People usually underestimate the effect of genetics and biology on behavior. In general, about 80% of our behavior is determined by our genetics. Some Godless HBD scientists believe that this means that there is no free will. God-fearing Christians know better, of course. What it means is that not everyone's natural man takes the same form, but we all have the same commandment to reject it. And if we do, we have the same reward: 2 Nephi 26:33: "[H]e inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile."
What is perhaps more interesting is that over multiple generations, if society is structured so that certain behaviors are rewarded with success and others are not, that genetic predisposition to certain behaviors can change as those with behavior patterns that are not-optimal will fail to succeed enough to pass on their genetic legacy to future generations. This seems shocking, but it should be pretty basic and intuitive to anyone who's ever bred dogs, or horses, or any other domesticated animal, because it works the exact same way for them.
What it also means is that the form of the natural man can be altered if society is structured so that behavioral genetics change over time, and that certain natural man forms are more more destructive to society overall. This can strike one as cultural supremacy, but it isn't—although the Northern European Hajnal Line natural man makes for good neighbors, it's also supremely dysgenic and likely to have paved the way for society walking to the brink of self-inflicted destruction. The same could be said for the early Israelites or the Nephites, if the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon respectively are read with an eye for looking for that particular pattern.
Let me pause for a moment and give you two links that are relatively lengthy reads on the nature of HBD (human biodiversity). There's a huge wealth of technical literature on the subject, but these two links aren't really technical. They are, however, absolutely foundational to understanding much of what's going on in the world. The first explains much of why during the Old Testament, the Israelites were under such strict commandments to maintain their nation and their culture, undiluted with other elements (wisdom that we've somehow forgotten today. It's amazing that the charlatans and liars that make up Christianity today believe that this wisdom that's literally the main story of the Old Testament is somehow anti-Christian today.) The second explains the "pride cycle" as seen repeatedly in both the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon; quite literally, there is a scientific explanation for it in the r/K-selection theory. Better yet, go to the HBD tab up there at the top and read all of the references, but in the meantime, these two offer absolutely required context to understand what will follow..
https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/big-summary-post-on-the-hajnal-line/
https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/the-theory/rk-selection-theory/
Now that I'm back, and you've had a chance to hopefully read and absorb the information in those two links, let's examine the impact of those theories on a situation that's relevant today. I'd like to eventually do more of this with those two theories as the backbone to examine a number of socio-political situations that exist today—for instance, I've never gotten around to my Ephraim and Judah, part II where I examine how the behaviors of the descendants of the two are in an extremely unhealthy and dysfunctional relationship today that would best be served by letting the Jews have their place in Israel and Ephraim have their place in Europe and America and keeping the two of them at arm's length to reduce the opportunities for more mischief than we've already had, but that's a post for another day.
One of the most troublesome problems in America is what to do with the roughly 10% minority group of American blacks, which have never assimilated into America, never should have been brought here in the first place, quite honestly, but now that they're here, we've been trying (unsuccessfully, for the most part) to coexist peacefully by expecting that with proper education and appeasement (blackgeld, really) they will act like ersatz white people. They don't. And that's OK. Arguably, they shouldn't. Our culture isn't necessarily better than theirs, but it certainly is different, and the two don't mesh well and never have. Although Lincoln was both evil and wrong in most of his ideas, his belief, which was never adequately acted upon, that black and white America would never be able to live together in peace in this fallen world, and that they should be returned to their own place (he favored the creation of new black colonies in the Caribbean or Central America; a small number of them did end up returning to west Africa and founding the country of Liberia) was a good one that would have acknowledged that in this fallen world, separation of the nations is the path to peace, not diversity and integration, which reliably and predictably leads to prolonged conflict. Either the Caribbean or Africa would have been preferable to the unsustainable situation that we've been trying to manage since.
Anyway, this quote in the comments section over at the r/K home is an interesting one.
The movie [ed. The Black Panther] is anti-nationalist to it’s core and thus CANNOT be K: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/02/wakanda-is-israel.html
"There is nothing 'nationalist' about this movie. If anything, it’s about how a nationalist (T’Challa) learned that his nationalism was wrong."
