Print this post Print this post

Interracial Marriage & White Genocide in Latin America

Elizabeth Warren shows off her non-white grandchildren

3,032 words

I was happy to see the high amount of activity on my last article on the future of the white demographic in the USA. As I had hoped, I received counter-arguments. The most common criticism of my predictions references Latin America as a contradiction of them. It is claimed that Latin American countries have been engaging in miscegenation for over 300 years, and yet there are, it is claimed, staunch and powerful white minorities in these countries still, due to resistance to intermarriage. Yet, I claim that whites in the USA (excepting “rural backwaters,” as Eric Kaufmann calls them) will be mixed in 150 years or so.

I will respond to these counter-arguments and disseminate some of the fascinating information I have found on race in Latin America.

The main counter-argument to the white genocide hypothesis

My earlier simulations suggested that current racial-romantic preferences regarding mating, if they remain in tact into the future and drive marriage, are such that almost all Americans will be mixed within the next two centuries. This will happen despite the appearance that our population will only decay very slowly since only a minority of whites choose interracial marriage currently.

The key assumption that is disputed is that the racial preferences of whites will not change in the future. The counter-argument is that the whites that remain in the future will be those who are more racialist, as the less racialist ones will be the ones who marry out.

It has been claimed that this is exactly what has happened in Latin America. I will dispute this.

Race in Latin America: Mexico

Latin American countries each have unique racial profiles. The Mexican population appears to be mostly Amerindian, with a small percentage of people retaining European heritage.

From Admixture in Latin America: Geographic Structure, Phenotypic Diversity and Self-Perception of Ancestry Based on 7,342 Individuals  ( )


The samples from which this breakdown were taken are represented as dots on the below chart:

You can also see that the northern part of Mexico is more European.

I would argue that the reason that whites have (hardly) held on in Mexico is not due to their evolving to be more racialist, but due to circumstance. Many whites in Mexico are relatively recent immigrants, and many are long-time residents of Amerindian-devoid, rural northern towns. From wiki ( ):

Mexico’s northern and western regions have the highest percentages of European population, with the majority of the people not having native admixture or being of predominantly European ancestry, resembling in aspect that of northern Spaniards. In the north and west of Mexico, the indigenous tribes were substantially smaller than those found in central and southern Mexico, and also much less organized, thus they remained isolated from the rest of the population or even in some cases were hostile towards Mexican colonists. The northeast region, in which the indigenous population was eliminated by early European settlers, became the region with the highest proportion of whites during the Spanish colonial period. However, recent immigrants from southern Mexico have been changing, to some degree, its demographic trends.

While the majority of European immigration to Mexico has been Spanish with the first wave starting with the colonization of America and the last one being a consequence of the Spanish Civil War of 1937, immigrants from other European countries have arrived to Mexico as well: during the Second Mexican Empire the immigration was mostly French, and during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries migrants mainly from Italy, the United Kingdom, Ireland and Germany followed. Additionally small numbers of White Americans, Croats, Armenians, Greeks, Poles, Romanians, Russians and Ashkenazi Jews came. The European Jewish immigrants joined the Sephardic community that lived in Mexico since colonial times, though many lived as Crypto-Jews, mostly in the northern states of Nuevo León and Tamaulipas. Some communities of European immigrants have remained isolated from the rest of the general population since their arrival, among them the German-speaking Mennonites from Russia of Chihuahua and Durango, and the Venetos of Chipilo, Puebla, which have retained their original languages.

Race in Latin America: Brazil

Brazil is a country lauded by the world for its thoroughly mixed population. Yet, on the white-positive internet, there are many who claim that the whites in Brazil are racialists who have successfully preserved their heritage, despite hundreds of years of mixing..  Take this comment from Unz, for example:

But, according to geneticist Sérgio Pena “with the exception of immigrants of first or second generation, there is no Brazilian who does not carry a bit of African and Amerindian genetic.” ( )

This proclamation, if true, would confirm my hypotheses. Still, it is interesting to dig into the ancestry of Brazilians.

In this article ( ), geneticists gathered DNA data of 934 Brazilians from four of the biggest Brazilian cities, and compared their self-reported racial categorization to their actual ancestry. What they found was that self-identified white people in Brazil can be anywhere between 60-90% European by DNA.

We can see that the definition of “white” is radically different in these different cities. The anti-white activists seem to love to pick and prod at the definition of white, as if it disqualifies the desire of people of European descent to maintain our genetic integrity, which frustrates those of us who are white-positive. But we must give the devil his due. Yes, the definition of white can change. In the real world, white is a coloration, and it is the coloration of the lightest-skinned people around.

There are some pure whites in Brazil, still. We must look to South Brazil, (the patch of land dangling off the bottom of the country’s map).

The city of Porto Alegre is a coastal city in the southernmost region of Brazil. This region was almost entirely built by recent European immigrants in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This is also the region that is always trying to gain independence in their O Sul é o Meu País movement. What you can see from the  Admixture in Latin America: Geographic Structure, Phenotypic Diversity and Self-Perception of Ancestry Based on 7,342 Individuals study, which mostly sampled from South Brazil, is that there are many residents in this region that retain pure white ancestry. Take a look at these heartening graphs, which come from samples mostly taken from this southern region. 

Given that O Sul is unique in its purity of European ancestry in a country of thoroughly mixed people with aggressive race-mixing mores, it is hard for us of the white-positive internet not to interpret O Sul é o Meu País as a request for a white-ish ethnostate. However, if it is, they are keeping it quiet. I’d love to see what some of our more internationally-aware comrades have found. The wiki page for it ( ) cites non-racial rationale :

Its defenders allege that the states of Paraná, Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul have particular and distinct characteristics from the rest of Brazil, and thus they claim the right to political, economic, social and cultural self-determination, based on the expectation of self-sufficiency to direct better the resources of the state to attend to its regional peculiarities.

And it is very popular. In October 2016, the region held an unofficial referendum on whether to secede from Brazil. Of the 616,917 voters, 95.74% voted to secede. The Brazilian government, however, has not recognized its independence.

This case study is black-pilling to those in the white-positive space who would like to ask for a kind of “ethnostate” in the USA. Even if you get 95% of a small region to support it, the US government would probably still not concede, just as Brazil does. 

One contention of the critics of my theory is that amalgamation will start to fizzle out, and that Latin America shows that eventually a white minority that staunchly refuses to mix will be formed. If this is possible, it has not happened in Brazil; the interracial marriage rate of Brazil is three times that of the USA ( This rate has increased from what it had been in the past. The pardo population is growing faster than any other, and the white population is in absolute decrease, after many decades of increase from high birth rates despite amalgamation.

Brazil is well underway in its amalgamation process. It will be interesting to watch the next century pass in Brazil. What will become of the whites there?

Sidenote: The Princeton paper linked above shows that there is a positive correlation between social class and likeliness to intermarry in Brazil. The Root reports ( ) that this is due to the aggressive pursuit of white women by successful black men.

It’s also obvious to all Brazilians that once black Brazilian men attain a certain social status, they choose white women as their life partners. Brazil’s most famous soccer player, Pelé, has been married three times, but never to a black woman. Nearly all of Brazil’s top male samba singers are married to white women. A study conducted of high-level black Brazilian businessmen in 2011 found that out of the 50 interviewed, 49 were married to white women ( ).

Black Brazilian actress Polly Marinho, 32, thinks this is a natural outcome in a country that values whiteness on television, in its magazines and in government.

“We are educated to think, like, that black is not beautiful. Black is a slave. Black is not good,” said Marinho, who recently starred in a popular television show on Brazil’s largest television network. “Let’s take, for example, a very famous black soccer player. When they want money, they want good things. A beautiful house. A Ferrari and a white, white, blue-eyed chick.”

Claudette Alves, a black professor based in Sao Paulo, conducted a study to find out if love truly has no color in Brazil. She laid out the results in her 2011 book, Virou Regra: Becoming the Rule. The book’s title and book cover imply that marriage between black men and white women is becoming the rule rather than the exception.

In a YouTube interview with Brazil’s most famous black actor, Lazaro Ramos, Alves said that her research of 1,435 interracial marriages in every level of society in Sao Paulo revealed that this preference crosses classes.

“It’s a phenomenon that is in every level of Brazilian society,” Alves said. “It’s a way that black men protect themselves. In history, and in their lives, they are pushed to deny their identity.”

In the final stage of the study, she conducted in-depth interviews with 11 black women. She found that they were sad and frustrated with the status quo.

We could all agree that black men are not pursuing white women in Brazil to “protect themselves,” whatever that could possibly mean. The reality that racialists, whether black or white, must admit is that interracial marriage is not something that happens due to some racist evil, it is something that people naturally do when there are no norms against intermarriage, and when there is diversity.

Race in Latin America: Other Countries

I found the best data for Mexico and Brazil, but I will still report the graphics from the previously cited Admixture in Latin America: Geographic Structure, Phenotypic Diversity and Self-Perception of Ancestry Based on 7,342 Individuals study, for the edification of readers.

I think the amalgamation hypothesis has played out quite well in Latin America, if these samples are representative (Brazil’s is obviously not). People are almost all mixed, with some exceptions coming from recent immigrants from Europe and their descendants and people spatially removed from non-whites. This seems to have happened despite the fact that racism was common in this region before their governments embraced and promoted mestizaje after the international academic establishment renounced scientific racism in the early 20th century (Mexico, at least, promoted mestizaje before this time).

Updated Simulation

The main criticism of white genocide is that there is a genetic basis for ethnocentrism (an theoretically racialism) and that natural selection will weed out the least racialist whites, leaving a remnant of the white race that has genetically immunity to miscegenation. While I cannot know the heritability of racialism, or the distribution of it, I can set something up to test the idea that random mating dynamics will produce this end.

I have updated my simulation to allow for large variation in the racial preferences of each data person. Data people are set with a certain baseline own-race preference, which reflects the preferences of the table presented in my last article. Some people end up with very strong own-race preference, and some with very weak own-race preference.

The results are below:

As you can see, the results are almost exactly like the results in the last article.

Why is this? Surely, the racialist whites will slow the amalgamation more? Surely, natural selection and will lead the racialists DNA to remain in the pure-race population?

It doesn’t work in such a way in my simulation, because the racialist whites are still very likely to marry non-racialist whites, and have mid-ethnocentric white children (racial preferences in my program are inherited from parents).

I do not think this would be avoided in society unless there are out of the closet white racialists. Without the intentional mating of genetically-racialist mates, people are just marrying on the basis of chemistry, and a closeted, crypto-normie, genetically-racialistic person might still have chemistry with a genetically non-racialist person of his own race.

