Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
2,118 words
It has been said that money spent on travel is never wasted. Travelers expand their knowledge of the world, acquire memories that last a lifetime, broaden their minds and, if lucky, have fun. Since I have the good fortune to work in a field that allows me to travel frequently to many parts of the world, I can attest to the truthfulness of the above precepts.
As an Instaurationist, I look upon travel as an opportunity to observe the people and cultures I happen to visit. It goes without saying that the Instaurationist view of humankind is basically correct. With few exceptions, I have found the majority of the foreigners I’ve gotten to know, including non-whites, to be decent enough. Many are as warm and kind as anyone you would ever want to meet. It is a curious fact that men and women of all races, tribes, and nations are in certain ways alike. An honest, hardworking, honorable man stands out in any society, as does a knave, criminal or fool.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s The White Nationalist Manifesto here
It is indisputable that all humans share many traits. How could it be otherwise, considering that we have to face many of the same ancient trials and tribulations? In evolutionary terms, it would make sense for human behavior to respond to some of our challenges in roughly the same way.
This far I am willing to go. But there are limits, stark unbridgeable limits to the “We are all the same” ideology. Yes, we are all (or mostly all) the same in some ways. But as races, nations and tribes, we are also vastly different. And the differences will never disappear, no matter how much federal money is thrown at them, no matter how many Charlie Roses and Oprah Winfreys attempt to deny the obvious.
The reader will notice that I use the word “different,” not “superior.” The white race is different from the Negro race, the Asiatic races and all of their sub-groups. The question of “superiority,” however, brings up another train of thought. I happen to believe that the white race is the most highly evolved of all human groups. If one wishes to call this “superiority,” so be it. As for supremacy, I do indeed believe in “White supremacy” in all primarily white countries and that the status and conduct of nonwhites in such countries must be determined by whites. I do not necessarily believe that the white race should hold an exalted position in Botswana, though there is no doubt in my mind that a handful of whites is perfectly capable of ruling all Botswanans, to the immense benefit of both groups.
What I’m saying is that “superiority” lies in the eye of the beholder. It disturbs me not a whit when some American Negro or mulatto stridently claims that the Negros are a master race, responsible for all world civilization and that whites would be helpless without them. A Negro has every right to believe such nonsense if he wishes. I only draw the line when some guilt-ridden white liberal seeks to shove this bilge down the throats of my children in their classrooms. I say let the “market” set the value of the different races of mankind. I am smugly confident which race will come out on top. I’m also certain that practically all nonwhites share my view, though many would die rather than admit it.
I further believe that whites are different from non-whites and always will be. The end results of these “differences” is that the white race is uniquely prepared to serve as the engine of human progress and the engineer of the modern world.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s Toward a New Nationalism here
I hasten to add that every race contains outstanding individuals, as well as a thick, biological layer of sludge. I reject the idea that “intelligence” alone is an adequate gauge of “superiority.” Surely IQ is the bedrock upon which much else is built but the truly superior human has many other qualities: physical strength and beauty, moral courage, honor, simple decency, generosity, altruism and imagination — the list is endless. Every person has at least one or two of these attributes. The proportion is what counts.
Take the Jews. By any standard they are clever people. Some are brilliant. Does this make a “superior” people? In their own eyes the answer is unquestionably “yes.” Skeptical non-Jews do not necessarily see it that way, even accepting that there are Jews who combine both the sharp minds associated with the Chosen and the more elevated characteristics which are often not associated with them.
Of Pure and Impure Blacks
Politically correct twaddle aside, Negroes are not and never have been noted for even normal intelligence. But that is just the most obvious difference between them and most whites. If Negroes were merely dull, the problem could be easily managed simply by ensuring that they were funneled in positions suited for their talents: monotonous industrial tasks, menial jobs, shoe shining and the like.