Africa does not produce K-strategists any more than Hawaii does. The lack of winter means that you will never starve as long as you are willing to eat bugs. This breeds an r-selected low time preference into the population. Whites and [north] Asians had to figure out how to store enough food to last through until the first harvest of the next year. They had to process delayed gratification or they would eat all their seed crop before the end of winter and have nothing to plant after the snow melted.
American blacks lived in similar conditions in the American South during slavery, which actually reinforced r-selected tendencies within the population because as they were valuable property, they never had to worry about starving. All the r-selected tendencies stereotyped today were present during slavery, according to the Thaddeus Russell’s A Renegade History of The United States. Male slaves would often bounce between plantations, fathering children wherever they went, and then abandoning them to go back to their master’s house before they were in too much trouble.
And then emancipation, and suddenly the black man had to play to by white man’s rules, which were still K-selected, or he would STARVE. His children would starve. By WWII they had figured it out. The data from the 1950’s shows rising incomes, rising educational rates, lowering birth rates, higher monogamy rates than whites – in short fewer numbers of high quality offspring. So K-selection. Thomas Sowell likes to point to a cold war era study of the black children of American servicemen stationed in Germany that supposedly proves black children are just as capable as white children, but that’s not what it actually proves. It proves that [black] K-selects are competitive with other K-selects. That data proves that it takes multiple generations for K to become dominant within a population, but IT CAN HAPPEN. It did happen.
But their race remains far more vulnerable to r-selection, as evidenced by the drugs, promiscuity, and welfare dependency that the 1960’s ushered in that basically undid all the progress of almost a century in just ONE GENERATION. American black inner cities are now more less on the level of major cities in sub-Saharan Africa. Failed economics, obscenely high crime rates, aggressive dominant females, majority promiscuous single mothers these are the results everywhere blacks are allowed to reintroduce r-selection. By contrast, everywhere they are required to play by K-selected rules, they do so just fine.
If you want to fix the black population, take away the welfare. All at once. Shock the system. Let them find jobs or starve. Make them watch as the people celebrate the deaths of their single mother raised criminals. Never let up, never give any handouts. In one hundred years or so K-selection will dominate their race and you will get Wakanda.Now, I don't show you this quote to endorse the policy there. Just because you can mold the black population over multiple generations to one in which their natural man is one that makes for better neighbors than what it currently does doesn't mean that you should. I'm not here to tell you what you should or shouldn't do, or what you think is right. Personally, I value individual freedom too much to think that even benevolent social engineering is a good idea, so separation until such time as our cultures can mingle more freely and more peacefully is my preferred solution. And if they never do until the Millennial Age is upon us, the wicked are destroyed, and we get along by default because only the righteous are left and Satan is bound—well, that's an acceptable outcome, and better than many that are actually more likely to happen.
But if the theories don't tell you what you should do, they certainly do a great job of predicting what will happen under certain societal trends, if they remain unchanged.
EDIT: I'll add a bit about the Jews after all, a topic that came up in the wake of the Parkland shooting (a highschool that is dominated by rich Jews and poor minorities and has very few Heritage Americans, according to at least one report of a graduate.) From Heartiste (edited by me, mostly for language) who in turn quotes Jewish fellow Lawrence Auster:
"Given the wildly overwrought suspicions that some Jews harbor about the American Christian majority who are in fact the Jews' best friends in the world, it is not surprising that these Jews look at mass Third-World and Moslem immigration, not as a danger to themselves, but as the ultimate guarantor of their own safety, hoping that in a racially diversified, de-Christianized America, the waning majority culture will lack the power, even if it still has the desire, to persecute Jews."
That’s a highball of truth right there. The peculiar Jewish psychological profile of neuroticism coupled with psychopathy predicts this exact sort of behavior toward the majority culture. From a historical vantage, it’s incredibly short-sighted.
And we see this jewish predilection playing out in every imaginable way. Today, Jewish provocateurs assemble groups of child soldiers in Florida, following the de Jesus Cruz shooting, to agitate for gun control, which is really goyim control.
If the thesis that diaspora jews are most paranoid about a White Gentile uprising against them is true, then OF COURSE jews would want their Gentile hosts completely disarmed.