To test this, I would need to create a program where people’s mating is not just dependent on preferences for own-race or other races. That is not really the hypothesis I am testing, though; I am testing the normie-tier idea that we can leave society alone, being liberal as it is, and expect that whites will not be amalgamated away because “there will always be whites marrying whites.” I test this hypothesis because this is how normies dismiss the White Genocide idea.

Some philosophical analysis of the counter-argument

The claim that one’s natural ethnocentrism actually prevents interracial marriage actually has not been proven, and I am not yet convinced. For example, a person could be very proud of his or her own people, but due to extreme general confidence, perhaps even deriving from feelings of ethnic invincibility, feel no fear that miscegenation will harm or change anything. Or perhaps, the genetic controls on ethnocentrism are no match for the environment in which a person in raised. Perhaps even the best racialist genes cannot undo the imprinting effect of being raised since preschool around people of other races.

In college, I had many Asian-American friends, and most of them came from very patriotic and proud Asian families. Most of the Chinese attended “Chinese School” a few days a week, and the Koreans went to Korean-specific churches. Most of them held the racist belief that Asians are superior, which occasionally could cross the line and become offensive.

Nevertheless, about half of the sexually-active ones pursued white girls (the non-sexually active also liked white girls). This was especially true of the most racist ones who had the more hard-driving, hardcore-Chinese parents. I cannot get inside their heads or inside their genes to see what kinds of people they really are, with respect to racialism, but the experience sticks with me, and confounds me.

Personal thoughts on the actualization of amalgamation in the real United States of America

It goes without saying that my simulation is not reflective of the real world, which is full of caveats. In the future, I would like to get into statistical techniques in demographic predictions, as these will have better predictive power in at least the near-term. My simulation’s main fault is that any human in my simulation can meet any other person in the population. This is obviously untrue in the USA, where people are spread across vast geographic areas, and where there are white rural areas where people often leave and rarely enter.

A spike in TFR would allow us to ward off amalgamation, also, though I have never mentioned it. If the TFR is 3.0, we can tolerate interracial marriage rates of 30% and still hold our population. But, if our interracial marriage rates approach those of Asian-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, or the American Indians, we will not be able to make enough babies.

So, the best I can do for the reader is to begin hypothesizing, based on available regional data. We start with this map.

Sidenotes: see how the Southeast is amalgamating at similar rates to the Northeast! Despite the “good” modern behavior of these white Southerners, who grow up in the most integrated schools in the country, the world continues to hate them with the strongest hatred in the 21st century world. *Sigh* And see how Vermont, that deep-blue stronghold, has literally the lowest rate of miscegenation in the entire country. Its “too white, needs-to-change” neighbor New Hampshire, with its naughty propensity to elect the occasional Republican, has twice its miscegenation rate. Should I suggest that voting Democrat could be a good way to deflect suspicion from whites who have no intention of integrating into the mainstream USA?

The key takeaway from this graph, for me, is that almost every state in the Union is amalgamating at rates that exceed the USA in the early 20th century. Still, I would suggest that amalgamation will produce thoroughly non-white people only in the cities. There must be a global slowdown in immigration, and given that slowdown, the numbers of non-white people who naturally wander into Montana, Vermont, etc. will only lower. I say naturally because religious humanitarians have a habit of shoving Africans into places like Maine ( ).

Even with these actions, there will probably be pure whites surviving in rural areas around super-cities like Chicago and NYC which draw the regional population inwards, and also in super-remote areas like Montana. There is also the Amish factor, which is surely already shifting the surprisingly low (8%) miscegenation statistic in Pennsylvania. But as white as they are, they are not really our people; they are distinct.

I predict that the white race in the USA will resemble the American race in some Latin American countries, such as Peru or Chile, which remain pure only in the rural areas, due to centuries of amalgamation in the historically European-built and European-run cities.


  1. K
    Posted January 10, 2020 at 4:34 am | Permalink

    Your experience with Asian men is the same as mine. They have an extreme ethnic chauvinism and what comes off as simply a desire to racially dominate white people. They constantly spout outright hate filled things towards whites, but lust after white women. Chinese men in particular have the standard if a Chinese man is with a white woman he gains a lot of face, but if a White man is with a Chinese woman, the white man is likely a loser and the Chinese woman a whore. That comes off to me like they are oddly saying we are superior to them without saying it directly? The extreme obsession of white women displayed by non-white men is downright disturbing and honestly confusing, you hate us and think we are weak, but you want your children to have half our genes. I can only understand it as a desire for racial conquest another tribe (Asian men) simply wanting to steal the resources (White women) of another group.

    • Anon
      Posted January 10, 2020 at 7:31 am | Permalink

      Asians have strong preferences for whiteness too. Wealthy Chinese women invest in double eyelid surgeries to have rounder, whiter eyes. They walk around with umbrellas to prevent darkening from sun exposure. Investments in skin lightening creams is pervasive, not just in Africa but also India and other places.

      There is a strong pro-white bias in nearly every race. As I said in my comment above, DNA technology is going to start playing an interesting role in this, especially once the Chinese really take the lid off. At some point, what it means to be “white” is going to get very complicated.

    • Franklin Ryckaert
      Posted January 10, 2020 at 8:02 am | Permalink

      “…The extreme obsession of white women displayed by non-white men is downright disturbing and honestly confusing, you hate us and think we are weak, but you want your children to have half our genes…”

      Replace racial hate with racial jealousy and this attitude becomes less confusing. All non-Whites (secretly) want to be white themselves. Since they personally cannot, they hate Whites, but at the same time they try to make their progeny more white by admixing with Whites, hence their hate-love attitude.

      • White Traditionalist
        Posted January 10, 2020 at 8:56 am | Permalink

        There may be some truth to that but a bigger factor is conquering the white woman as historical and racial revenge. They hate white men and want to breed with the more beautiful white women of their racial enemy. There’s no inconsistency.

        • Another Ghost
          Posted January 10, 2020 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

          I think you’re a bit too biased here. Though minor preferences may vary the fact is that beauty is objective.

          • Arthur Konrad
            Posted January 12, 2020 at 4:21 am | Permalink

            “Beauty is objective” and other forms of Platonic speech. It is akin to saying “Fear is objective”, as if it was some kind of quantifiable category, and not an experience with foundation in organic life. The fact that there is a greater consensus in the world regarding what represents “ugliness” certainly points to the fact that there is a greater consensus in the world regarding what represents deformity, for all the obvious reasons.

      • Digital Samizdat
        Posted January 11, 2020 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

        That makes me think of an old Wayans Bros. movie, I’m Gonna Get You Sucka!

      • Freddy
        Posted January 11, 2020 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

        Franklin, you hit the nail on the head!

        I’ve been trying to convey the same message to my friends, although I use the term “attraction-hate” because I don’t think “love” has any place in this equation.

        I think that everything happening to us boils down to ENVY and the social/political expression of this is egalitarianism.

        “Envy (from Latin invidia) is an emotion which ‘occurs when a person perceives they lack another’s superior quality, achievement, or possession and either desires it or wishes that the other lacked it’.”

        This occurs not only within a population but also between populations.

        This is ultimately the driving force behind the behavior of Jews, Blacks, Asians, etc towards Whites. This explains why they hate us but also want to live among us and have babies with us.

    • Victor Henderson
      Posted January 10, 2020 at 10:13 am | Permalink

      That is not the case, white men who date asian women are often socially akward, have low self esteem and feel more masculine among asian women due to their overal genetic build being small/short. White men who often date asian women are seen as losers by asians and even by whites and other non-whites. Because its based on yellow fetish/anime-manga love.

      People speak of bias for white, that is false people have a bias for lighterskin in women not in men but women. But not for women to be outward white. We often get the idea that white women are higly persued but that is false, its more the ambigous women who looks exoctic with a lightskin tan who often desired by alot men from all races to a certain extend. Darker tone is considered very masculine, powerful, and dynamic. That is why alot women are also attracted to black men….yes many wont say it out loud gentlemen. But people have their secrets and fetishes just like the beta white guys sadly have for asian women. Asian women are also not considered attractive by most men of other races besides for white beta males and asian men of course. That is why you see asian females with either asian or white males overall. Same can be said of black women who are not considered attarctive to most, but their men are considerd highly attarctive by women of all races as we can see alot black women with all types of women white, arab, asian, latina etc. Us white men fall in the same bracket as black men in that context….but are more persued to due our socio-economic status ( money, power and influance) hence why asian love to date white men…as asian cultures is all about status. But when these factors are removed the attraction for white men highly dicreases.

      I know its sounds harsh but its the hard truth. While black men are attracted for their natural charisma, energy, etc wheter poor, middle class or super rich. Now look at arabs, desis ( south asians) polynesians these men are not sought out at all overal besided by the women of their own race. The avarage white women or women overall is not attarcted to arab men, south asian men or polynesian men unless exeptionally goodlooking/handsome and of course weealthy.

      • Another Ghost
        Posted January 10, 2020 at 11:57 am | Permalink

        This is the most suspicious post I have read on this website, and the very very poor grammar does not help dissuade from the conclusion Ive come to . . . .

      • K
        Posted January 10, 2020 at 8:10 pm | Permalink

        I was not clear. The Chinese standard of White men dating Asian women are automatically losers my point was that the standard is there regardless of the actual quality of the White man. Their is standard also there regardless of the actually quality of white woman. Lower average in attractiveness white women who are not fat will still be praised to high heaven. Their standard is not necessarily following in line with stereotypes; it is simply there to give the maximum amount of benefit.

      • Yman
        Posted January 10, 2020 at 11:39 pm | Permalink

        “Darker tone is considered very masculine, powerful, and dynamic.”

        Sound alike true devote for multi-racialism

        Beside of black men’s poorer performance of Financial, Technological, Academic field
        what’s so masculine or powerful about being English speaking black men?
        their rap music or being part of sports team didn’t make their poor culture as desirable

        your argument is white women prefer black men than Gregory peck or Marlon Brando because they show off some muscles at ESPN
        white men are most handsome and masculine men without no doubt

        If white women are truly approach as that kind of stupidity then let’s forget about West and cheer for China, Next big shot

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted January 11, 2020 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

      The world hates whites for the evil things whites have done in the past. I know the readers don’t like reading it; and I don’t like saying it, but this is the case.