Many years of observing Negroes have taught me a few things about them. First of all they lack self-control. The average black simply does not have the emotional and mental stability of the average white. Unless they are under firm control, they will quickly make a shambles of whatever they touch. The propensity of the Negro for violent crime is a consequence of this. IT is a truism among detectives that the white man will plan a murder, whereas the Negro will commit muder in the heat of the moment. Negroes are well aware of this lack of control among their own people. It is not for nothing that they fear the so-called “crazy Nigger.” By the time he has reached adulthood the Negro will have seen enough evidence of this dangerous trait to teach him caution and prudence while in the company of fellow blacks.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s Truth, Justice, & a Nice White Country here
The Negro has a grossly exaggerated sense of his own worth and abilities. His meager ability to engage in abstract thought limits his ability to accurately assess his true potential. This is a grave and worrisome situation. Recent research has shown that one of the worst spurs to violence is the unjustified inflation of a person’s self-esteem. In this country we have a whole generation of Negroes who are genetically predisposed to violence, who were probably born with a primitive “will to power” stronger than that of the average reflective and contemplative white. These Negroes have been preached to and bombarded with the idea that they are equal to or superior to whites in every way that really counts. The reality is that the average Negro is woefully underprepared to compete. Never or seldom told this, when he collides with the harsh realities of the real world, he is confused, angered and finally enraged. It’s easy to imagine whom he blames for his trouble.
The Negro Is Hyperaggressive
One function of the Negro’s lack of self-control is his hyperaggressivity. Urban dwellers know all about this, especially clerks at liquor stores and all-night gas stations, not to mention white prison inmates and white women in general. One of the striking things about the Negro the world over is the offensive, threatening aggression of young Negro males (the females can be just as nasty, but as in the case in all bipeds, the male is more aggressive). You see it in New York, in Los Angeles, on the streets of Paris, in the cities of Latin America and, most telling, in Africa itself. This is not “learned behavior,” a legacy of the rage generated by slavery. This is bred in the bone. Fortunately the Negro is usually only brave when he outnumbers his opponent in most cases — or his victim is unarmed. Armed, determined whites have repeatedly beaten Negroes in one encounter after another, under all kinds of conditions. The superior self-discipline, intelligence and toughness of whites almost always triumph over the savage courage of even the “fightingest” blacks.
It is really amazing how Negro traits extend across space and time. Take a Negro street hustler from New York or Chicago and set him next to a pure African street hustler on the streets of Paris or Madrid. You can hardly tell them apart. It is absolutely uncanny. The same expressions on the face, the same body movements, the same pushiness and arrogance. It has to be seen to be believed. It is eerie how the race clings to its mannerisms.
The best test for racial determinism in behavior is provided by an examination of mulattos. Almost all American Negroes have at least a dollop of white blood. The Anglo-Saxon technique to ensure racial purity did not aim at an impossible ban on intimate contacts. It simply insisted that anybody with any Negro blood whatsoever was considered a 100% Negro, regardless of any superficial white appearance. While effective, this technique had the side effect of engendering a white hot rage in all American mulattos. Unlike their Latin-American brethren, who with enough money and enough luck could crawl up out of the ranks of simple Negroes into a quasi-white status, American mulattoes were stuck in the same pit with the coalblack field hand and the blubbery Mammy figure. The rage is understandable, though the process was entirely necessary to ensure white racial purity.
You can buy Spencer Quinn’s novel White Like You here
The Negro abolitionist, Frederick Douglass, is a tragic example of a half-white doomed to Negrohood. A glance at his writings is sufficient to show that his real concern was not the black slave. It was the mulatto Frederick Douglass, who wanted desperately to be white. Unable to achieve his impossible goal, he wished to destroy the race of his own father. The phenomenon is familiar to any who have studied the lives of prominent mulattoes.
The danger of the mulatto is that he tends to combine traits of each race into an explosive cocktail. The intelligence and cunning of the white married to the violently unstable Negro temperament is a true recipe for disaster. The most grotesque example of this currently on the U.S. scene is Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Islam.
Farrakhan, who must be at least three-quarters white, is a Jamaican immigrant, ironically from a social group known as the “Jamaica whites.” The mulattoes have traditionally played the role of a middle class in Jamaica. To be honest, though they haven’t done it quite successfully, compared to the mostly pure African Jamaicans who make up the bulk of the population, the Jamaica whites are easily able to maintain their superior position over their darker cousins. General Colin Powell is the son of such parents.
Farrakhan is, by any standard, a bizarre figure. He is not, however, a fool or off his rocker. Insane? Possibly by Western clinical standards. His “flying saucer” speech at the Million Man March was as chilling as it was astounding. Farrakhan is a born leader among blacks. What we hear as the foam-speckled ravings of a nut or hear as typical Negro mumbo-jumbo is serious business to his followers. The hatred Farrakhan has for whites is very real. The light tint of his skin is closely connected with the emotion that dominates his life and those of his followers. In strategic terms Farrakhan is an ally and should be encouraged. He is a strong, polarizing force for racial separation. On the other hand, it behooves Majority leaders to never forget that Farrakhan and his acolytes would like nothing better than to roast each and everyone of us over a slow fire, topping off the ceremony by eating our livers.
