SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
No bio...
User ID: 853
You sorely underestimate how quickly evolution happens. It only took a few very silly ideas to become memetically enshrined in our collective consciousness to radically alter the genetic trajectory of the United States. And that's only within our own lifetime.
Evolution does not take hundreds of thousands of years. Events like the Black Death, Feudal Law which likely led to a genetic pacification of European people due to persistent executions of something like 2% of the most criminal population annually, will change a population within several generations. The feudal system likewise brought higher TFR for the upper classes which functionally led to the genetic replacement of the lower classes and the emergence of a Middle Class. You cannot ignore the millennia of evolution in Europe and assume that they are selecting for the same type of personality as in Indonesia, or that these differences are not radical enough to lead to powerful selection effects. They absolutely are.
And I've already presented a very clear example of memes becoming genes in the form of the Jewish religion, although I don't mean to single Jews out because we are all products of the same forces, it's just one of the clearest cases out there of myths and symbols leading to the selection of types of people, and not over tends of thousands of years, either- much faster than that.
High-power eugenics techniques are coming to fruition
Embryonic selection is not high-power, it is extremely low power. High-power eugenics is filming a Movie that convinces people they should be really concerned about demographic change and organize to mass deport illegal immigrants to keep the country majority white. Or making a movie that convinces them they are an evil person if they care about racial demographics (high-power dysgenics!).
Embryonic selection cannot hold a candle to the high-power eugenic technique of planting an idea into the heads of the collective consciousness. And the rationalists most eager to pretend that something like embryonic selection is a substitute for the harder task of memetically challenging the Culture are just proving they are still slaves to it just the same.
One case where I absolutely am sold on this, though, is thinking that eugenics on personality traits has a large potential to explode societies that practice it.
What is religion and culture, if not a mechanism for coordinating the breeding behavior of the masses? Culture itself is eugenics on personality traits. So when we talk about European culture throughout the ages, including the innumerable pressures on those populations (Kingdoms and Empires, Black Death, European feudal system, etc.) that is synonymous with discussion of eugenic selection for a European type. In the Roman era that culture looked different in some ways, but similar in other ways, to Christianized Europe.
Another, more explicit instance of this, is Judaism as a eugenic program for the selection of a Jewish type. The myths, the rituals, the symbols held dearly by the flock, actually lead to the formation of a type of person. One of the myths in Genesis is the patriarch of the Jewish people, Jacob, using media and "culture" to direct the breeding behavior of a flock of sheep, which he inherits by making them all speckled. Of course, in the bible flocks of sheep are symbolic for people. This is ancient and esoteric knowledge.
So given your own premises, accepting this fact, you should have an extremely high prior probability that people who were selected throughout the millennia in Asian culture are not the same as people who were selected in European culture, because culture is nothing except a program of eugenics or dysgenics depending on the frame of reference.
In the same way, my chief concern is dysgenics, not on maintaining a stasis that has never really existed. What would a eugenic culture look like in the 21st century? That is the question that concerns me, not maintaining homogeneity or something for its own sake, and certainly not a myopic obsession with IQ nationalism like you see in the rationalist sphere. At the same time, I am extremely concerned with a culture that accelerates dysgenic behavior and dysgenic changes in population.
One cannot easily imagine that at all. From the Roman destruction of Judea to the Zionist project, international Jewry has only survived and been molded by its symbiosis with Aryan civilization (with Israel revealing the contradictions of Jewish Nationalism, owing to that fact). Assuming that Judaism, an extremely peculiar type of religion which is a rote race worship that is nearly extinct in the modern era, would still exist without European adoption of Christianity is an extremely tall order. It very much helps that the entire Western world came to accept the Jewish framing of their own identity and even allowed them to live among them as foreigners. Without Christianity I do not think Judaism has a chance of existing because the myths that congeal Jewry together have a lot less potency if 99% of the world doesn't believe them, or treats them as superstitious, supremacist, and hostile, and a lot more potency when everybody is convinced of the truth of those myths.
It's easy to feel like you are Chosen when the entire world civilized world accepts that as true.
There was an e-debate on Rumble yesterday with Nick Fuentes on one side and a Jew teamed up with Christian Zionist Gavin McInnes on the other side. Gavin's reaction to the news that it is common for Jews to hate Christianity more than Islam was hilarious. Pretty funny Gavin's own debate partner admitted to preferring Islam to the Christian Zionist's religion.
But there's a deeper level, some Jews properly understand Christianity as Judaism for Gentiles (and Islam too, for that matter). Christianity is the only reason Judaism exists today, owing to the station and mythological power that the Christian religion concedes to the Jewish people by accepting the Torah and Covenant as divine truth. Christianity was also the force which clashed with the idols and myths- indeed, the fabric of civilization, of pagan Europe. There are Jews who like Christianity for the role it has played in this dynamic and understand how crucial the adoption of Christianity has been for the station of Judaism.
