying for their “rights” in front of City Hall downtown, not so pleasant. The freeways are jammed, trees are felled on lovely old boulevards to make room for more cars, and RE prices are soaring, because immigrants cram two or three entire families into a 2-bed apartment. I fear for the future as much as you do, and maybe we will be the ones to ‘light the fire’ to take back our countries. I’m very much afraid that it is ‘too little, too late’, but I vow to fight during the few years left to me. I worked 53 years, and did not ‘see’ the problem evolving, since I was in survival mode. Now, I will do what I can. Thank you for your marvelous post and I hope everyone does some serious thinking after reading it.

  16. Jj
    Posted December 7, 2019 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

    What the hell are we going to do about this?

    We have to talk about it

  17. Svea Svensson
    Posted December 7, 2019 at 1:59 pm | Permalink

    Regarding the picture of Prince Harry and Meghan, it is rather surprising that their son looks so white. “Baby Archie” has inherited his mother’s brown eyes, but his father’s fair skin and reddish hair. So he will probably be used frequently by those who want to prove that race-mixing isn’t a threat to the white race.

    • The sad one
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

      Very distasteful topic, but it must be said:
      She didn’t give birth to this child. I had that feeling immediately after seeing her “after birth” photos. Then I saw same opinions floating around internet.
      Smoke and mirrors, all is done solely for propaganda purposes. And it’s working well.
      My own mother used this “royal” example to justify how it is ok and no problem to mix. It’s on TV-unbeatable argument vs biology, statistics, probability and why bother you hateful person, it’s a baby. End of story.

      • Carson Brewer
        Posted December 8, 2019 at 6:44 am | Permalink

        I suspected she was just a surrogate. We’ll know for sure when the baby grows up.

      • Alexandra O
        Posted January 11, 2020 at 9:37 am | Permalink

        I have nothing kind to say of Meghan Markle on many levels, but I don’t doubt she was pregnant and had the baby. We will have to wait a couple years to see how the baby ‘grows up’ and skin pigmentation settles. What matters most are her effusive political views, which are not going down well with the Royal Family, nor with many of the English people, but there is enough multiculturalism firmly planted in England now — since they have ‘taken in’ myriads of their former colonials — to support anything that Meg and Harry do.

        And, a brief update, just in the last week (January 8, I believe) the charming couple announced they are moving ‘somewhere in North America’ — Canada and Hollywood has both been noted as possibilities — and stepping away from “Royal Duties”. How can it get worse, having those two roaming the world, spewing their bi-racial nonsense.

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted December 7, 2019 at 10:37 pm | Permalink

      Megan Markle’s mother is fairly light-skinned, so it is possible that this baby really is this white.
      I’d add that all humans are fairer as babies. I was a little Aryan until I was school-aged. Now my hair is a medium-dark brown, and my skin is pretty dark, for a white person.

      Baby Archie is probably a good 80% Northern European by descent, which is a strong number. That is 4 times the amount of European DNA than African DNA. The racial breakdown that will define the American of 350 years in the future will be far less European.

      I’d add that the spiritual damage to Archie’s identity, which results from the de-racination, is also problematic for anyone who wants to establish a sense of peoplehood. If the non-white family accepts the dominance of the white racial identity, it can be water under the bridge. But I have a feeling that is not the case with Megan Markle, and that it would not be the case IRL most of the time.

      For these reasons, I am not yet convinced that baby Archie proves that everything is alright.

      • Franklin Ryckaert
        Posted December 8, 2019 at 2:59 am | Permalink

        I don’t see how you can describe Megan Markle’s mother as “fairly light skinned”. Here is a picture of hers, with her daughter and her baby :

        Black with White is the worst combination thinkable. The “one drop rule” should be maintained.

        • Phineas Eleazar
          Posted December 8, 2019 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

          She is light-skinned by African standards. Our eyes are biased, but she is probably about 20% white.

          • ex South African
            Posted January 10, 2020 at 5:05 am | Permalink

            It also depends on the camera type, camera angle and background. Some blacks appear whiter and some whites darker than they should be. Meghans mother – depends from where in Africa she originated. I have seen plenty South African blacks with a lighter hue than others (for example Mandela, some San/Bushman mixture). There exists a wide range of black hues amongst the blacks in Africa. South Africas blacks are more brown than ebony black like in some places in Africa. Baby pictures – compare to Michael Jacksons daughter Paris baby pictures.