Look around at the mulattos who are so prominent in the American Negro community. Both Andrew Young and the pathetic Julian Bond are nearly white, yet their hatred of whites is far worse than that of more melanized black leaders. The sneering comment made by Young about the Rev. Hosiah Williams (“He’s nothing but a turd-tapping Nigger”) came from deep inside his psyche.
Racial differences are real. They cannot be wished away. Every day brings a new announcement from the medical establishment or the scientific world concerning yet another human trait associated with race. A few years ago a handful of liberal nitwits and Jewish “social scientists” tried to run a scam on anthropology and sociology by simply denying that there are any races. As preposterous as this sounds, the theory gained wide attention for a while. As the long list of race-related traits grows ever larger with the progress of the human genome project, the voices of these knuckleheads grew more and more quiet and then were silenced.
Racial differences are real. Race exists. Race matters. Deal with it.
Notes
This article originally appeared in Volume 24, Issue 1 of Instauration, December, 1998.
30 comments
When liberals signal against racialism and point to blacks who achieve in some field outside of sport or crime like the Obamas, the Colin Powells, The Condoleezza Rices and so on, they are always mixed. Is there such a thing as black achievement without white admixture ? Probably very little.
It’s a sad situation that even racialist black leaders have to be significantly part white to lead other blacks.
But blackness is just an unreasonable burden on all of us. To drape this mess on top of the white population of the world is beyond belief. It’s beyond belief that white leaders over time have allowed this. For what ? To have cheap labor and a market of imbeciles to sell crap to ? For some high ‘principle’, some abstract sentimental ‘value’ ? To not be called racists by the Jewish lobby ?
None of these are sufficient reasons.
Underlying it all, there is this feeling among whites, and a sense given by politicians that one day blacks will ‘evolve’ into having white standards. That they will mature. And if we just throw enough resources at this, if we just supply enough gibs, if we just make enough anti-white concessions it will speed this up. But this is as insane and dumb as blacks and their flying saucers/pyramids.
The most brilliant and successful black people in the world are Igbo of Nigeria, and they are black as night.
Underlying it all, there is this feeling among whites, and a sense given by politicians that one day blacks will ‘evolve’ into having white standards.
Many liberals I have known see blacks as the Grand Experiment, to be brought into “equality” with White people by any number of social programs. The fact that virtually all of these programs have failed does not deter liberals: desegregation, affirmative action, war on poverty, black history months, diversity boondoggles, non-stop agitprop on the telescreens. The result? Just about every black run city in America has been reduced to a dysfunctional wasteland with Detroit as the exemplar.
Globally, liberalism takes the form of de-colonialization, black majority rule and open borders. The result? From Haiti to Zimbabwe black countries run the gamut from distinctly illiberal one-party regimes through failed states and into human rights fiascoes. The current devolution of South Africa, accompanied by ANC terrorism against White farmers and destruction of the country’s infrastructure, ought to be a lesson learned about the failure of the egalitarian project.
None of this deters liberals who, being ideologues, reinterpret reality to conform to their ideology. The program failures are due to a lack of funding. Or White flight. Or gentrification. Or not enough “diversity.” Or the legacy-of-segregation-colonialism-apartheid-institutional-whatever. Might as well claim “witchcraft” because, really, liberalism has become a quasi-religion.
Underneath it all one suspects that liberals can not face the reality of racial inequality. If blacks are inherently different from Whites, then liberals are in a world of hurt. White liberals are a small minority on this planet and even within their own countries they are pushed off the proverbial and literal sidewalk by everything from gangbanging flashmobs to the rise of No Go Zones, effectively warlord kingdoms carved out of once liberal cities. Globally, liberals are a small minority, outnumbered and out-gunned by exploding African populations.
When faced by an unpleasant reality, rather than altering their worldview liberals instead destroy the representation in order to maintain the delusion. Hence, the current liberal initiated wave of IT censorship, iconoclasm against monuments to “White supremacy,” and inquisitions against anti-egalitarian heretics.