UPDATE: Also Checkout My Addendum to The Real Banned Book list on Holocaust Revisionist Liturature
I think this is on the mark, and in some ways it is even more dubious than your "the building collapsed, how would you prove a diabolical mass execution immediately before the collapse." It would be that plus:
- All of the evidence for the diabolical mass execution was in the custody of an enemy-conquering power (the Soviet Union no less).
- The conquering power has been proven to have fabricated material and documentary evidence in other cases of collapsing buildings, including providing eyewitnesses and confessions for mass executions the conquering power was actually responsible for.
- The conquering power refused to allow any international observers for their investigations concluding that the building victims were murdered by diabolical top-secret executions.
- The ally of the conquering power conquered the western half of the country and made the exact same accusations for buildings that collapsed there, even delivering flashy propaganda videos supposedly documenting alleged cases to international tribunals, which were later admitted to have been false.
You mentioned your interest is piqued, the best overview that gives a fairer representation of both sides you will find anywhere else is a Revisionist work published in 2020 called Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides. If you read 1 published Revisionist work to understand the modern position, it should probably be that one although it's a prolific body of work and there are many other works as well.
That's a work geared toward a general audience, but the works which are most demonstrative of the rigor of Revisionist research are mostly done by Carlo Mattogno. Although they are much more specialized and technical they tend to be too dense for a casual reader, i.e. Auschwitz: The Case for Sanity (2010).
These are books that can no longer be found anywhere after the publisher was ejected from all printers and distributors on the heels of the recent UN Resolution.
"Racist" was never anything else except a post-WWII and post-Holocaust framing of "sinner" suited for the 20th and 21st century. That's the point Hoffmeister was making. It was always that from the very beginning, it was never at any point anything else. That's what the word is.
Sinfulness encompasses belief systems too, Amadan.
This is like us arguing over whether BAP is a sinner. If I reject the religious system that frames sinfulness, I'm not going to say "yeah BAP is totally a sinner" I'm going to say "can we stop trying to use the word 'sinner' to pigeonhole beliefs when we should all frankly know better? Sinfulness isn't real, the label is a mechanism for mind-control and behavior-control." This is what Hoffmeister is doing.
The word racism, like the word "sinfulness", exists insofar as it is a mechanism for controlling the minds and behaviors of the laity. So you can argue that sinfulness exists all day long because there is a religion that has a dictionary definition for it, and it lays out a clear set of criteria for the behaviors that constitute sinfulness. That doesn't interest me, my interest is in dislodging the mind-control broadcasted by that word.
You can reject the religion that labels nonbelievers infidels
Yes, this is my exact point. If I reject a religion that labels me an infidel or heretic, I am not going to accept that label to describe myself or my own beliefs. This is really basic stuff, nobody does this, except for farming upvotes on /r/atheism which falls under the "intentionally provocative" mode of embracing that label only as a power flex.
I reject the religion that frames the entire concept of racism which, by the way, relative to world history is a brand new concept tightly coupled with our own post-WWII civic religion which is exactly what we reject. "Words have meaning", exactly, which is why it is stupid for you to demand that I accept the framing of a religion that I reject by embracing that word to describe myself. Words have meaning, so I refuse to play along with that garbage and humor a religious fanaticism that I oppose.
I'll take a closer look at the full list. Great piece by the way, I'm sure I'll be coming back to it more than once.
It was a war in which 70 million people died, mostly civilians. That fact doesn't really help us answer the question of whether this bathing and disinfestation facility in Majdanek really was used to gas Jews, or if Revisionists are correct that it was used to disinfest prisoners and delouse clothing. Revisionists are obviously correct given the incredible amount of physical and documentary evidence they have procurred in their study.
I've read stories about entire family trees snuffed out in Gaza. If I accused Israel of gassing Gazans inside gas chambers disguised as shower rooms, you refuted that claim, and then I replied "I know people who have had family die in Gaza" what would you think of me? Probably that I have an irrational attachment to an implausible narrative.
I don't have to imagine I'm an atheist, I am, and I'd happily confirm that I'm a heretic
That's very brave of you, you could write "I am le heretic!" all day long and get updoots on Reddit.
If someone though is sincerely accusing you of being an infidel or heretic and you confirm their accusation you are accepting their frame of reference.
When you say you will "happily confirm you are a heretic" it's a "what are you going to do about it?" play. But if you actually lived in a society where that accusation had weight and social consequences, and you opposed the conventional wisdom for what entailed heresy, you would not accept that label for yourself or use it to describe your beliefs.