Yet instead of wisely reflecting on their own motivations and simmering resentments, jews prefer to take the moon shot of rendering the goyim toothless and impotent. [T]he goal of Jews and liberals is total disarmament of Heritage Whites. If it was about stopping violent crime, they would be all for effective methods like racial profiling and long prison sentences. But they aren’t. So they’re lying about their real motive.Some more quotes from Jews about being Jewish in America. First, Dr. Jacob Klatzkin, editor of the Encyclopedia Judaica.
"We are not hyphenated Jews; we are Jews with no qualifications or reservations. We are simply aliens; we are a foreign people in your midst, and we emphasize, we wish to stay that way. There is a wide gap between you and us, so wide that no bridge can be laid across it. Your spirit is alien to us; your myths, legends, habits, customs, traditions and national heritage, your religious and national shrines, your Sundays and holidays... They are all alien to us."Arthur A. Cohen, noted Judeo-American scholar and theologian.
"It is an apparent truism that the concept of the Judeo-Christian tradition has particular currency and significance in the United States. It is not a commonplace in Europe as it is here; rather, Europeans since the war have become habituated to speak of Jewish-Christian amity, to define the foundations and frontiers of community, to describe and, in describing, to put to rest, historic canards and libels. In Europe they are not addicted as we are here to proclaiming a tradition in which distinctions are fudged, diversities reconciled, differences overwhelmed by sloppy and sentimental approaches to falling in love after centuries of misunderstanding and estrangement. I need not speak at length here of the religion of American secularism, that uncritical Jacobinism which is neither fish nor fowl, and certainly neither Christian nor Jewish. Suffice it to say that such secular religiosity is correctly perceived by both communities to be dangerous; it is the common quicksand of Jews and Christians. And it is here that we can identify the myth. Jews and Christians have conspired together to promote a tradition of common experience and common belief, whereas in fact they have joined together to reinforce themselves in the face of a common disaster. Inundated institutions have made common cause before a world that regards them as hopelessly irrelevant, and meaningless. The myth, then, is a projection of the will to endure of both Jews and Christians, an identification of common enemies, an abandonment of millennial antagonisms in the face of threats which do not discriminate between Judaism and Christianity; and these threats, the whole of the Triple Revolution—automation, the population explosion, nuclear warfare—these are the threats which evoke the formation of the myth.
"The threats are real and desperate, but patching-over will not, in the long run, help. Patching-over can only deteriorate further what it seeks to protect. The Judeo-Christian tradition is an eschatological myth for the Christian who no longer can deal with actual history and a historical myth for Jews who can no longer deal with the radical negations of eschatology."And Nesya Lieberman, granddaughter of former Senator (and notorious Fake American) Joe Lieberman:
"Jews have been praying for a return to Israel for millennia, and I'm fortunate enough to live in a time when such a return is possible. Why would I live anywhere else? Israel is my home."And a small selection of Twitter responses when Fake American and Fake Conservative Ben Shapiro, who's only true principle ideology seems to be "Let's get America to fight some wars that benefit Israel, because I sure don't want Jewish kids to have to fight them." when he freaked out over "Judeo-Christianity."
Heather Anne@cler_morgaine
Judaism and Christianity are both *Abrahamic* faiths. The term 'judeo-christian' is used to to fake religious pluralism while excluding Islam, which arguably has more in common with both than they do each other
Dr. Ramone, Esq.@melvinramone
Judaism rejects the core premise of Christianity. You're making up facts.
Cornelius Rye@CorneliusRye2
It's literally not. It's a very recent invention by YOUR PEOPLE. Jews have very little to do with America pre-WWII.
JOHNMEYER@JOHNMEY28401489
You represent Talmudism. Different thing.
#BroniesForTrump@GWSSDelta
White evangelical Christians' rate Jews 69 out of 100, but Jews rate evangelical Christians 34 out of 100. I look forward to the day when Christians wake up from the "Judeo-Christian" "greatest ally" con and realize that Jews hate them.
Emprah'sFinest@SamHydeShooter
Please tell me which of the Founders was a Jew.
Deplorable Unum 🇮🇹@deplorable_unum
Wrong. America predates the 20th Century, when the "Judeo-Christan" term first appeared. Stop trying to rewrite America history, little Benny.