It just may be that all this indicates that liberalism is self-destructing. The dilemma is not letting them drag down the rest of civilization.
“Underneath it all one suspects that liberals can not face the reality of racial inequality. … White liberals are a small minority on this planet and even within their own countries they are pushed off the proverbial and literal sidewalk by everything from gangbanging flashmobs to the rise of No Go Zones, effectively warlord kingdoms carved out of once liberal cities. Globally, liberals are a small minority, outnumbered and out-gunned by exploding African populations.
When faced by an unpleasant reality, rather than altering their worldview liberals instead destroy the representation in order to maintain the delusion. Hence, the current liberal initiated wave of IT censorship, iconoclasm against monuments to “White supremacy,” and inquisitions against anti-egalitarian heretics.
“It just may be that all this indicates that liberalism is self-destructing. The dilemma is not letting them drag down the rest of civilization.”
Well put.
“Many liberals I have known see blacks as the Grand Experiment, to be brought into “equality” with White people by any number of social programs.”
I don’t think I have ever met a liberal who see black people as an “experiment” of how to create equality. I have never had the impression that liberals are, first and foremost, seeking to perfectly equalize the world. That is not their fundamental value, contrary to so many right-wing ppl in the Internet.
Liberals are trying to make the country/world work better. They see that black ppl are frustrated about inequality, and see the lasting effects of slavery and Jim Crow, and they see how this frustration causes social problems in American life, and they try to solve this through reparations and affirmative action and so on.
They see the terrible things done in history done by whites with beliefs in their own superiority, and they try to fight this idea to stop such things from happening again.
They see that *great* economic inequality causes problems among lower classes and frustrations among lower classes, and they see that the general good can be served through progressive taxes and so on, and so they alleviate it (but never force complete equality).
Liberals understand that Asians kick our butts and always will, until they are racially absorbed. They seem to be ok with this; they don’t care about this inequality.
It is not actually about forcing equality, even though liberals have an annoying habit of making buzzwords such as “equality” and shouting their buzzwords from the rooftops; the excitement and extreme displays of emotion they perform when crying “equality” just makes it look like they hold this ideal as some kind of absolute sacred principle.
It is pivotal that white-positive people shed poor thinking and poor analyses. We have had multiple articles questioning whether liberals are “against beauty.” No, of course they are not. Neither is liberalism reducible to a need to make all humans equal.
The problem with spouting too many faulty ideas is that you discredit yourself. We cannot make mistakes. For this reason, we should always criticize every article and every comment with no mercy.
Sutter, I like your approach, I really do.
Truth be told, one might be led to think that liberals are “against beauty” because that is the end result of their policies: the destruction of beauty. Lowering the standards so that everyone can fit them and putting unwieldy people into built-up areas.
When they try to “fix” society in the ways that you describe, they create further problems (wrt us) and even deepen the original problem because of dysgenic fertility. A right-wing solution would not be unlike certain extant colonial arrangements and would actually ameliorate things over a long period of time. Perhaps we could have very pleasant dealings with the ‘Igbo’ that you mention, but not if they insisted on thrusting the rest of their African compatriates upon us.
Ultimately, there are no ‘lasting effects of slavery and Jim Crow’, it is simply biology, and this has been demonstrated many times. The only reason liberals could come to their ideology and policies is because they refuse to recognise biology.
For my part, I find the superiority question vis-a-vis East Asians to be a wash. They are capable of being trusting with one another and their rote-learning ability is slightly higher, and they are more emotionally stable, with the tradeoff being that they are less creative. Our education system is also completely pozzed and diversified. We also have many more geniuses per capita than they do despite having slightly lower average IQ. It is disheartening to see people throwing around blanket statements such as ‘East Asians are not creative’, ‘China will sink back into the Middle Kingdom after globalism’ which really sound like cope tbh. There should be no underestimating them. They are most definitely a threat and believe me they know it.
It has not been shown that there are no lasting effects of slavery and Jim Crow. It is just not clear how great they might be. It is, however, the current trend to blame black under-achievement on modern-day racism. This also justifies anti-white sentiment (two birds with one stone).