I think a good comparison is the word heretic. Imagine you are an atheist and a puritan accuses you of being a heretic. Do you say "yes, you are right I am indeed a heretic." Only if you are trying to be provocative, but really you would just dismiss the entire frame of that question. No, I'm not going to admit to you that I am a heretic, I'm not going to accept your frame of the world by embracing that label, I dismiss the label altogether.
I think Rush Limbaugh coined that one.
Because Zyklon B was a life-saving measure. Even the non-Revisionist Jean-Claude Pressac estimated that 97% of all Zyklon B at Auschwitz was used for delousing clothing to prevent the spread of epidemic typhus. Of course Revisionists contest the idea that 3% of that supply was used to murder millions of people inside gas chambers disguised as shower rooms, but the point is that even non-revisionists accept that the vast majority of the use of Zyklon B was for the purpose of disinfestation to prevent the spread of epidemic typhus. Zyklon B was used across the entire Reich at nearly all concentration camps, not just the 4 "extermination camps."
The Soviets investigators, Nuremberg reports submitted as evidence in trials, and Majdanek museum all identified the Bath and Disinfestation building as the center of gas chamber extermination, but after the Revisionist technical study they admit that the rooms in question were used to delouse clothing with Zyklon B, not gas prisoners, indeed as a lifesaving measure.
Yes, he discussed the literature and linked to a 1981 bibliography. There is a very large volume of newer published works which precipitated the large-scale Amazon book bans of hundreds of volumes. He explained why he did not include them, it's too large a category and much of it is too technical for a casual audience. I am suggesting a banned Revisionist technical study on Majdanek, which has an accompanying Banned video.
It's a great list, I'm certainly not complaining he didn't just list a bunch of Revisionist books, I just think it's an interesting addendum given this recent work directly caused widespread censorship reforms on Amazon, YouTube, Facebook, etc.
I know @KulakRevolt gives a headnod to Holocaust Revisionist literature in his article without specifically including it. But given that Holocaust Denial was basically the first class of political content to be banned from YouTube, and the first class of book political content to be banned from Amazon books, I would be remiss if I did not specifically mention banned Revisionist materials that are responsive to your interest.
This is especially the case because the long-time publisher of the Revisionist written literature recently declared it was suspending operations and restructuring the business. This is on the heels of some extraordinary suppression efforts of Revisionist written material, including growing censorship laws in the Western world and very recent UN Declarations demanding member states actively combat this material.
So, one example of a banned video related to a banned book is a video on the Majdanek Gas Chamber Myth released by the same publisher of a banned book on the same study. Any reasonable person who is willing to spend a few hours can see that this is a clear case where the banned book provides a more truthful interpretation of history than what passed as official history of an alleged gas chamber extermination camp. This is only one such case of dozens of volumes from the same publisher, which are all more banned in the real sense of the word than anything else Kulak has on that list.
It turns out, there was a measurable genetic change due to non-European migration to Imperial Rome immediately before its decline and collapse (which was later completely erased by the barbarian invasions). I'm not saying that is going to happen in the United States, I'm saying BurdensomeCount is the Arab merchant who shows up in Rome in 300 CE and claims he is taking his rightful place in the Roman hierarchy.
I'm sorry, do you realize how recent the mass immigration of cognitive elite in University, tech. etc. actually is? Absolutely none of what you mentioned can be attributed to the impending demographic replacement of the cognitive elite. So they have no "rightful place", it's just an experiment to see what happens when we replace the cognitive elite that built Western civilization with a cognitive elite that built worse civilizations in other parts of the world.
Who says I'm not trying to adapt? I can be accused of a lot of things, but not trying to adapt isn't one of them.
Specimens that fail to adapt and lose the game get selected out
Exactly, which is why the system itself is so important. Let's not pretend this system isn't a brand new upheaval and that it was always set up to be this way. It wasn't, they are only now allowed to join in on this Western hierarchy at this point, this is a grand experiment with a lot at stake.
I know he's being tongue-in-cheek provocative when he says "higher fit humans taking their rightful place near the top of the western hierarchy", and I greatly prefer that banter to 2rafa's "the real British are the people who drink tea and attend Wimbledon". But I'll respond in kind: the Western hierarchy was built and was at its long best before this suicidal sociological experiment that has graciously allowed him to pretend he is one of us.
You linked an older thread, this is his thread from yesterday and yes I think he's on the mark. IQ nationalism is a failure mode of HBD awareness.