      My Asian friends in college were extremely butthurt that some white girls apparently avoided their romantic advances for being non-white. They were also butthurt about the history of anti-miscegenation laws in the USA. Sometimes they would complain about whites having it so good despite “not working hard” and despite letting their kids do “whatever they wanted,” a repetition of the “white pig” stereotype (I thought it was funny that they did not understand that this phenomenon is actually the effect of liberalism invading parental morality). In grad school I heard a Chinese guy ranting loudly and crazily in the library about the genocide of Native Americans in the USA. Chinese people are usually angry about the massacre of Chinese coolie workers that happened in the past in the USA.

      In college, I was not “woke” or white-identified. I simply enjoyed being around un-PC, highly confident people, which the Asians are, and which the whites are not. Needless to say, this contributed to my awakening.

      I don’t like to say it anymore than anyone else, but whites have earned our hatred through our sins. Anti-white sentiment is not just jealousy, and it is not just looking down on us.

      The question is, how are we going to weather the reparations process (which will happen in one way or another, as much as we hate it) without white guilt leading us down Sweden’s suicidal uber-humanitarian path, or without backlashing into Trumpian racism that increases anti-white sentiment and drives whites farther from white-positivity, and deeper into white guilt?

      • vasil
        Posted January 11, 2020 at 10:26 pm | Permalink


        what sins being better at the game everybody was playing?

      • Steven JW
        Posted January 12, 2020 at 7:18 am | Permalink

        “My Asian friends in college were extremely butthurt that some white girls apparently avoided their romantic advances for being non-white. They were also butthurt about the history of anti-miscegenation laws in the USA. Sometimes they would complain about whites having it so good despite “not working hard” and despite letting their kids do “whatever they wanted,” a repetition of the “white pig” stereotype”

        How does this not come off as envy?

        “I don’t like to say it anymore than anyone else, but whites have earned our hatred through our sins.”

        I simply do not believe that. What sins were not practiced by all at the time (MANY of which still are in Asia and Africa.)
        Conquest is not unique to white people. What is more unique to white people are these inane attempts to placate others for some endless moral hierarchy. That being the very same product of narcissism that conquest is, it may be a uniquely sinful expression of white people.

        And I never really had the same experience with Asians that you did. Many of them were friends, occasionally I ran into the socially aggressive ones but that came off more like a villain in a Kung Fu movie. They were utterly absurd.

      • Tank1488
        Posted January 13, 2020 at 7:25 am | Permalink

        @Phineas Elezar “I don’t like to say it anymore than anyone else, but whites have earned our hatred through our sins. Anti-white sentiment is not just jealousy, and it is not just looking down on us.”

        Just off yourself already you pathetic white-guilt wimp.

      • Lars
        Posted January 16, 2020 at 1:29 am | Permalink

        “…backlashing into Trumpian racism…”

        Absurd. Trump has done absolutely nothing to benefit, and much to harm, his White base, while serving the jews above all else. The best that can be said about him is that he is not explicitly anti-White. From your post in general I would suspect that you are non-White.

      • Yman
        Posted January 16, 2020 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

        “evil things whites have done in the past”

        what prevented you from mention “evil things” commit by Babylonian, Assyrian, basically every ethnic groups on earth

        “whites have earned our hatred through our sins”

        Since you already assume whiteness is evil and without trump everything is OK, why don’t you go more progressive?
        There’s no possibility that average poor white men were descendants of evil colonizers or slave owner
        obviously college educated white men are more sinner/privileged than uneducated poor white men therefore you must step down as low social status

        of course, you won’t do it and declare every white men are sinners while you’re practicing upper middle class’s hereditary monopoly game

        you’re corrupt priest who preach about “all men are created as equal” and at the same time shut the door to people who seem as unfit to aristocratic church community

        “The question”

        There’s no question or doubt that multi-racial society where every body are minority will rule by small group people who actually own corporation and banks
        America will become more Anti-Democratic plutocracy backward society

        and you, faithful doorman for ruling class already decide who will blame for, I guess
        it’s white men or whiteness, of course

  2. Maee
    Posted January 10, 2020 at 5:27 am | Permalink

    Excuse me? Warren’s grandkids are 100% native american!

    • principally correct
      Posted January 11, 2020 at 9:39 am | Permalink

      You mean 100% native Amerindian.

  3. Anon
    Posted January 10, 2020 at 7:01 am | Permalink

    I was one of the commenters who challenged your thesis. (“Critic” is too harsh a word, because I actually applaud the work and effort that have gone into these articles. Kudos.)

    Your characterization of the counter-argument is mostly accurate: yes, less ethnocentric whites will marry out over time which means that the whites who don’t will become increasingly ethnocentric over time. But this leaves out a few additional points.

    First, men and women both seek high-status partners (men seek youth and beauty, women seek resources). In Latin America, that leaves whites at the top of the racial heap. Everyone is seeking to marry “up.” This is why issues like racial IQ also matter. People with high Amerindian or black admixture will tend to sink to the bottom of the racial hierarchy. No woman wants to marry a low status male. This is demonstrated in your Princeton paper and Root article. What those articles DON’T say is that the few examples of white women marrying high status black actors or athletes are extremely rare because high status blacks are rare. In general, racial hierarchies strongly reinforce natural white ethnocentrism. A few exceptional actors and athletes don’t change that general rule.

    Second, it can’t be ignored that the main reason that Latin America is so mixed today is because the Spanish and Portuguese colonists didn’t bring enough white women with them. Instead, white men were having sex with native and black women. This shows up very well in DNA studies, where the white portion of mestizos and mulattoes comes entirely from white males. Horny white men having their way with the natives are the reason why self-identified whites in Latin America are mostly, but not 100%, white today.

    This is not true in America, where the British (and subsequent waves of white immigrants) brought enough white women with them. As a result, whites in America are still 99% white (!) after also living in a multiracial nation for 100+ years — almost as long as in Latin America. As it turns out, if you have enough white women, things turn out differently.

    Yet despite Latin’s America’s unique miscegenation history (which we blame on white men), there are STILL white populations there that are 90%+ white after all this time. Your model says they should not exist, but they do — despite the fact that race mixing was actually encouraged in Latin America.

    Finally, it is worth noting that technology is probably going to play a large role in the future. All races, it seems, prefer whiteness. Even blacks prefer lighter skinned blacks, Latinos prefer lighter skinned Latinos. It’s even true in places like India, where the lighter skinned tend to be high caste. The Steve Sailer “flight from white” thesis seems pretty oversold to me, at least when it comes to dating habits.

    What role will this general preference for whiteness play once DNA technology takes off? It seems inevitable to me that technology will eventually change the DNA of the human race. Our natural reproduction habits have become dysgenic. Science will be the eventual solution to that. Right now, that future looks Chinese, since they are working on this while whites are resistant to “eugenics”. But just as whites are beginning to wake up to the growing racial threat, I suspect within a few decades, whites will also be far more open to using technology to reproduce themselves. When that happens, all bets are off.

    • Victor Henderson
      Posted January 10, 2020 at 9:50 am | Permalink

      The whole marrying up is more socio-ecomomics. Because white european groups as the Spanish and Portugese where that elite and women saw where the power was in society among European colonial men. The Amerindian and African groups where slave class most if not 99.9% which by default was considered low class. But the whole notion of Amerindian and African groups having a low IQ is also false which i think is very important state. These groups did not have the privlegde to go to school and where just used for economic/free labour use to build the nation, but where far from unintelligent. Many of Brazilian and latin American argicultural science, alternative medicine, etc especially africans who where used as slaves some groups where highly educated in arabic as an example and could read and write.

      Also dont underestimate the amount of white women marrying non-white men in latin america. Many white women come from middle class areas where interaction with non-white guys is very minimal but not choice ….more of circumstances. Many white women are highly interested in non-white especially black, mixedrace men who are also in the middle class if one is seen. I have traveld to brazil, colombia, and even argentina the white daimond of latin america so to say. And the attracttion for black latino men, mixed race latino men is huge and these where women from the middle and upper middle class. Its just so that they hardly meet especially black men in these type of circels, as you say more are in the working class due the legacy of slavery which didnt build generational wealth for slave families so they had to start from 0% apposed to italian, german, polish, spanish and other european migrants who came with capital to migrate.

      China is and east asian is really threat to the white race, there main goal is to dominate Europe as we can see with asians and their diaspora groups. I feel that radar on East asians are very low while many see the west as a direct enemy behind hidden doors. They are already advanced in many areas in DNA technology.

      • Greg Johnson
        Posted January 10, 2020 at 9:58 am | Permalink

        African and Amerindian IQ is significantly lower than white, and most of the differences are genetic. This is well established science.

    • Another Ghost
      Posted January 10, 2020 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

      I cannot help but believe people whom think a future of genetically modified human beings produced en mass to appear as Europeans is nothing but a farcical way of coping with harsh reality.

  4. Anon
    Posted January 10, 2020 at 7:52 am | Permalink

    The white Brazilian separatist movement hasn’t taken off for the same reason it hasn’t taken off in any other Latin American country. Whites don’t need to separate when they dominate.

    Whites dominate Latin America. They dominate both economically and politically even when they are a small minority. They also have a habit of replacing leftist governments in military coups. That has happened hundreds of times there, most recently in Bolivia.

    Whites don’t dominate the US the same way, at least not anymore. They are under threat from both above and below. That’s pretty well documented here on CC. That is another reason why the Latin American comparison is imperfect.

    White separatism is far more likely in the US than in Latin America, where it hasn’t happened because it wasn’t necessary.

    • diconez
      Posted January 23, 2020 at 9:03 pm | Permalink

      @17 anon, on the other hand, it is only the elite white populations that have survived, as the bottom and middle rungs increasingly miscegenate in the cities. and as i mentioned elsewhere, while this happened clandestinely in the colonial age, the lid started to come off as Latin America liberalized and desegregated.

      no wonder so many Christian (and not so Christian) Lebanese immigrants have so much influence. the whites of Latin America have become kind of like a parasitic Semite caste. yet, unlike the parasites, without them the continent would be awful. Colombia is the most homogeneously mixed, and on one hand the mixing has toned down the worst aspects of browns, on the other hand the society is still way more violent and drug-addled than the US. a world where you have to watch where you park everywhere, and you cannot trust even the security guards of your gated community. yes, that is coming if you let it, dear North Sea cousins.

  5. White Traditionalist
    Posted January 10, 2020 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    There was a time when around 90% of whites got married and over 99% did so within their race. Is even half of the white population getting married these days? And of those whites who still get married, what’s the percentage still marrying within their race? Probably around 85% but with the trends of increased online dating, immigration, urbanization, economic stagnation, female empowerment, white emasculation and demographic decline, the proportion of whites marrying within their race is likely to fall considerably over time.