            Even me as a race realist sometimes is challenged in evaluating the racial background of some women who with the first look look very European, but on a closer look it is not so. I never had that problem while still staying in South Africa. There you just had four classifications (Black, Indian, Coloureds, Whites) in the population registry and you could pretty easily spot them on the streets. No Arabs or wide range of Eastern types. Overseas you have a much higher variety of immigrant types with a genetic distance closer to white.

      • Richard McCulloch
        Posted December 9, 2019 at 4:18 pm | Permalink

        Assuming Markle’s mother is 24% genetically white, the average for American blacks per Bryc, et. al., then Markle, with a white father, would be 38% black and baby Archie 19% black, supporting your opinion that he is at least 80% Northern European. You are also correct that his pigmentation can be expected to darken over the next several years. Regarding his facial features, these are not very developed in an infant but I thought his nose and eye shape indicated black ancestry. From a video that Markle appeared in at age 12 I think it very likely that her present facial features have been surgically altered.

        • Franklin Ryckaert
          Posted December 9, 2019 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

          “…I think it very likely that her present facial features have been surgically altered…”

          Yes, that seems very likely. Here is a picture of hers as a little child :

          Notice the kinky hair and the absence of a nose bridge.

          In a later picture she suddenly has straight hair and does have a nose bridge, but notice how artificial that looks:

          • Phineas Eleazar
            Posted December 10, 2019 at 3:33 pm | Permalink

            I had no idea that Megan Markle looked *that* different as a child.

            But that is about what most-all “biracial” Americans I have seen in my personal life have looked like, so it stacks up with personal experience. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Megan Markle, and I’ve probably seen hundreds of biracial people.

            I’d expect her hair is chemically straightened with some very expensive procedures. I don’t know about her skin, she probably just wears big hats all of the time and puts on a bit of makeup.

  18. M. Porcius
    Posted December 7, 2019 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

    If we ever truly take power, the degradation of the white race can be easily reversed.

    A comprehensive eugenics program including genetic engineering, cloning and selective breeding will not only reverse any damage done but it will lift the white race to new staggering heights.

    Cloning of mammals is already possible and with a bit of R&D it would be possible for humans as well. Genetic engineering is becoming more and more effective. Imagine the possibilities…

    I recommend everyone to read Eugenics by Richard Lynn, link here:

    • Anon
      Posted December 10, 2019 at 6:04 am | Permalink

      It depends on who controls the genetics, but yeah. The Chinese are working on this technology. There is resistance to this in the West, but a future white ethnostate could do the same thing.

      If you really want to go down the science fiction route, you can imagine whites paying POC surrogate mothers to give birth to white kids created in a petri dish. Right now the going rate is $100k, but that would go down if it was outsourced to foreign labor.

  19. Svea Svensson
    Posted December 7, 2019 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

    Even if most whites generally prefer a partner of their own race, many of them will choose someone of another race if he or she is younger and more attractive. They trade their whiteness (and sometimes money) for youth and beauty – at least as long as it is socially acceptable.

    The most common example of this is probably white men marrying Asian women, which explains why 12% of the white men, but only 10% of the white women, marry outside their race.

    This constellation also seems rather normalized among racial nationalists. The American Renaissance Conference even invited one of these men to give a speech on “The Arctic Alliance” earlier this year!

    • Stronza
      Posted January 1, 2020 at 8:24 am | Permalink

      That was John Derbyshire. Here are 2 short excerpts from his talk at Amren Conference in 2019.

      My 2007 article suggested that we Arctics—whites and yellows—put our clever heads together and come up with a common strategy against those threats. Hence the word “Alliance” in my title.

      See, it’s not about races as we know them, it’s about our common, long ago, experience of climates with winters and 4 seasons. Derbyshire actually believes that “yellows” are threatened.

      Some unkind people have scoffed that I was merely projecting my own domestic circumstances onto the world at large. (I am married to a Chinese lady.)

      My reply: Possibly I was, but the Arctic Alliance may none the less be worth considering.

  20. inq
    Posted December 8, 2019 at 1:30 am | Permalink

    Egypt. The best example of white race glory and how racial mixing contributed to collapse of a white empire.