There is no research or proof that Asians are less creative. I have seen the Ed Dutton videos about the concept of “genius,” and it is possible that Asians are less likely to be “geniuses” in his definition, but when it comes to mathematical competition, spelling bees, rubik’s cube solving, scientific output, chess (and other such games), competitive video gaming, musical performance, etc….Asians always are at the top. Asians dominate science departments in American universities. And this is what most people consider a genius to be.
There is a reason Asian businesses always beat American businesses.
I think that the legacy of JC and slavery is merely a blank cheque given to minorities to do what they like to us. I doubt anyone could qualify or quantify what this legacy is without allowing for the terrible things that have been done to other groups as well. How do you know that the legacy wasn’t positive and that our account isn’t an underestimate? I can’t reasonably allow more than a fraction of the whole equation for this alleged legacy. If we simply don’t want them around, and if that includes liberals as well, then they don’t have the right to invade our spaces.
For the Asian question, it is slightly ironic that the things you mentioned were all Western inventions. Germany and other Nordic countries had an IQ of 105 until recently (allegedly the same as East Asia). They benefit from having national purpose as well as a patriarchal, ethno-nationalist government. When it comes to physical beauty, respect for nature, we win. Imagine having all that brainpower and just concreting and dumping on the entire landscape as they have, at least we have significant nature reserves and the greens will win out as soon as we do. It’s just that there are more of them and immigration is very selective, that’s all. In any case, neither one of us is superior as I believe we should be equals. Essentially, I agree with you about the point of this article but there is no need to be so ethno-masochist.
Jesse Lee Peterson has said that Blacks want Whites to love them (but they refuse to earn even respect and so are doomed to disappointment). Assuming Reverend Peterson is correct, could it be that the mulattos feel the rejection so much more acutely because they have no idea who the Whites are in their bloodline? They know that some White person — probably a male — left his seed and walked away? I’m not a Negro Apologist, but if I felt like the orphaned child of Whites, I might be salty about it.
That may have been true in the Jim Crow era, but now it’s the reverse. You have the products of white mothers and absentee black fathers (Toure, Jordan Peele, Barack Obama, Alicia Keys) who desperately want to prove their blackness by out-blacking everyone. Even black comedians have remarked on it.
Does the same level of strictness need to be applied to those white with admixtures other than african?
E.g. a small amount (less than 5%) asian or amerindian ?
There were a few interesting pieces of information in this article, but besides this, the article was exactly what we shouldn’t want in any pro-European movement.
Who goes on a white nationalist website to learn what to think about black people? No one, so what is the point?
The insistence on white superiority is a major weakness of this article. From the standpoint of intelligence and temperament, this writer should how our race compares to East Asians, and be humble. They are superior in almost every way. They are, and will continue to for a few centuries at least, kicking our asses economically and scientifically. Our race also has a singularly poor moral record, which matters a lot wrt judging a race’s merits to all decent human beings.
People will, whether you like it or not, come to their own opinions of different races. The staunchly white supremacist position will be rejected by almost everyone. So we should put it aside. I honestly don’t know what kind of cretin would double down on a sense of racial superiority. The more we attach our goal of conservation to white supremacy, the more we will drive intelligent and decent people away, and inspire insane cretins. Furthermore, if you rest on your fake laurels of white supremacy, you will be rudely awakened when you go out into the world and find that the white man is not that dominant at all, and that non-white people are highly competent and successful in all spheres of life. Your entire worldview will come crashing down, as it almost did for some commenters when Chanda Chisala’s articles came out on Unz. “HOW COULD WE WANT THE WEST TO CONTINUE SURVIVING IF WE ARE NOT BETTER THAN BLACK PEOPLE!!! IF WE ARE NOT SUPERIOR, SCREW IT ALL, I’M THROWING IN THE TOWEL!!!”
But a desire for cultural or racial conservation should be quite common; I think that only about 10% of people are true believers in the diversity cult (that number will be higher in the USA where people are raised in diversity from a young age, and can’t imagine any alternatives unless they immigrate to Europe). What most normies do not understand is that diversity = racial erasure and that any hope of creating a culture to replace the dead Christian culture hinges on the genesis of an ethnic identity.
Excellent point, Sutter. As for me, I don’t love my race because it’s superior to some other race; I love my race because it’s mine. Do I actually need a better reason?
I slightly agree with your point that articles about supremacy can be perceived as bad optics.
I strongly disagree with your points that East asians (North East asians) are superior in many ways.
“our race compares to East Asians, and be humble. They are superior in almost every way”.