    While it’s true that the vast majority of white women who marry end up marrying white men this doesn’t take the full sexual landscape into account or the broader social consequences of miscegenation.

    Around half of whites aren’t marrying anymore and of those who do about half of them end up divorced. Marriage is also delayed on average until the late 20′s or early 30′s. Vast amounts of sex and breeding takes place outside the confines of marriage and non-marital or post-martial relationships have a greater chance of being interracial. If the white American birth-rate is 1.8 then a substantial 0.3 of that are products of miscegenation. Losing 1/6 of an already low birth-rate every generation is like compound interest: demographic trends are exponential rather than linear and a group that allows itself to become genetically integrated in this manner will cease to exist within several generations as you have already proven statistically. There is also evidence to suggest that the old concept of telegony is a real phenomenon so that white women who have unprotected sex with non-white men could be absorbing some degree of non-white DNA for any future offspring they may have, even if the father is white.

    If a significant minority of white women have a child or children with non-white men this reduces the already below-replacement white birth rate considerably while raising the non-white birth rate. It causes additional racial pairing problems for the next generation of whites because there are fewer whites to mate with and a greater proportion of non-whites. Bringing non-whites into white families alienates some members from others, weakens familial racial attitudes overall and encourages additional miscegenation between the family and its immediate social circle. It further normalizes race-mixing among the public and discourages people from vocally opposing it as the norm of assumed conjugal homogeneity is undermined. It weakens the sexual and social unity of white men and women. It divides the white population against itself and undermines any practical ability to separate along racial lines as this would entail the mass separation of families and most whites do not have the stomach for that. Those who engage in race-mixing may also want to encourage it for their own reasons, be they ideological, to normalize a socially marginal activity, to “corrupt” others, to evangelize for a supposedly beneficial activity, to salve feelings of guilt etc. I’m only talking about the political and social effects rather than the frequent deleterious consequences that directly effect those in mixed-race relationships.

    Racialist hardliners like William Pierce (who may have if anything underestimated the threat) advocated capital punishment to prevent it from becoming normalized. White nationalists who claim that race-mixing isn’t a real threat to white survival (and if anything helps us by making us more ethnocentric) are burying their heads in the sand.

    • HamburgerToday
      Posted January 10, 2020 at 10:59 am | Permalink

      There is also evidence to suggest that the old concept of telegony is a real phenomenon….

      I had never heard of ‘telogony’. Fascinating. Thank you for the new knowledge.

  6. c matt
    Posted January 10, 2020 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    I guess you did not have data for Argentina? Would be curious, as it seems less mixture occurred there.

    • ReactionaryScot
      Posted January 10, 2020 at 10:53 am | Permalink

      People generally think of Chileans and Argentinians as being far more white than they actually are because the Amerindians they race mixed with lived much further south than those of Peru or Bazil and therefore had whiter skin. Thus someone who is a third native chile and will look whiter than someone who is a third Inca or Mayan.

    • Anon
      Posted January 10, 2020 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

      Here’s Argentina. 2012 study. White admixture is shown in blue.

      Highest white admixture is in Buenos Aires, although BA has a lot of slums outside the white city center.

      Argentina, Uruguay, and southern Brazil are the whitest parts of South America because they drew a lot of European immigration in the 1800s-1950 or so. Other parts of Latin America are much less white, especially in the mountains and the Pacific side.

  7. Vergissmeinnicht
    Posted January 10, 2020 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    I’m from Brazil; São Paulo state (the 4th most White), from a city that’s 68% self-reported White (read: 30%-45% indeed White). Every time I go to the shopping centre I think to myself “Gosh, in 50 years or so there’ll be no Whites here!” (Yeah: that’s somewhat hyperbolic) Two of my High School friends are engaged to Mulatto women (‘two’ is a huge chunk of them, as I never had many friends…) You just have to look at the older Brazilian generations and then look at their grandchildren: These Boomers are clearly more European-looking!
    I don’t see ANY common-sense ‘racialism’ in Brazilians (well, perhaps in the South, but I never been to the South)… or if there’s some, it’s no different than the average American Southern ‘centrist’ Millennial… Actually, now that I think of it: The races in Brazil do not ‘keep it to themselves’ at all (at least, comparing to the US).

    The problem with the theory, even if correct, that non-racialists will simply be outbread is that even if you’re highly ethnocentric, once there’re so few of people such as you, you’ll ending up procreating with the larger population (race is not the only factor for marriage; money, status, resources, etc. are too); and if you do resist it, you might end up as the Amish: full of weird genetic problems.

    I argue that around 17%-37% of Brazil’s population are indeed White (last Census says 49% or so, which is risible); White Brazilians don’t procreate as many children as other races do, White Brazilians miscegenate too much; White Brazilian simply LEAVE Brazil.
    Whites in Brazil are doomed. (An actual ‘White Genocide’ probably won’t ever happen (in Brazil, in the US or in Europe, etc.)…but in 300 years or so, there will not be many full-blooded Europeans if trends continue.)

    P.S.: By a ‘true’ White Brazilian I mean someone who’s at least 85% European, and this ‘European’ ancestry is mostly Iberian or Italian… who pales in comparison to the Anglo-Saxon genius.

    • Vergissmeinnicht
      Posted January 10, 2020 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

      I’d like to share some other thoughts I’ve previously forgotten…

      Yes, Whites do dominate in Brazil and perhaps it’ll always be like this (unlike the US, GB etc.) but… it’s getting SCARY recently: Whites, Blacks, mixed-race persons etc. here, in Brazil, are Americanised (by ‘Americanised’ I mean the post-Civil Rights Era America) nowadays; there’s affirmative action now; non-White racial awareness is taking root (not as quickly or strongly as in the US but it *is* taking root nonetheless – slowly but surely) due to American ‘New Left’ influence (which, in turn, could only have happened due to PROSPERITY: Brazilian Black and Mulatto persons can NOW watch ‘Modern Family’ and “study” Sociology at Universities)… there’re hate-speech laws, also… And there’s NO explicit White movement at all! Only ‘implicit’, e.g., Right-Libertarianism.

      I’m getting OUT of Brazil, I hope – to the USA, my favourite country (despite it being so different of what the Founding Fathers have envisioned); or, to Italy (the country ~70% of my ancestors being from).

      (Sorry for any English error – not my mother tongue!)

      • Vergissmeinnicht
        Posted January 10, 2020 at 3:13 pm | Permalink

        Ah, never-mind ‘explicit’ racial White movement! There’s not even milquetoast ‘IQ debate’ here in Brazil! And I don’t even mean it in the Jared Taylor/Michael Levin/et al. manner, but in the Charles Murray manner: In the ‘cuckservative’ American right-wing, IQ stats so far are not completely forbidden, fortunately – Murray works for a mainstream neo-con think-tank, Jason Richwine works for the Center for Immigration Studies (which, in turn, has advised President Trump), and probably there are other examples such as these…

    • Lovely Phenotypes
      Posted January 12, 2020 at 6:49 am | Permalink

      Be it a warrior of justice, a modern ‘warrior of justice’, a woman whom foolishly seeks to help her sisters, a boy whom fears the world, an architect, philosopher or a musician . . . the clay is at the will of its masters. An artist can form clay into anything he can imagine and whatever shape is made, a work of art or a failure, it will never not be made of clay.

  8. Posted January 10, 2020 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

    White genocide is not a theoretical debate. White genocide is a criminal charge.

    Genocide is any attempt to eliminate a group, in whole or in part, by any means. Mass non-white immigration plus forced integration in all white countries and firing, deplatforming, censoring and imprisoning anyone who objects to these policies clearly meets the definition of genocide. As long as those policies are being imposed we have an ongoing white genocide. Really, any deliberate targeting of any national, ethnical, racial or religious group to reduce their numbers meets the legal definition of genocide under UN Resolution 260. Even if you don’t succeed in completely eliminating a group just trying is still genocide. Attempted genocide is genocide. So all these arguments that it may of may not work are irrelevant to the criminal charge of genocide. The conditions that lead to interbreeding are FORCED, but only where there are “too many” white people.

    Does the existence of Jews today prove there was no holocaust? We still have Ukrainians, so does that mean there was never a holodomor?

    • Alexandra O
      Posted January 11, 2020 at 8:46 am | Permalink

      I agree with you completely. I definitely see what is happening in the U.S., and in England, where I have traveled, to be attempted Genocide, a crime. California, where I live, is overrun with Hispanics, who buy up real estate, raise rental prices, which forces Whites out! Then they move their friends into the building. And some Whites are obviously intermarrying with them. The main culprit, as I see it, is not only immigration, but the political teaching and enforcement of ‘Equality’. My mother, a German, raised me with the dictum, “We must keep this house clean and orderly, like Whites live here”, obviously referring to Blacks and Hispanics then filling Los Angeles. The old rules kept us separated, and ‘white genocide’ seemed impossible. Well, here we are, 60 years after the Civil Rights era, heading toward oblivion. I will stand with you in calling White Genocide what it is — a blatant crime — though at my age, it’s difficult to be too radical and still survive.

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted January 11, 2020 at 9:13 am | Permalink

      To be honest, I am simply trying to catch attention by using the term “genocide” in my title.

      I am not really talking about genocide, I am talking more about extinction-through-hybridization.

    • Posted January 11, 2020 at 11:28 am | Permalink

      You are right that the ongoing white genocide is a crime. It’s a crime of epic proportions – but we shouldn’t look to the UN to validate this; the UN can, and probably will, change its definition of “genocide” to exclude the genocide of the white race.

    • Stefania Says
      Posted January 12, 2020 at 10:03 am | Permalink

      eyeslevel, I agree with you 100%. Our enemies are making sure that the borders stay open for both legal and illegal nonwhite immigration. This will make it more likely that whites will miscegenate with the nonwhites, thereby reducing the white population. As whites decrease due to low birth rates (of white children) and the massive nonwhite immigration continues, this will further make whites look towards nonwhites for companionship. This concerns me greatly because I want my people to survive and have self-determination.

  9. jose
    Posted January 10, 2020 at 1:13 pm | Permalink
    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted January 11, 2020 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

      Hi Jose,

      In my previous article, I clarified that Hispanic is not a race. I are aware, but thanks for the link to the nice video, which I genuinely did enjoy.

      From the USA/Canada perspective, Hispanic appears as a race, though, so I just treated it as such. Almost all of the Hispanic immigrants appear to be basically Indios, with some being Mestizos who are >50% Indio.