    Nordic Desert Empire—Ancient Egypt

    DNA and Ancient White Egypt

  21. D Marotta
    Posted December 8, 2019 at 2:45 am | Permalink

    The trend is that more Whites will continue taking our own side by rejecting globohomo and its poison and continue turning more and more to the nationalist right which is becoming more ethno nationalist particularly as Whites in some Nations decline as a majority so we will see more Whites become more ethnocentric on average ( reproducing their own/ rejecting mixing, pro natal more conservative ) while the ethno masochists are boiled off the White majority going forwards. Its similar to the Amish who are becoming more Amish on average as the less committed have been boiled off over the years, Same with Whites becoming more pro White going forward. The Nationalist trend is only just starting to so there is tremendous potential for growth in all Western Nations as politics as usual/msm continues to decline.

  22. Chd7
    Posted December 8, 2019 at 3:09 am | Permalink

    Thank you for this article. This is a huge issue which does not get the attention it deserves.

    I live in a moderately affluent, middle class suburb of London. I estimate of the white mothers I come across 25% – 33% have mixed race children.

    There is a UK based YouTube dissident content creator who has on numerous occasions brought up the fact marriage statistics don’t indicate any cause for alarm. The obvious problem with this is these children don’t appear to be the products of stable, long term relationships, if you know what I mean.

    Again, thanks, glad to see this discussed.

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted December 8, 2019 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

      You’re very welcome, please share the article if the situation arises in discussion with another dissident.

  23. cecil1
    Posted December 8, 2019 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    Of course miscegenation is the biggest threat.

    WHO exactly in the alt-right circle doesn’t think its a threat. Its the definition of destruction outside of actually direct killing.

    (But direct killing fosters resistance and immediate awareness… a slow attack with miscegenation is more hidden to the naive)

    Those who seek #WhiteGenocide prefer mixing to displacement. Their object is not to SUBSTITUTE, their object is to DESTROY.

  24. HungarianFashionista
    Posted December 9, 2019 at 4:26 am | Permalink

    Christmas commercial by McDonald’s Deutschland. Shot on location at Keleti railway station in Budapest, where the 2015 refugee crisis took place.

    The comments here illustrate one of the big problems of white man: we are not very good at intuitively grasping certain mathematical concepts. It’s not that we are stupid. You explain compound interest and annuity to a 10 year old, and he will understand it. But there is an emotional resistance in us against it, because we feel that compound interest is not fair. How come I’ve been paying my mortgage for 10 years, and my debt hasn’t gone down? How come my race will disappear from the face of the Earth, when only 10 percent of whites marry out? We have a naive belief in a fair and just world, and it prevents us from really, deeply grasp certain laws of nature. (((Other))) races have no such beliefs, and that’s one of the reasons why they are more succesful than us.

    Regarding this idea of moving to “a less successful European country that uses an uncommon language”, if you are moving back to the land of your ancestors, or you need a safe place for Movement Work, it’s fine. But I often hear average Westerners wanting to move here simply because this is still a safe and white country.

    First of all, a lot of what people in the West believe about us are illusions. There are serious problems with Gypsies (or farther to the East, with Muslims). Africans are trickling in. For now most of them move on to Western Europe, but once Germany stops accepting them, Hungary will be good enough. In Budapest I see white women with African men and mixed babies almost every day. Half of our population, and more than half of our young people, have a Westernized, liberal outlook. In reality the right has maybe 5 percent on the left. The situation is precarious, and we may lose political power in 2022.

    Secondly, contrary to popular belief, right wing votes don’t grow on trees in Eastern Europe. I know people who raise children on the kind of money that Westerners spend on cable TV and cell phones. And these Hungarians still save money for gasoline, leaflets, food donations, and in their free time they go to godforsaken villages and organize the political community. And then wealthy strangers want to come here and basically enjoy the fruits of other people’s labor. They raise real estate prices, they squeeze us out of our cities. In the building where I live, Westerners own half the apartments. When Hungarians in the countryside want to escape unemployment and Gypsies, they often find that it’s easier to relocate to London than to Budapest.

    Third, there are 2 things that we know for sure about these immigrant wannabes: they aren’t attached to their own culture, and they have a tendency to give up fights very easily. Do we want “new Hungarians” who move out at the first difficulty? Do we want their defetist genes in our gene pool? Thanks, but no thanks.