Thus although an alliance is posited on blogs between "high merit high IQ" groups on one side, and Congoids on the others, it was actually the experience with Han Mandarin parody of "education" that ended meritocracy at least in college admissions and that really gave venal libtarded collitches the license to engage in full-scale ethnic cleansing against native-stock Americans. It was a process already under way for some time, but this accelerated it beyond anything. And I did not exaggerate when on previous threads (I can't find now) I estimated that whyte, straight non-Ashk American born males who are not athletes, not legacies, are maybe 2-3% of student body of "elite" skrewls now. If that. That estimation isn't an exaggeration, and I can explain how you can come to that figure. That's insane. And it's mostly due to the cowardice of the libtarded professors (and few conservatives, who also never spoke up) who let basically ethnic cleansing take place, whereas they could have opposed it even on purely liberal antiracist grounds.
So you really think the US doesn’t look any different if large scale immigration from Ireland and Italy never happened? That seems ridiculously unlikely. And there is still evidence that different white gentile demographics vote differently, and Irish and Italians are still overrepresented by some margin at the top of the Democratic Party compared to other gentile white groups.
I do think the US looks different without large scale immigration from Europe but that's not the question... I would mark "assimilation" not as there are no longer any demographic correlations but as their identity not being salient in culture or politics. Some families identify on a surface-level as Italian or Irish as family lore or aesthetic, but it's not a salient part of the American political struggles. This is in sharp contrast with Jewish identity which continues to be an extremely salient component of political and cultural life.
You just don’t agree that it’s assimilation because Jewish intermarriage is predominantly with progressive white gentile elites (many indeed of Irish or Italian descent), who obviously don’t share your politics.
I think my definition of assimilation as the identity no longer has saliency in political or cultural struggles works here. Look at the CW thread, issues of Jewish identity and advocacy come up all the time (and it's not entirely my fault for that either). They are politically, culturally, geopolitically extremely significant. Do we get to look forward to Asians and Indians behaving the same as Jews, retaining an intense identification with their actual (and not even fake) homelands and ethnicities?
Asian Americans have intermarriage rates of about 30%. So maybe?
I won't pretend to be able to predict the outcomes of the impending Hapa ethnogenesis, but early results do not at all look promising. What I will say is that this is monumentally more significant than the integration of European groups which are all much more similar to each other than any of them is to Asian populations.
It's almost comical because all of this shows how correct the DR's model of the world is.
European groups come to America. They retain demographic differences but assimilate into the White identity of the nation.
How can any reasonable person possibly compare that to the impending Hapa ethnogenesis? We aren't even talking about assimilation, we're talking about ethnogenesis. It's also fair to relate the assimilation of European groups as a white ethnogenesis.
That's why this is all more significant than childish loyalties to a non-existent "meritocracy." The real question is the question of ethnogenesis and its civilizational implications, and it's only the DR that actually appreciates that.
You set up this system, and now we're beating you at your own game!
Actually, the system was set up explicitly to keep you all out, you can be the top of the hierarchy in your own nation and see how that works out. Only very recently did that change. But it certainly was not how the system was set up, and not the system under which western civilization was actually created such that there are uncountable numbers of people like you begging to join it.
I definitely took issue with BAP's last post, but I do agree with this one. Why would it be childish nonsense to identify the replacement of the cognitive elite of a civilization with racial foreigners (in 1 or 2 generations no less) as anything other than extremely significant? Can you think of similar events in human history where this happened that were not the result of conquest or colonization?
It's more childish, although more socially acceptable, to pretend like this doesn't matter or mean anything significant because of "meritocracy" or something.
Italians and Irish are European, and they completely assimilated. Identifying the assimilation of European immigrants to bank on the assimilation of non-European immigrants seems childish to me all right... the DR says that there's a racial component to the ability to assimilate. The DR also says that Irish and Italian are European. You say that DR is wrong because the Irish and Italians assimilated, that does not follow.
Blacks did not assimilate. Neither did Jews, their retention of their ethnic particularity continues to be highly significant in American politics, and very arguably detrimental to non-Jewish white people, unlike Italian and Irish identity.
Are Indians and the Chinese going to actually assimilate like the Italians, or are they going to behave more like Jews?
I imagine there were more than a few Germans who were born and remembered life under monarchy in the German Empire. Then they witnessed the fall of the monarchy and transformation to a Republic after the abdication in 1918. They lived in the Weimar Republic and witnessed the fall of the Republic to a fascist government under Hitler. Then the fall of National Socialism to a Communist government. And then the fall of Communism to a liberal Democracy. You have to wonder the cynicism that ideological thrashing would build into a person, and the gullibility of the people who truly believe "finally, we have reached the Truthful Solution."
Liberalism is only successful because its adherents truly believe in it and cannot imagine anything else. The second it's regarded as anything other than an inevitable endpoint, or universal truth, is when it is going to fail.
More options
Context Copy link