      I love the Amerindian people, and I am not really an American white nationalist who would keep them out of the USA or Canada; I would support that the Americas be returned to the Amerindian people, and Hispanic immigration to the USA is helping this process along. I would support investment in gene-editing technologies that could allow us to recreate authentic, pure Amerindian genomes and resurrect the real American people.


      As for the phenomenon of European Hispanics, I’d once again point out the recent European immigration.

      Take the first person in the video: Michelle Renaud. Renaud is a French name, the French version of the English name “Reynold.” I couldn’t find too much information on her in our English-language internet, but I’d put money on the bet that she is partially of recent French immigrant stock (possibly mixed with Mestizo locals, as her face looks a little smooth and round for a European).

      As the Wiki article I referenced regarding Mexico says, most European Latinos are *not* established in Latin America with deep roots, but instead are of recent immigrant stock.

      I’m sure the local citizenry does not even notice, as I am sure that the Euros and Middle-Eastern recent immigrants are very-well assimilated, intermarry easily, are very deferential to the local majority culture, and say/care little about their European heritage (unlike recent immigrants to Europe).

  10. Alexandra O
    Posted January 11, 2020 at 9:15 am | Permalink

    I read ‘somewhere’ — and don’t have the citation — that Brazilian women who can afford it are going to ‘gene banks’ and selecting white, educated (such as college professors or students) men’s sperm for invitro fertilization. Do you have any comment on that? Perhaps creating sperm banks in the U.S.. within our WN community, will be what is needed to ‘keep our best and brightest’ alive in the future.

    • Albusexistence
      Posted January 12, 2020 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

      Aye I saw the article on Twitter. Brazilian women were getting sperm from specifically blonde blue-eyed European men. I will try to find it but dont count on it, all these social media purges do their job well.

      • Albusexistence
        Posted January 13, 2020 at 1:41 am | Permalink

        I do believe this is not the article I originally saw as the one I saw was donors specifically from Europe. But it was the same type of genes wanted. I assume this is not the first time this has been reported.

        So wealthy blacks in Brazil seek white women, and women in Brazil whom can afford it also seek white genes. . . .

        This has to either support the idea of racial identity, propaganda, or at least quash some of the idea that, without cultural interference, in a diverse area, people don’t choose their group.

        • Albusexistence
          Posted January 13, 2020 at 7:41 am | Permalink

          Just came across this on twitter and believe it is incredibly relevant to this discussion.

          “The BBC profiles an Afro-Caribbean British woman who is frustrated she can’t find an egg donor who comes from the same race and culture as her. She says she may not be able to connect to a child of a different race.”

          “‘Why can’t I find an Afro-Caribbean egg donor?'”

  11. Digital Samizdat
    Posted January 11, 2020 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

    It’s also obvious to all Brazilians that once black Brazilian men attain a certain social status, they choose white women as their life partners.

    The Dominicans have an expression for this: mejorar la raza, meaning, literally, ‘improving the race’.

  12. DP84
    Posted January 11, 2020 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

    Your last article on interracial marriage was quite good, and made several key points that I strongly identify with. This one, however, leaves a lot to be desired, and I’m not talking about the arguments against the genetic power of ethnocentrism. I’m talking about the core assumptions behind how miscegenation can be stopped.

    I’m going to do a little mind exercise here, as it will demonstrate where I’m coming from in regards to how to stop miscegenation: I was raised in the 1990s by Evangelical Protestant parents, and when I first got into politics at 16 years old, I initially cared most about the issues my parents cared most about: Abortion, gay marriage, and premarital sex. It is the third of those I want to zero in on, especially since I came of age in the milieu of 1990s-early 2000s “Purity Culture” promoted by hucksters like Josh Harris.

    Lets assume, for the sake of argument, that premarital sex is something we don’t want teenagers or young adults engaging in. The way my parents convinced me to abstain in my teen years was two fold: 1. They appealed to the Bible. 2. They explained the dangers of STD’s and teen pregnancy. I was wise enough by 16 to know that I couldn’t just quote the Bible at people who don’t respect it as a source of moral authority, so I resorted to the second argument. I was always the guy who loved to run his mouth on controversial issues in high school, so I felt no shame making these arguments.

    To my surprise and dismay, the pushback I got from my classmates far surpassed any pushback I got when I sounded off on the boilerplate issues of abortion and gay marriage. Only the known Lefties challenged me on gay marriage, whereas EVERYONE rejected my arguments on why premarital sex is a bad thing.

    I stopped running my mouth on premarital sex after that. It wasn’t worth the opposition I was getting. More to the point though, that experience in highschool left a major inprint on me, which is this: When people really, genuinely want something – in this case, horny teens justifying their natural desire to have sex – then its stupid and useless to try and explain to them why they shouldn’t have it or shouldn’t do it.

    I decided that instead of taking the paternalistic attitude of “premarital sex is bad for you, don’t do it,” I would instead take the attitude of “suit yourself, it’s you who will have to deal with the consequences, not me.” I take that same attitude with drug use and with basically every other personal vice that doesn’t objectively qualify as a “threat” to society (like murder and stealing).

    My core argument is this: If, in order to stop something, we have to resort to shaming tactics or some sort of paternalist attitude, then we are destined to lose, and therefore, its not worth it.

    People who feel strongly about something are going to do what they want to do regardless of whether or not we approve of it. This is a lesson the Right should have learned after the 1960s when the old suffocating conservatism was overthrown in favor of “live and let live” liberalism. My Dad went to a conservative church when he was growing up in the 1970s, and him and his friend derisively referred to a list of five fake sins as the “Filthy Five,” which were: No drinking, no smoking, no going to movies, no playing cards, no dancing.

    The White public didn’t turn against shaming of miscegenation because of Jewish propaganda alone, they turned on it because opposition to miscegenation was inextricably tied to a “No Fun” lifestyle, and that was an attitude that the White Race had thoroughly rejected by the time of the Hippie Movement.

    There’s a lot of talk in this movement about how we shouldn’t ghettoize ourselves. I agree with that in principle, but then might I suggest a way to not do that: Don’t swim upstream of a current thats going the other way. In other words, don’t try to “bring back” values and tactics that the White Race rejected decades ago.

    Like it or not, a libertarian spirit rules the day, and White people generally don’t like being told what not to do. They want to be able to figure it out themselves. And frankly, they need to be able to figure it out themselves. We shouldn’t try to save them from themselves, we should instead let them learn through harsh experience.

    If they join us after suffering the consequences of their actions, great. If not, then they are weak, and they aren’t people we should want on our side anyway. We should only try to save those who want to save themselves, and if they reject our advances, we should wipe our hands clean of them and let it go.

    As for the long term consequences of miscegenation, while I dread them as much as any other White Nationalist, I also don’t care enough to warn White people about it when they don’t want to hear it. Personally, I think the time has come to be thinking, if not advocating, in terms of separatism. In other words, forget metapolitics and focus on what can be done to save the remnant of our people that wants to be saved and that is actually worth saving.

    Ultimately, the way to stop miscegenation is this: Get our own country and pass laws that a consensus of White people already agree with in principle. A country of racially conscious Whites will naturally want to ban miscegenation and will be ok with shaming anyone who deviates, especially if that’s the only thing you get socially shamed over. Simply put: No ones going to want to keep their race pure if they can’t enjoy the nice things of life. Drop the attitude of paternalism and reap the benefits.

    • White Traditionalist
      Posted January 11, 2020 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

      The problem with libertarianism is it sanctions a host of behaviors that are destructive not just for the individual but the family and the broader community. The attitude of most whites on the issue of race-mixing alone simply isn’t compatible with white survival, never mind drugs, pornography, video games, gambling, homosexuality, junk food, birth-control, casual sex, adultery, marriage and divorce etc. It’s no wonder that the enemies of whites fervently promote all of this stuff because it’s all objectively destructive. By the way, whites don’t have a problem with being told what to do: they usually accept tyranny when it comes to what they are allowed to say, who they are permitted to hire and fire, who they are forced to integrate with, what weapons they are allowed to own for self-defence etc. Whites don’t give a damn about freedom, except the freedom to intoxicate themselves from the harsh realities of life.

      However, you are correct that it’s futile trying to persuade the masses not to do things they have been convinced by clever marketers that they want to do. Separatism, even on a small scale at the start, is the only alternative to losing everything.

      • DP84
        Posted January 12, 2020 at 7:49 am | Permalink

        @White Traditionalist:

        I should have emphasized something more clearly: Whites may be okay with being told what to do, but they are not ok with being told what not to do. When I tried to convince my classmates in highschool not to have premarital sex, they rejected it. Likewise, if you try to tell a White person who likes movies or likes junk food to not watch movies or not eat junk food, then he or she is naturally going to ignore you. Therefore, it is useless and futile to paint yourself as a puritan by shaming personal vices that White people authentically want to engage in.

        Also, and this is an ongoing disagreement I have with most of the WN Movement, but I do not accept the theory that Whites only engage in bad habits or bad behavior because “mass marketers” tell them to do so.

        When I was a freshman in college, I saw a documentary called No Logo: Brands, Globalization, Resistance, which was basically the film version of the 1999 book “No Logo” written by Jewish feminist Naomi Klein.

        Her thesis was simple and straight forward: Corporations manipulate consumers into buying things they otherwise wouldn’t buy and doing things thry otherwise wouldn’t do if it wasn’t for the alleged overwhelming mind power of corporate advertising, manifested through iconic corporate logos like the McDonalds arch or the Nike swoosh which inherently inspire loyal to their brand.

        I dismissed her entire thesis as Leftist BS back in 2008 when I saw it, as her assumptions about human behavior rob people of their individual responsibility and individual agency, which is anathema to my deepest held convictions, and indeed, should be anathema to anyone with a Right Wing view of the world.

        Leftists need to strip all their precious victim groups of individual agency, because if people were actually responsible for what they choose to buy and how they choose to act, then they are also responsible for the inevitable consequences, which means corporations and society aren’t actually to blame, which means that changing the environment or the power structure won’t change human nature, which means they can’t just manipulate and mold people any way they want.

        Traditionalist thinking is identical to Leftist thinking in this regard. You guys falsely and illegitimately assume that people can be conditioned and molded to be someone radically different than who they are on the inside. That’s not how people work. Some individuals choose to gorge themselves on junk food and become obese, while others – most of them upper class people in urban and suburban areas – choose to eat healthy and exercise.

        That’s all 100% a matter of choice. Upper class people probably consume more media and more corporate advertising than underclass overweight people, and yet, as a general rule of thumb, upper class people lead healthier lifestyles.

        So you see, its not that people are being “manipulated” into bad behaviors, its that they choose to engage in them because, at a genetic and/or spiritual level, they lack impulse control and the ability to self-regulate. Alcoholics are the same way: They can’t control themselves once they start drinking, whereas normal people can self-regulate and stop themselves from descending into a drunken stupor.

        So then, there is no rational or objective basis for traditionalists such as yourself to oppose personal vices, which are only bad from a certain point of view, a view which is not necessarily shared by everyone else. I’ll cover the vices you listed one at a time and examine whether they actually harm the White community or not

        Drugs:Hard drugs like cocaine and heroine turn people into psychos and facilitate an underground drug dealing world which is rife with murder and danger, therefore, they should be banned. Lighter drugs which make you mellow like marijuana and opioids should be legal, and white people who take them are only a threat to themselves and their immediate families. I refuse to see them as victims, because they objectively victimized themselves.

        Pornography: Child porn should be banned for obvious reasons, but otherwise, it should be legal, and here’s the brutal reasoning as to why: Some men were born with the natural skills to attract women and make babies with them, while others, like me, were born without those skills and will never get married or have kids.

        Unfortunately though, we were all born with a sex drive, and porn should be legal because it gives the incels and volcels an outlet for sexual release. Prostitution and sex work should be legal for the same reason. In the future, there probably will be technology which allows us to remove our sex drive altogether, which will solve the problems of hypergamy and the 80-20 rule of male-female relations. Until then, taking away porn in todays society is like taking away water from a dessert dweller.

        Video games: *insert Dee Sniders take down of Tipper Gore at the 1984 Congressional hearing*

        Gambling: I think the current cultural take on gambling is the healthy and proper one. On one hand, gambling is frowned upon in polite company, and its something people shouldn’t be proud to identify as. On the other hand, that’s what the casinos are for: They act as a red light district for people who like gambling to express their vice. Gambling shouldn’t be illegal.

        Homosexuality: They shouldn’t be allowed to have those obnoxious “Pride Parades,” and they definitely shouldn’t be allowed to normalize their lifestyle among children. Otherwise, they don’t bother me. I’ve known enough homosexuals to know that most of them are basically decent people who happen to have odd sexual inclinations. I do not consider them a mortal threat to society like I was raised to believe. Sorry not sorry

        Junk Food: I said my peace above. Corporations aren’t manipulating anyone who wasn’t already weak inside to begin with. Their much ballyhooed “sales tactics” are just illusions. They don’t have the power to get people to buy what they want or eat what they want if people strongly don’t want to eat them and don’t want to buy them. People aren’t playdough to be molded in every shape and size like Leftists and Traditionalists falsely believe.

        Birth control and casual sex: This is the other side of the porn equation. Good looking, confident men are naturally going to meet beautiful women and have sexual relations with each other. Birth control allows them to do this and not have a bunch of bastards to show for it, which is a good thing, not a bad thing.

        Its true that birth control depresses the white birth rate, but the white birth rate has been going down since 1800, which means birth control alone is not to blame. Industrial civilization is to blame, and no matter how much traditionalists may LARP about the good old days of agrarian farming, the industrial revolution isn’t getting rolled back, short of a nuclear apocalypse.

        What you’re left with is the appearance of a purtian who just doesn’t want others to have a good time. That was a lethal image that the Left used to convince Whites to reject the conservatism of the 1960s, and it worked. Please don’t repeat the failed mistakes of those days.

        Adultery: This is actually the one sin that is still universally frowned upon. If you are married and you cheat on your spouse, one way or another, you’re the villain. Adultery is still grounds for immediate divorce, and it should remain that way.

        marriage and divorce: Marriage simply isn’t the revered institution that it used to be, and I honestly don’t have a problem with that.

        Divorce is strictly a matter of the 1960s feminists taking things too far by making women the new bullies on the block in order to get revenge on men. The pendulum will inevitably swing back into balance, and we will have the social equality between men and women that was promised in the 60s, and which, unlike racial equality, is actually productive and desirable.

        I don’t want a patriarchal society where men can beat up women and get away with it, and I also don’t want a feminist society where women can verbally berate and abuse men and get away with it. Balance shall be restored.

        In conclusion, we need to deal with White people as they are, and make futile attempts to change them into who we want them to be. We should draw out the ones who are naturally attracted to the rallying cry of White self-defense. Everyone else is expendable. We should be able to agree on that if nothing else.

        • White Traditionalist
          Posted January 12, 2020 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

          I think you underestimate how slavish the average white is. Most whites in the abstract support free speech but ban it and what’s the response? Nothing. If you legislate open employment and educational discrimination against them in their own country what do they do? Nothing. If the system introduced a concerted propaganda campaign against any of these vices it would have a massive effect which could be followed by hard regulation. Consider the change in attitudes towards smoking over the last 70 years. All of this is academic though because we live under hostile states that have every incentive to encourage the worst instincts of the majority in order to weaken and pacify them. An unhealthy, passive people are not only easier to control, they will also demand MORE regulation and subsidies. Libertarianism (which belongs on the left of the spectrum traditionally and according to Murray Rothbard, if we accept the left-right dichotomy) ultimately leads to more control of public behaviour and less freedom than sensible paternalism.

          Opposing junk food or pornography doesn’t make you a puritan, even though that’s going to be the standard line of attack from the left. Fat, porn addicted slobs are asexual, unaesthetic blobs. It’s anti-life and from an enlightened viewpoint, anti-hedonism. Even while we agree that taking a dissident viewpoint on degeneracy isn’t going to affect the majority, it may encourage a small and higher-agency minority to change their lifestyles.

          We don’t need a free will/determinism debate but genes and environment make a mockery of the distinction for me. Most fat people can’t stop themselves from being fat in a modern high-calorie environment with corporations able to peddle constant propaganda over television and fill their products with harmful, addictive substances. This results in over 70% being fat or obese. I could write a 2000 word essay, point after point, on the negative consequences that obesity alone has for society. Writing a little paragraph on each of these highly complex issues does not begin to do them justice.

          In my view we should only be appealing to the minority of whites who are racially-conscious and willing to act on their convictions by building real life communities. Attempting to appeal to the majority with the message of “live and let live” is self-defeating because they don’t give a damn. If we are to have healthy white communities they won’t be based on libertarianism (which is just an ideological mask for corporate slavery). They would be communitarian, familist, self-sufficient, anti-consumerist, natalist, militant and broadly religious, not as a matter of preference but as a matter of survival.

        • What Is Tradition?
          Posted January 12, 2020 at 4:27 pm | Permalink


          No Logo … I dismissed her entire thesis as Leftist BS back in 2008 when I saw it, as her assumptions about human behavior rob people of their individual responsibility and individual agency, which is anathema to my deepest held convictions, and indeed, should be anathema to anyone with a Right Wing view of the world.

          Humans have agency, but their liife goals are socially constructed to a large degree, as humans are social animals. If the social status system rewards warriors, you will get young men using their agency to become warriors. If the social status system rewards wealth, you will get young men using their agency to become wealthy.

          I smoked cigarettes starting when I was 16 and only stopped in my 20s after a long, hard struggle – and I’m still tempted 20 years later. It wasn’t cigarette advertising per se, but instead it was movies, music videos, and my own social circle that got me into the habit. I used my agency to acquire cigarettes even underage, but the status system that caused me to aspire to smoking was wholly socially constructed and mostly by mass media.

          You guys falsely and illegitimately assume that people can be conditioned and molded to be someone radically different than who they are on the inside.

          There is no such thing as “on the inside” – that mind/body distinction is the basis of superstitions of all types – including the leftist promotion of transgenderism, which assumes one can be a woman “on the inside” while being a man “on the outside.”

          Upper class people probably consume more media and more corporate advertising than underclass overweight people, and yet, as a general rule of thumb, upper class people lead healthier lifestyles.

          Demonstrably false; the opposite is true. Upper class people consume media and especially advertising far less than the lower classes. And their healthy diets and lifestyles are absolutely a matter of the social status system. It used to be quite popular to smoke in the upper classes, until the social status system changed and it became absolutely taboo to smoke among the upper classes.

          should be … I refuse to see … should be banned … should be legal … technology which allows us to remove our sex drive altogether

          Your comment is a long list of normative claims posturing as positive claims.

          Call it “left” “right” “traditionalist” or whatever, your normative claims are based on your personal positive claims that are not based on observable reality but your own highly idiosyncratic opinions.

          It’s just libertarian individualism that “punches down” on people you feel are beneath you, with special pleading for your own sexual misfortune, hence the jarringly out-of-place advocacy for pornography and prostitution.

          • DP84
            Posted January 13, 2020 at 5:24 am | Permalink

            @What Is Traditionn

            If the social status system rewards warriors, you will get young men using their agency to become warriors.”

            *Face palm* I’m just going to assume here that you don’t know much about Human BioDiversity or that you downplay the significance of race and genetics, because if you were informed about race, then you would have figured out what Sam Francis figured out when he said in his 1994 Amren speech:

            ”The civilization that we as whites created in Europe and America could not have developed apart from the genetic endowments of the creating people, nor is there any reason to believe that the civilization can be successfully transmitted to a different people. If the people or race who created and sustained the civilization of the West should die, then the civilization also will die.”

            If a society of warriors disappears, its because the people who have the warrior spirit in their blood disappeared. I’m not saying environment or nurture doesn’t matter at all, but its power pales in significance compared to genetics/blood, which, last I checked, is on the inside of us and is completely beyond our control.

            In reality, the social system doesn’t create the people, the people create the social system. If you have a problem with the social system, then the buck stops at the people who built it, which means, the buck stops with individual White people making good or bad decision.

            “it was movies, music videos, and my own social circle that got me into the habit.”

            If what you are saying is true, then black people who join street gangs and engage in typical hood violence are actually innocent victims, because they also learned that behavior from seeing it on movies, music videos, and especially from their own social circles – which, in the Black community, are notorious for promoting in group loyalty.

            If you are prepared to accept the conclusions of your premises, sobeit, but in that case, you’re no White Nationalist. And if you somehow insist that Blacks are responsible for their actions whereas Whites are innocent victims, than buddy, perhaps you should reexamine your premises, cause they are a load of BS

            YOU and you alone are responsible for being addicted to cigarettes, and all I need to demonstrate that is to point out the millions of Whites exposed to the same media as you who did NOT get into smoking. You are not a victim, and you’re not innocent.

            There is no such thing as “on the inside” – that mind/body distinction is the basis of superstitions of all types – including the leftist promotion of transgenderism”

            1. Transgenderism is a mental disease, not a “superstition.” You don’t get to decide who you are biologically based on how you feel. You’re born the way you are born. Transgandered people are at war with biology and thus are at war with reality. No superstition involved.

            2. I’m going to take a guess at something: You probably don’t believe in souls or gods/god or spirits. You probably think that unless something can be verified through deductive or inductive reasoning, then it must not exist. Please look into “Abductive Reasoning” and you’ll have a better, more educated understanding of how I approach things.

            “Demonstrably false; the opposite is true. Upper class people consume media and especially advertising far less than the lower classes.”

            Then clearly you’ve never been to an urban metropolis like New York or San Francisco where upper class Whites like to live. Corporate advertising is ubiquitous in those cities, especially Times Square in Manhattan. Upper class people are exposed to that every time they go out for a walk. Granted, so are the lower class people who live there, but their life situations are totally different: They are either too busy working or are stuck at home trying to manage their families. They don’t have the leisure time for exercising or reading things in magazines or on the internet – which, btw, more corporate advertising on there.

            Upper class people generally have superior intelligence, character, and impulse control, which allows them to better resist corporate attempts to get them to buy their unhealthy items. Lower class people generally lack those qualities and therefore are more likely to engage in risky behaviors of all types, in this case, unhealthy eating.

            “And their healthy diets and lifestyles are absolutely a matter of the social status system.”

            Nope. Their diet and their class is a reflection of their internal character, or lack thereof

            “Your comment is a long list of normative claims posturing as positive claims.”

            Because you’re a Traditionalist, you have the same impairment that Leftists do: You don’t get the process of first stating the facts about a particular issue (the positive claims), then making conclusions about what should or shouldn’t be done (the normative claims). Every single one of the issues I listed, marriage excepted, was first grounded in the facts of the case. And in the case of marriage, the fact is that its an institution which is only valuable if a consensus of people believe its valuable. Since that consensus is objectively gone, appealing to marriage as an inherently good institution has no basis.

            “It’s just libertarian individualism that “punches down” on people you feel are beneath you”

            People are beneath me or above me based on their actions, which is a reflection of their character. Actions are a fair way to judge the inherent value of others. If you disagree, then we aren’t fighting for the same cause.

            “with special pleading for your own sexual misfortune, hence the jarringly out-of-place advocacy for pornography and prostitution.”

            You have a very particular archetype for how men “should” or “shouldn’t” behave, and like a Leftist trying to make everyone the same, you are bound and determined to shove everyone into that narrow archetype regardless of individual differences. You would shame any man who doesn’t conform to how you think he should conform.

            Like I said, a big reason why White Nationalism is ghettoized is because of backward thinking like that. White Nationalism needs to be a truly Progressive movement if it wants to win, not a Traditionalist movement.

    • Lovely Phenotypes
      Posted January 12, 2020 at 7:44 am | Permalink

      Your views seem to be a product of the 90s which are a product of influence. Not everyone has to “make their own mistakes” that’s an absurd idea also from the 90s. I would not be here if that were the case.
      You can always appeal to the positives instead of the negatives, but then propaganda is key.

      I don’t think ethnocentrism is a poor defense, I simply believe it is downstream from social influence. Social influence is the key to group behavior and networking theory. Social influence today of miscegenation, white guilt, anti-racism, egalitarianism, etc. is effective not because they are moral positions or “right” but because they are a barrage of influences making us create a world in our minds framing it in such (A box we cannot think outside of.)

      Of course we have no power to change the influence so this cannot be helped.

      But then the path of small-enclave neurotic Jews… I’m not sure if that’s actually “winning” or saving anything.

      Then again religiosity and fanaticism is the only way something can survive in the modern world and in such a trying time. Over and over again I hear people proclaim not to be too focused on race etc. as it leads to dullness and burnout etc. but I think that is wrong in some ways. Extreme focus on something is the only way it can survive an assault. The growth period of a religion must be met with extreme belief and zealotry in order for it to survive the onslaught of outsiders and the onslaught of foreign influence.

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted January 12, 2020 at 9:43 pm | Permalink

      I’m not so sure that I have advocated for acting like Christians. My point here is to talk about the White Genocide hypothesis. I do this because it is disputed, and because it is key for our advocacy.

      I believe that information, like this, would actually lower rates of miscegenation among whites, if our people were to understand it. There are a few myths that ease the natural, healthy feeling of despair that people have regarding miscegenation, which make them more likely to race-mix.

      Myth 1. race is not real. Take, for example, this Britcuck’s appeal to Lewontin’s fallacy:

      “The usual argument is that genomics has identified no clusters of gene variants specific to conventional racial groupings: there is more genetic variation within such groups than between them.”

      This guy admits that he has race-mixed:

      “I always knew at some level that race is an inference about traits based on appearance. But finding the right way to articulate it has made me appreciate that it is much harder to “see beyond” at the subconscious level. Rationalising and good intentions aren’t enough; this is about undoing a habit of mind. Still, my own experience in a multiracial family persuades me it can be done.”

      However, race is real, and there are – quite literally – no full-blooded Sub-Saharan Africans who are more genetically similar to a full-blooded European that any other full-blooded European (!po=40.9091)

      What percentage of the millions of our people who race-mix would avoid it if they were not forcing themselves to deny race? Who knows.

      Myth 2. The rarity of interracial marriage means that you do not have to worry about the loss of races, phenotypes, cultures, etc. The major races will remain in-tact.

      My analysis is about that.

      Myth 3. Even when people race-mix, they come out looking anywhere between the races of the parents. Therefore, even if the world all mixes, we’d still have blonde-haired, blue-eyed white people around, etc.

      Arguing against this would require more expertise about the genetics involved in the expressions of phenotypes. This silly denial is rather common among black people and some other normies.

      I think that a sober understanding of racial annihilation and racial reality would stop some interracial marriages. You don’t need to beat anyone over the head, you just need the facts to be out in the open.

      I also think that any behavior, policy, political movement, or whatever we do, will need some rational justification. We do live in the liberal epoch! As Greg has written in The White Nationalist Manifesto, the white genocide hypothesis is one of the strongest justifications for ethno-nationalism. So I’ll make the argument to the best of my ability, and if Greg likes it, he might publish it.

    • Peter
      Posted January 14, 2020 at 8:21 am | Permalink

      I very much agree with your positions; thanks for representing them here.

  13. vasil
    Posted January 11, 2020 at 11:31 pm | Permalink

    the intention of the article sound like a blackpilled induction covered as aseptic objetive truth to be honest

    and is not the first time, the last month since i have discovered this web i have read some articulist like the one who review games whose jewish counciousness spread all over the mask of “good white” ,is evident that he like some of the jewish “pro white” authors in unz review are motivated not to redpill about jews but undercover the power of the jews and legitimate their power ,is normal that a lot of jewish supremacist would end up atracted and even legitimating the worldview of white nationalist now that jews think they have no to fear anymore white resistence.

    jewish counciousness have entered phase 2 where they want to express their supremacism in open way ,the archetype of the ” victim jew” is outdated and they are tring to redefine jewisness in a all powerfull way across time and space,thats why you see webs like HAARETZ redefining their foundatinal myths like the slavery of jews by the egyptians

    why do you think all these iq stadistics are so promoted in places like unz and are the only white nationalist that are tacitly permited ? because stupid whites make the dirty job of the jews promoting their supremacism while they prepare the terrain for a race caste sistem once everyone have been brainwhased like in brave new world novel where every class was brainwhased since birth to accept his position ,iq racial stats do the same job.

    why do you think articless in unz make jews responsible for moving america to defeat the nazis?

    because it means that jews saved thenselfs without the help of anyone and have zero debt toward white americans softening their fellings toward our disposesion, and of course being the mastermind of all this historical process is always cool.


    overall this web is wonderfull place like 95% of the articulists jews included but i think there is some truth to what i have said

  14. Some whitish guy
    Posted January 11, 2020 at 11:43 pm | Permalink

    You are 100% correct. I am Puerto Rican. It took years of internal struggle and confronting uneasy truths to finally see the need to preserve the race that gave rise me. Unfortunately, you are right that this country will miscegenate to the level of Latin Americans, but there is still time to course correct. We must break this self destructive racial cycle.

  15. Lovely Phenotypes
    Posted January 12, 2020 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    I tend to be a bit of a purist when it comes to genetics and race.
    It is the hardest position to maintain given all the propaganda thrown at people and even in our own circles being more accepting of outsider views. It’s endlessly attacked as an evil, “materialistic” or of lesser importance because of the dark world we are in.
    Genetics are important because when they are gone they are gone. This is not the same as culture which changes with the wind or can be remade in some way or give way to something else. It is the end.
    What mysteries and keys genetics hold still have yet to be unveiled, what tiny intricacies are precursors to greatness or beauty is still not known . . . the worst thing someone can do is throw away thousands of years of genetic evolution in some fit of altruistic rage or modern lust. And that goes for all races. I would prefer a world that still has Asians in it, and yes even Africans.
    To those whom seek to use history to predict our outcome . . . I think there has never been quite a time as now trying so hard (and with such technology and power) to coerce people into mixing. Give it a few years (if it isn’t the case already) and people whom say “I’m just not attracted to black people” will be deemed racist and be socially ostracized.
    Jewish peoples are a good example of a people without racial binding. The Jews of today are not the ones of old. The ones of old no longer exist. Israel is inhabited by people whom cling to a minor percentage of their blood/heritage etc. etc. All that lives on of the Jews of old is “an idea.”
    All you have now are destructive zealots whom have consumed an ancient culture and live on with it because that’s all they have. And they are so ugly because of it. It is of prominent importance because they are nothing without it; hollow, heartless, and evil husks whose only identity is a cruel cult.
    I suspect this is one of the reasons why Jewish people lack a respect for racial solidarity. Beyond being a false idol that goyim worship it is something they no longer have. Better to destroy it than accept a soul-crushing reality of falsehood.

    Nothing will survive if we become Jews clinging to a culture when our blood belongs to another.

  16. Albusexistence
    Posted January 12, 2020 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

    Didnt “white” in America come to be from various European ethnicities not wanting to associate and be connected to the blacks and other non-whites around them? I specifically recall several articles on this website showing such information.

    Even critical race theorists (one who was black) said the melting pot in America was only ever for white people.

  17. Ryan Andrews
    Posted January 13, 2020 at 9:41 am | Permalink

    Unless I’m missing something, your zero immigration scenario from the previous article must be very wrong. If the youngest generation is about half white, half non-white, and that will be our genetic population structure from there on out. Whether we have zero mixing and half the pop. is 100% white and half 100% non-white, or total mixing, or anything in between, the overall genetic mix of the pop. remains 50% “white.”