    Fourth. Many of the immigrants are pensioners, mostly from Germany and the Netherlands. Here their Western middle class pension buys an upper middle class lifestyle. They buy up entire villages, renovate the houses, give work to locals, prevent the further deterioration of the countryside. That’s all very nice. But I just can’t help thinking: These are the only people who actually enjoy the comforts and freedoms of the West. They have money. They don’t have to worry about losing their job. They have all the free time in the world. And while we bleed in the EU dog fight with the Merkels and Timmermanses, these Western pensioners chill out in fancy Hungarian spas and rooftop wine bars. What if they went home, if only for 6 months each year, and spent some of their remaining time and money on politics?

    To sum it all up, we don’t need immigrants, we need allies. We need a Salvini in every country in the world. But especially in the EU. We want all white people, perhaps with the exception of South Africans, to stay where they are, dig in their heels, and fight. Start by sending this article to your parents, brothers, sisters, first and second cousins, aunts and uncles. They surely won’t report you to your employer.

    • Steven W
      Posted December 10, 2019 at 4:10 am | Permalink

      Excellent read. Thank you for that. It’s nice to hear another perspective and its also a shame that so many Hungarians are mixing African as well.

    • Anon
      Posted December 10, 2019 at 5:52 am | Permalink

      This is a very good comment. You should write an article for Counter-Currents on this topic.

    • d_malaparte
      Posted December 10, 2019 at 10:29 pm | Permalink

      If we go back far enough, a substantial number of Westernsrs owe their ancestry to people who slowly moved up through the Danube Basin, over millennia. Maybe this is why I find Balkans women so hot?

  25. Lord Shang
    Posted December 13, 2019 at 6:20 pm | Permalink

    Great article. Thank you for taking the time to gather this info.

    We need more stringent standards as to who gets classified as “white”.

    I’m an old-school conservative who recognizes (and has for decades) that white nationalism is appropriate for this era (once we have our ethnostates, I will be on the Far Right, not anywhere close to ethnocommunitarian social democrats, let alone socialists). I don’t like some of the whispers going around the WN sphere about how we should lower our standards as to who gets classified as members of our tribe. In the good old days, we had the One Drop Rule. Should this not be revived, perhaps not during the formation of tactical alliances for mutual survival, but certainly when assessing demographic power calculations ?

    Granted, we have many Americans who have “Injun” blood in them. Some of these are very old stock Americans, and ideologically, among our best people. They are certainly culturally assimilated to whiteness. I think an American with less than 10% Indian blood can be considered white. That percentage dramatically falls, however, with blacks.

    But the important point is not to overstate the number of global whites, thereby understating our true demographic peril. More then half of Latino “whites” are not true whites at all (though there is no need to alienate them from our cause). Ever been to Argentina? This 80%+ “white” nation looks more like 30%. Hell, even many Iberians and Sicilians and Greeks seem racially closer to Arabs than to Nordics or Celts (or many Slavs). The latter sub-races, esp the Nordic, are responsible fore most of the greatness associated with our race.

    What must be done:

    1. Hold down the fertility of nonwhites everywhere by every means.

    2. Increase the fertility of whites – but especially the whitest whites. We and the planet need more Nordics.

    3. Eugenically improve the white racial stock however we can. DO NOT EUGENICALLY IMPROVE NONWHITES, if it can be avoided.

    4. Absolutely prohibit, or, in ‘free’ countries, at least ostracize all miscegenation among whites. No miscegenation is acceptable. The offspring of miscegenation are not white.

    5. Of course, end all nonwhite immigration, while encouraging white racial nationalist ingathering – the necessary prelude to the Ethnostate(s).

  26. ntr211
    Posted February 4, 2020 at 11:59 am | Permalink

    The problem would not exist if white people were simply forbidden to have children with non-whites – but exactly these laws were abolished decades ago.
    But you can still rely on voluntary compliance with such rules.

    “As soon as a number of individuals consider themselves a group, you can force an endogamic behaviour. Of course, not everyone will follow this, but that’s not bad – once there is a group, however defined, then you can exclude such people from that group. So where there used to be a non-discriminatory, public gene pool – anyone could have children with anyone (Black and White, White and Indian, White and Arab, Arab and Indian, etc), and their offspring also could have had children with everyone, this is no longer possible: by definition, only those who marry within the group will be able to *stay* in the group. Persons who want to remain members of the group can therefore only marry other group members. And if all initial group members were white, then you get eternal whiteness. You have created a second, non-public gene pool, a barrier that prevents random mixing.”

Post a Comment

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.
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs


    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles


    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace