Sunday, February 17, 2019

Race: Why Liberal Globalists and Communist Revolutionaries Agree There Is No Such Thing

CanSpeccy, October 6, 2014: Liberals and other agents of the New World Order, like hard-line Communists, are revolutionaries who seek to establish a system of global governance. The difference between the two is that the globalization aimed at by liberals will subordinate all humanity to the moneyed elite, the bankers, the billionaires and the chiefs of the giant corporations, whereas the Communist revolution will serve the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, which is to say the Nomenclatura for whom tyranny means thousands of comfy bureaucratic jobs with lots of power and privilege.

To both classes of revolutionary, the great obstacle to their dream is the nation state that declares the right of the people in any geographic area with the means to defend themselves to rule themselves as they see fit, which means maintaining control of the borders to prevent occupation of the territory by invaders or an uncontrolled flow of immigrants, and the preservation of the religious and cultural tradition of the people.

To the revolutionaries, there is a simple solution to the problem of the nation state and the desire of the vast majority of the people of the world to live among their own kind in accordance with their traditional manners, morals and forms of governance. It is to insist that there is no such thing as the nation, that all humanity is one race, and that it is simply bunk to claim that the English, say, have a privileged status in England, or that the Amerindians of Canada have legal and moral rights to control over their traditional lands and the freedom to live on those lands according to their own beliefs and traditions.

Liberals and Communists are thus in agreement on the need for universal genocide, which is to say the destruction of the nation state and its underlying human biological and cultural diversity. As a cover for this project, which is to be fulfilled through mass migrations, multi-culturalism and the suppression of the fertility of indigenous peoples, both liberals and Communists deny the reality of human racial diversity, for in the absence of such diversity, both the the nation state and the crime of genocide become meaningless concepts.

The war on the concept of race appears now to be heating up with the publication of multiple books on the subject the consequence of which is the creation of ever greater confusion and misunderstanding.

Among the more recent contributions to this great obfuscation is A Troublesome Inheritance, by Nicholas Wade. As a former deputy editor of Nature magazine and a one-time writer for Science magazine and the New York Times, Wade has pretty good credentials as an obfuscator of basic science for political purposes as anyone with long experience of those publications with which Wade has been associated would know, and obfuscation is what Wade provides in this book.

Race, Wade acknowledges, is real, but then proceeds to lay it down as a matter of fact that there are only five human races: black, white, red, and yellow, plus Australian aboriginal. Thus he either deliberately muddies the water or demonstrates that he doesn't know what he is talking about. Making it impossible to know whether Wade is merely confused or is acting as a globalist shill, he never defines the term "race," thus his more or less arbitrary five-fold division of mankind serves to reinforce the popular misconception that race is largely a matter of skin color, whereas in fact skin color is by no means definitive of race. For example, sub-Saharan Africans, Dravidians of the Indian sub-continent, the Australian aborigines, and some Amerindians are all more or less the same color, but they are by no means closely related. Conversely, there are thousands of white Africans (albinos) who are definitely not Caucasians.

Race is a matter of kinship. To define the term formally, a race is an interbreeding population (human, for the purpose of this discussion) more or less completely isolated genetically from other populations by barriers of geography, politics, class, caste, or religion.

Defined thus, we can see that the tribalized people of black Africa are far from being a homogeneous group, but rather, are among the most diverse people on earth and may encompass greater population-level genetic variation than all other human groups combined.

Thus, as Wade notes, since 1980, all Olympic 100 m finalists have been of West African origin. But that does not make all black people fast runners. An East African on the Barak Obama model will never outrun a Jesse Owens over 100 meters, although an African of the latter type will never outrun the fastest East African over ten thousand meters.

But it is not just black Africans who display great diversity. Traveling over any significant area of the populated world one sees regional differences in the physical traits of the indigenous peoples: scull shapes for example, brachycephalics predominantly in North West Spain versus dolicocephalics in Southern Spain, or hair and eye color, to take another example, from dark-haired, brown-eyed Celts over most of the Scottish Highlands, to blond, blue-eyed people of Viking descent in Caithness in the remote North East of Scotland, and other coastal areas of settlement of the British Isles.

So racial differences can be seen at multiple levels. Between a Chinese and and Englishman, or a Glaswegian and an Edinburghian, and indeed between any two places where migration has not obliterated the pattern of genetic variation established during many generations of past reproductive isolation during which genetic drift, selection and random mutation have wrought differences among gene pools.

What these differences really mean, no one knows. Certainly Wade's presumptions about racial differences in psychology and their impact on the historical development of the world seem speculative to the point of absurdity. Yet such differences may indeed be important. Sadly, the globalist revolutionaries are intent on creating a global melting pot that will make all indigenous peoples a disappearing minority in their own homelands and wipe out in a generation or two potentially important racial aggregations of genes created over 100,000 years of human evolution.


Universal Genocide and the New World Order

Why and How Western Elites Turned Against Their Own People

In Praise of Diversity

No comments:

Post a Comment