    I know that the non-white birth rate is something like 5-10% higher than the white rate, and assuming that holds through the centuries, that would change the balance, but there is also a lot more white blood in the non-white population than vice versa (I think US Hispanics average 50-60% white), so I would think that would be a wash at worst, though I do not know how the numbers would play out in a simulation.

    Though I consider this an academic point because I would not assume that an increasingly prosperous world will result in less immigration—if Africa’s economic standing relative to the West improved five times over, it would still be worth their while, economically, to immigrate to the West (and it is not implausible that Africa may be the most populous continent in the world by the end of this century). So I think the reason ethnonationalists do not spend a great deal of time worrying about genocide-by-miscegenation is that if we still don’t have an ethnostate 200 years from now, we assume we’ll have already been completely swamped by then anyways. I know this sounds a bit like whacking your fingers with a hammer to take your mind off the pain of stubbing your toe, but it is what it is.

    • Phineas Eleazar
      Posted January 13, 2020 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

      You make good points, thanks for this comment.

      I had treated “Hispanic” as a race, because I thought that USA Hispanics are mostly Amerindian (based on the way they appear to the eye, and based on their countries’ ancestry compositions). It seems I was *very* wrong.

      It looks like USA Hispanics are a whopping 65% white by DNA on average, according to 23andMe user data (

      I am stunned to find this out. We must be getting some pretty white Hispanics as immigrants. It is possible, however, that the brownest Hispanic-Americans are less likely to use 23andMe due to poverty, disinterest, etc., causing those numbers to be skewed.

      Another thing that drove my results were TFR estimates I was using (from the last census, I think). The data that I had found showed Hispanic TFR was much higher than white (2.4 vs. 1.7), but I have found recently that is has probably dropped greatly (2.1), though it is still much higher than white TFR (1.6).

      So things might not be as bleak as I had thought for the no-immigration scenario. Based on current child demographics, I calculate quickly here that the population would end up being ~70% white by DNA, if birthrates between different races converged.

    • Ryan Andrews
      Posted January 13, 2020 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

      Edit: Just to be clear, my point is that if the collective national genome is 50% white, then it is impossible for the number of people who are at least 50% to virtually vanish.

  18. Posted January 13, 2020 at 6:37 pm | Permalink

    My first comment was not allowed, apparently. Anyway, again, the study pubiblicized by Sérgio Pena is fake. He used only 20 SNPs. This is the same guy who said the brazilian samba singer is 80% white, which is whiter than Nick Fuentes who is only 79% white.

    • Sutter
      Posted January 14, 2020 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

      20 SNPs, if chosen correctly, should be enough. See “A Small Number if Candidate Gene SNPs Reveal Continental Ancestry in African Americans.”

      • Posted January 14, 2020 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

        No, 20 SNPs is never enough: and

        Now if you were a researcher and wanted to show that race doesn’t exist, which triangle would you show? The one with the fewest loci.

        This is often done in courses on race where the teacher gives the class a genetic test to see what race they are, and their test uses a small number of SNPs (around 20). The fewer SNPs you use, the less it will cluster, and thus the less genetic cluster will correspond to visibly recognized races. And so a dishonest or uninformed teacher will do this.

        • Sutter
          Posted January 14, 2020 at 8:53 pm | Permalink

          Those SNPs are randomly selected, as you can see on the x-axis, titled “Number of randomly selected SNPs”.

          A good researcher will select smartly, from certain SNPs called AIMs which vary greatly across different races (

          When you do that, you can get 99% accuracy with 15 SNPs, as shown in the article I referenced. Here is the link:

          “These reference values were compared to estimates derived using 120, 60, 30, and 15 SNP subsets randomly chosen from the 276 AIMs and from 1144 SNPs in 44 candidate genes. All subsets generated estimates of ancestry consistent with the reference estimates, with mean correlations greater than 0.99 for all subsets of AIMs, and mean correlations of 0.99±0.003; 0.98± 0.01; 0.93±0.03; and 0.81± 0.11 for subsets of 120, 60, 30, and 15 candidate gene SNPs, respectively. “

  19. Coltrane Dane
    Posted January 14, 2020 at 10:25 am | Permalink

    @Phineas Elezar, I hope that my comment doesn’t get lost here, and I hope that you see my comment. I, like yourself, am a blogger. I wrote about the amount of White people genetically speaking in the USA about 2 years ago. Perhaps this it will be of interest to you. I calculated the amount of White people for all 50 states. Here is the link:

    I must be thoroughly honest with you: your original article brought me great despair. This being the case, I found that the wisdom of the Stoics has helped me get through this time that our people need. I personally want to do anything in my power to save our race. I am a 27 year old who is still in college and I am looking for a wife. I live in the East Coast where I go to an urban college. I want to find a wife who will want to have many children with me. I was wondering if you could impart me any advice for my situation. I thankfully do not have any college loan debt and my major will help me get hired as soon as I graduate (I believe this is the case). Please know that I want to do the best most wisest thing possible for our current trajectories in the USA
    Thank you
    Coltrane Dane

  20. d.diconez
    Posted January 22, 2020 at 9:43 pm | Permalink

    a few comments, as i’m personally an embodiment of the subject. a specimen, if you wheel, of these mischling whites, forgotten by Throne and Altar, raised around the bronze age peoples. not as bad as they seem, btw, but terrible on enough occasions.

    yes, on one hand latin american whites (or, rather, offwhites) are usually less woke and rather prouder than American whites… but yes, this does not translate to avoiding miscegenation. as latin american went from colonial and Catholic to republican and secular, institutions meant to prevent intermixing such as slavery, serfdom, the colonial caste system, the powerful Church, mercantilist tariffs, were taken down as decades progressed. British and American capital and forces even supported the liberals, as Latin republics accumulated debt selling raw materials to Anglo industrialists (and to a lesser degree, liberals in the ports of Spain; but that’s another topic). these liberal white burghers in the ports and trade centers plotted endless civil wars against the conservative whites heading the segregated countryside.

    meanwhile, these conservatives instead believed in a more closed and self-sufficient rural society, with some regulated trade as well, in the Catholic corporate tradition. albeit they ruled in a too harsh manner at times, perhaps due to the colonial exploitative mindset, the weak spot the Church had on education, as well as endogamy eventually causing higher separation between classes and colors and further otherization. while the Church had concluded that the natives and even the blacks (which were beneath the natives officially, and i can say it is true) were not absolute heathens (like the Saracens) or subhumans, many whites came to see them as such. although there was also the reverse case of browns who got wealthy and educated and impressed the whites, to then join the liberal side (if conservative, this brown was/is the best employee of his patron at best).

    these better browns, btw, were usually mestizos who descended from the intermixing of older Spanish waves, who were mostly male conquistadors who came without wives. you see, Spain did not have collectivizing barons nor religious civil war that made whole families flee; the Inquisition and the old order worked… for a while at least. it would have been nicer to allow trade not only to-fro Seville, but other Spanish ports; and that the white men who made the Atlantic trip to be criollos weren’t usually second sons, gray burghers and peasants, soldiers of fortune, or even former inmates. those weren’t ideal genes always, although to move was also a sign of fitness relative to the other population of the Americas. of course, without white wives, these guys got the best Indian wives they could (it is a sign of dominance also, which explains a bit of the black men-white women thing). seeing that these white men were already in the more sexually liberated Indian milieu, and usually admired by these Indian women to the point of keeping score of mistresses. machismo seems to have been born out of this collision of Spanish Medi and Amerind values. perhaps the men were even bringing some Mediterranean darker genes and higher tendency to breed: the first waves were more Andalusian, most were Mediterranean, nearly all Catholic. so these crossings were the ones who created the mestizo class, which then self-propagated, as the tendency to infidelity increases down the color line.

    as it happened, the Church and the State put a clamp down on it by issuing official classes and jobs allowed to each class. of course, whites got more land-nobility and trade concession titles, while the mestizo/mulatto class got to be burghers and wage slaves (the whitish ones, like my ancestors, more like homesteaders), and the natives and browns could be self-ruled in small segregated communities at best if not working for the white man. the only other weak spot of Catholic societies, the belief that nobles shouldn’t work while the bourgeois burghers are allowed to make just as much money and pay more directly to the state – ergo, making for a situation where rivalry was inevitable. so it’s not like the Catholic order was perfect, though it was perfectable and better than the eventual resolution of the liberal order.

    at any rate, the abuses and increasing genetic distance, caused several peasants of all colors to give up their conservative cause. the liberals won, then celebrated so by freeing colored labor off their serfdom; so they could flock to the cities and become wage slaves and maids. Benito Juarez, the first Mexican mestizo president, and the first liberal, was supported by America, contra the noble yet misguided Maximilian and the underqualified but faithful Napoleon the III. eventually the taboos against divorce (a Whig idea in the West) broke down, and this set off the increasing intermixing in the 20th century. true, there were more whites of more Northern areas in the 20th century, but still on one hand some of the others kept coming, while on the other hand these newer whites were increasingly liberal and having less children. thus we have Che Guevara being the son of a bourgeois doctor who played rugby as a teen, the elite sport in Argentina, and paying his own college until he was ready to bike around and revolt for eventual t-shirt sales. which is why i denounce him and the liberal project that’s been going for centuries, but specially since the 60s, as by then these now more secularized white groups had and have become disengaged elite groups that just copied whatever globalists say, perhaps with the old colonial mindset of trying to be just like the Europeans to be their equal… now since the 60s, headed both by the Vatican2 Church and liberal morals. lots of Latins use fake English words, and yes, intermix even more because they saw Black Panther or was propagandized by something else. this of course has had the knock on effect to miscegenate the lower whites, the ones who make children and along with the better mestizos are the backbone who had to leave their smaller lands and move to cities, where in college they had chemistry with some brown some time, and eventually either marry an educated mestizo woman or having one as mistress. the more recent whites accumulated more money and can insulate themselves more, but they on the other hand tend to be more sterile and decadent.

    ergo, a return to old school Catholic segregation may be the only thing that saves all whites, specially since only in certain cases of the South Cone can they form pockets, and if secular they might dwindle in birthrate anyway as they have since last century. in other areas, full secession is not easy, specially near jungle or highland areas where whites have a hard time settling into, as the valuable rural land is getting either more corporatized and/or nationalized, and ergo getting full of cities and browns (who form a troubled scared yet profitable middle class submissive to the liberal order).

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