They may have higher average IQs and better in some other ways but none of those comparisons have been made with whites that grow up in an ethnostate.
They copy a lot as well, are less creative/imaginative and they have not discovered as much as whites.
“our race compares to East Asians, and be humble. They are superior in almost every way”.
This just tells me you have not been around many East Asians at all. You should probably specify which East Asian “group is superior in almost every way.” Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese are very distinct in behavior and mentality. Chinese are enormously low-trust and they cannot help, but stabbing each other in the back if they can’t find a foreigner to do it to. Japanese on the other hand are high trust and they share many of the same problems whites do. They at least have a lot of ethnic pride still. Koreans tend to get angry very easily and show more displays of emotion more than Chinese and Japanese. They have enormous egos and extreme ethnic chauvinism. They are also being consumed by suicide and other mental health issues. Both Japanese and Koreans similar to us have low birth rates. Their demographics and decline look just as bad as ours. China is still growing, but very little in their society is to be admired. Their hard work is incredible, but their IQ really isn’t much higher than whites 102. China made a totalitarian state simply because it was necessary because trusting the average Chinese person to do the right thing is way too much to ask. I am not exaggerating one of the primary reasons Chinese people want to leave China is they hate the back-stabbing, low trust, and deceptive society they are a part of. They accomplish a lot, but their society is nothing to envy.
Whites make fantastic societies to live in and have made pretty much everything in terms of inventions and innovations. Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese know this even if they might want to deny it with everything they got. I agree to an extant with not liking the “superior” bit, but I don’t think there is any way around it and frankly, I don’t give a damn about if some east Asian is miffed by white supremacy in this case when they all have extreme ethnic chauvinism and they all think they are better than whites. As long as we aren’t dictating to how these people should run their nations I don’t care. There should really only be mutual respect for the most part because whites superiority in innovation is also what leads us to this collective suicide. As far as, I am concerned the groups that can maintain white level of civilization have no reason to feel inferior. They have good societies and their own histories that they can take pride in. Not to mention, we are all running into the same kinds of issues.
>Our race also has a singularly poor moral record
“Singularly” poor? That is not true. Name one immoral thing that whites have done that other races have not. Slavery? All races have done it (some continue to do it!), but whites were the first to end it.
Whites, and Indo-Europeans in general, as a race have been singularly obsessed with morality have been the leaders in moral theory and practice for millennia. To paint us as the most evil and immoral race is disingenuous at best and an outright lie at worst.
Throwing white people under the bus, “cretin”, asserting that whites are inferior…
This comment smacks of Jewish subversion.
The claim by Sutter that east Asians are superior to whites “in almost every way” (along with his observation that this is true in “mathematical competition, spelling bees, rubik’s cube solving, scientific output, chess (and other such games), competitive video gaming, musical performance” is worthy of debate.
I don’t believe this at all, though it is true that they are dominating whites in many competitions. But at the highest levels, in one of the fields they are supposed to be the best, top contemporary mathematicians, I don’t see many east Asians listed in this long list of 86: there seems to be 6 east Asians, two Indians — can someone tell us how many are Jews, and how many are European? I am not claiming this is a definitive list, I am not a mathematician to judge it, but we can take it from here.