The Forgotten Man@_ForgottenManKeep in mind that the modern Jewish faith is a literal descendant of the Pharisees whom Christ explicitly condemned, via the Talmud, which took Phariseeism to almost caricaturish levels.
As many of the presidents of the past have said, "This is a Christian nation." The Judeo-Christian makes no sense, Judaism and Christianity are two very different religions.
http://www.truthtellers.org/alerts/pedophiliasecret_reprint.html
There's a reason that all of the now dissipated (so it seems) energy around the #MeToo panic made many Judeo-Americans nervous. Even Larry David noted it, and said so during a Saturday Night Live monolog, that there was an "uncomfortable" degree to which "tribal" names were associated with the molesting of American women, girls and boys. And then, naturally, he tried to invoke the spectre of the Holocaust as a defense mechanism to try and keep people from noticing what he had just pointed out by guilt-tripping them (ironic, given that the Americans are the ones who pulled the Jews' collective rear-ends out of the ovens that we should be able to feel any collective guilt about the Holocaust, but for whatever reason, it appears that we do.)
One of these days, I'll post some info—primary source info—that raises some pretty uncomfortable questions about the Holocaust narrative, and then point out that even asking historical questions about the Holocaust somehow causes a bizarre descent of shrieking harpies, and it's literally been criminalized to look into certain historical questions in most countries in the West. What exactly are "they" so afraid that we'll find?
But for now, let me just reiterate a few of the 16 points.
4. The Alt Right, as a philosophy rooted in Western Civilization, desires to preserve it and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Graeco-Roman legacy.
9. The Alt Right believes that the hierarchy of decision making employed by humans is identity > culture > politics.
10. The Alt Right is opposed to the rule or domination of any native ethnic group by another, particularly in the sovereign homelands of the dominated peoples. The Alt Right is opposed to any non-native ethnic group obtaining excessive influence in any society through nepotism, tribalism, or any other means.
11. The Alt Right understands that diversity + proximity = war.See, the fact is; the Jews have never really assimilated into American society. Oh, sure, plenty of them live here and work here, and have managed to use their nepotistic tendencies to rise to positions of influence in various rent-seeker occupations, after which they promptly started attacking and destroying American cultural and legal traditions, to the point where the American film industry, American education industry, American political industry, and American financial industry actively work to cripple and fleece the American people, and the American courts actively mangle the Constitution to mean the exact opposite of what it says.
But I don't necessarily begrudge the Jews for being Jewish in their culture and behavior. I do, however, think that it's best by far for both the Jews and the Americans if the Jews were Jewish in their culture and behavior in Israel rather than in the West.
Diversity + proximity = war. Peace between the nations is best obtained by the same method that peace between neighbors is maintained; by respecting boundaries and having good fences.
"Judeo-Christianity" is nothing but the Satanic ideology of secular humanism with a Coexist bumper sticker slapped on the back of it.
And I say this as a guy with at least a small degree of Jewish ancestry that I know of, from the Swiss Jewish (or formerly Jewish) John and Thomas (his son) Yonn in the early 1700s. I suspect that the Yonn's abandoned their Jewish identity almost immediately, if they hadn't already, since Thomas married an English girl in South Carolina after coming here, and there's no record I can find of his descendants having practiced Judaism or having not married local Christian girls.
However, it was sufficient that my paternal grandfather's patriarchal blessing declares him to be of the lineage of Israel, but not of any specific tribe as "the blood of Israel is mixed in [his] veins"—a rather singular pronouncement that I've never heard of anywhere else. And one of my own sons was declared to be of the lineage of Judah in his patriarchal blessing; something that normally only happens to converted Jews. So again; I don't begrudge the Jews their Jewishness, but I recognize that the mixing of Judah and Ephraim has had rather catastrophic consequences for the descendants of Ephraim, which will likely rebound at some point against Judah as well, unless they can stop vexing Ephraim, and go home to their homeland where they belong.
Read 2 Nephi 21 (which quotes Isaiah 11), particularly vs. 13 for more confirmation.
13 The envy of Ephraim also shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.