1) John Tate
2) Pierre Deligne
3) Endre Szemeredi
4) Laszlo Lovasz
5) Grigori Perelman
6) Terence Tao
7) Noga Alon
8) John Milnor
9) Jean-Pierre Serre
10) Tim Gowers
11) Curt McMullen
12) Andrew Wiles
13) Ed Witten
14) Shing-Tung Yau
15) Stephen Smale
16) Barry Mazur
17) Noam Elkies
18) John Conway
19) Michael Atiyah
20) Simon Donaldson
21) Peter Sarnak
22) James Harris Simons
23) Manjul Bhargava
24) Stanislav Smirnov
25) Charles Terence Clegg “Terry” Wall
26) John Ball
27) Ingrid Daubechies
28) Robert Langlands
29) Ben J. Green
30) Joseph B. Keller
31) Brian D. Ripley
32) Frank Kelly
33) Mikhail Gromov
34) Bernard Silverman
35) Wendelin Werner
36) Elon Lindenstrauss
37) Yurij Manin
38) Christopher Zeeman
39) Roger Penrose
40) John Baez
41) Donald Knuth
42) Peter Lax
43) Lennart Carleson
44) Srinivasa Varadhan
45) Jacques Tits
46) Stephen Smale
47) Lotfi A. Zadeh
48) Louis Nirenberg
49) Yakov Sinai
50) John Griggs Thompson
52) Lennart Carleson
53) Isadore Singer
54) Shinichi Mochizuki
55) Martin Hairer
56) Maryam Mirzakhani
57) Artur Avila
58) Cédric Villani
59) Stanislav Smirnov
60) Ngô Bảo Châu
61) Andrei Okounkov
62) Vladimir Voevodsky
63) Richard Borcherds
64) David Mumford
65) Charles Fefferman
66) Grigory Margulis
67) Alain Connes
68) Shing-Tung Yau
69) Simon Donaldson
70) Gerd Faltings
71) Michael Freedman
72) Vladimir Drinfeld
73) Vaughan Jones
74) Shigefumi Mori
75) Jean Bourgain
76) Pierre-Louis Lions
77) Jean-Christophe Yoccoz
78) Efim Isaakovich Zelmanov
79) Maxim Kontsevich
80) Laurent Lafforgue
81) Andrei Okounkov
82) Enrico Bombieri
83) Sergei Novikov
84) Heisuke Hironaka
85) Alan Baker
86) Klaus Roth
Farrakhan is probably every bit as nasty as you say, but I will defend him on at least one point: he is really quite based on the Judenfrage!A few years ago a handful of liberal nitwits and Jewish “social scientists” tried to run a scam on anthropology and sociology by simply denying that there are any races. As preposterous as this sounds, the theory gained wide attention for a while. As the long list of race-related traits grows ever larger with the progress of the human genome project, the voices of these knuckleheads grew more and more quiet and then were silenced.Oh, they’re still at it, I’m afraid. They still routinely deplatform scientists who speak out to publicly about race differences–witness what has happened to James Watson of Watson & Crick fame.
“Liberals understand that Asians kick our butts and always will, until they are racially absorbed. They seem to be ok with this; they don’t care about this inequality.”
Liberals aren’t really concerned about Asians one way or another. They are probably near the bottom of the liberal list of marginalized groups. Funnily enough, there has always been a segment of the dissident Right which is drawn towards Asians as some version of perfected White people. This can usually be chalked up to waifu or anime fetishes that many younger Right Wingers seem to have, but there’s also a genuine attraction to Asian culture that is ultimately self-defeating.
John Derbyshire and Charles Murray deserve half the blame, at least.
In exchanges on social media with normies, I often direct them to Counter-Currents. I would not want this to be the first article they come across.
Yeah exactly.
I agree with the above sentiment. Articles written like these make Counter-Currents a bit of a hard sell.
There is no getting around the superiority question. If we simply say it is all relative, but then advocate for objective moral positions we come off disingenous. Non-whites know this that is why you see the mass desire for non-white people to breed with whites. I personally don’t like it because I have no desire for groups like East Asians to feel inferior. But the nasty superiority complex I would argue does not come from White Nationalists. It comes from normies and white liberals who go to other people’s societies and expect to be spoken to in English. People who expect that other groups to follow their beliefs and their customs. I have seen this all the time in East Asia. Countless complaints about how people behave in their own country and the gall to tell locals that they should follow western practices. These are also the type of people that never bother to learn the language of the country they live. That creates resentment and rightfully so. I think white people are the best because of our intellectual achievements, but humans have multiple functions such as we are built to be social creatures. East Asians simply have better social cohesion -excepting China- that we don’t match them at. This is a complex issue, but simply stating that white society isn’t objectively better than African society just comes off like we are purposely lying.
To be honest i wouldnt say non-whites have a desire to mate with us. In large percentage that is not even the case. Mixing happens more in a certain environments and to be honest i say its westerners who have a desire to mate with non-whites. Look at many of the white males in dissantant right who have a fasination for asia, manga, anime etc. Many desire to be with east asian women and procreate with them. I would say also its a certain group of white nationalist who feel ”superior” to non-whites, but this is false whites are not superior to any other race and those who push that agenda are shying away of reality of day to day life. Also this notion of ”asians having a high IQ” by nature is false. Any culture that places emphasis on education, abstract thinking, reasoning, intelectual development can develop high IQ. The same with blacks….we often speak of blacks but i am realist enough to see major difference between the sub-groups among them. The igbo’s of Nigeria, Akan’s of Ghana/Ivory Coast are perfect example of high IQ achieving blacks as seen in the UK, Usa, Canada. Looking at the Akan’s of Ghana and Ivory Coast one can notice their high intelligence, civilization as it often noted how they are very organized, sophisticated people. Even there architecture looks much sophisticated, structered then other west-african groups. I remember jared taylor traveling to Ivory Coast as speaking how developed Ivory Coast was, that was due to leader at the Hoiphet Boigny who was of Akan extraction who was diciplined, structred yes also corrupt but he developed that nation to great degree. However, since it came in the hands of less developed ethnic groups that country went downhill to all types of civil wars
“Whites aren’t superior to anyone.”
Whites are responsible for the modern world. Charles Murray has a great book on human accomplishment it is overwhelmingly white. Again saying this, to a normie shows you’re avoiding the obvious when you talk about racial and iq differences. The question will come up in their mind “So you’re saying whites are better than blacks?” or at the very least superior in this very meaningful metric on average. There is a reason why a lot of normies go on a rage when you talk about racial differences. It is because the implicit conclusion is some groups just aren’t up to snuff. You can say that is sad, but avoiding it like you are now is not a good strategy because most white people just have a misunderstanding of their own history. If we don’t acknowledge that there was something better about us that allowed us to accomplish so much, you’re accepting the antiwhite narrative of us simply being more evil than other groups. We want to get rid of ethnomasochism not reinforce it.
To be frank, like Sutter, I don’t think you have spent that much time around East Asians. China and South korea one can look at their advertisments and see how much white people in general are present. Also, they will intentionally pair Asian males with white women commonly. I have been around a lot of non-whites my entire life black men have an obsession with white women as do mestizos from south of the border. I had thought East Asians were different, but no going to their countries it is the same. China, in particular, has an obsession with breeding with whites they call mixed babies 洋娃娃. They think mixed kids are beautiful and mixed people are very popular on their app douyin.
You sound older about all the talk of white rightists wanting to be married to an Asian woman. A lot of white young men are attracted to anime because there is so much that is traditionalist in it. Many shows present masculinity in a positive way and are inspirational. This infatuation is obviously there to fill the void of not being able to have a positive male and racial identity. I agree there is a desire for East Asian girls to an extant, but I think that is due to lack of exposure and an idealization if anything.
Also, IQ is largely heritable. This is well established. I would say East Asia is probably making their best and brightest even better with their education. Education is like sharpening a knife if you have good knife you can make a fine edge, but if the knife is awful no amount of sharpening is gonna improve the edge.
Uhm…you DO realize white women have always been the most desired slaves by all races, right? And do you also realize that we have been exposed to decades of propaganda telling us how it’s normal to mix races? No other race is exposed to that kind of propaganda.
Naturally some people are going to succumb to it.
But taking all facts into account, whites are much more desired by other races than vice versa and they don’t shy away from taking it by force.
A while ago there was an article on this site–or it could have been a similar site but I believe it was here–saying the key characteristic of the black race was their belief in magic (and I don’t mean in some winsome way like in the Loving Spoonfuls song). I remember resisting it, thinking it was too glib, or something, but it stayed with me and now I think it’s true and maybe profound. From my reading and my experiences with them, I think it’s true that belief in magic or, at least, animism is so important to them that we have to consider it as a trait, maybe THE trait of theirs.
Seems like this could have been written today.
Blacks should have their own countries and run their own government, but sometimes they seem to need a fair-minded white arbitrator. Sometimes even blacks agree that whites should run their government. 83% black Detroit elected a white mayor, and Africans like George Obama often say their nations would be better under white rule. Black leaders the world over embezzle public funds and make them disappear. African nations have the highest gini coefficients on average, meaning they have the most economic inequality. It seems to stem from the black mentality more than any ideology.
I’ve been saying this for years. The biggest mistake was to abolish the colonies! By now the human rights movement would’ve had ensured Africans have the same rights as everyone else, but thanks to a white government they wouldn’t have faced so many wars and their overall standard of living would’ve been significantly higher that it is now. Needless to say the natural and human resources in Africa could’ve been used to improve humanity as a whole.
That is, of course, had Africa sticked to white governments as opposed to what happened in South Africa.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.