- Racism and the fight against immigration
- The dogma of racism - a free gift to the pro multicult lobby?
- Racial awareness - a crime or a natural phenomenon?
(How do we define the word racism?)
- Genetics or environment? - Tendencies in newer reseach
Racism (the word)
- Superstitious Catholic Idiots
- A defence for the right to hold racist convictions of superiority
- Family and race
- From family clan to race
- Racial awareness or 'racialism' versus racism
- 'Race means nothing at all' - theory or reality?
- The Development of Races
- Two extremely different cultures: Romans and Inuit
- Our children should look like ourselves, not like the mail man
- Appearance and Identity
- Does it matter at all if our genetic heritage disappears?
- Our own flesh and blood or purposeful breeding for 'quality'?
- Officially sanctioned racism
- The Author’s personal opinions
Click in left margin to get back to index!
Extra: 500 Years of Female Faces Video at bottom page
Racism and the fight against immigration
A provoking discussion around race and racism
Adversaries of immigration have routinely been accused of being "racists" from the very beginning of the discussion.
Since the awareness of the incredible and serious problems, which uncontrolled mass immigration has brought to the Danish and the European societies in general has risen, and resistance or at least skepticism about these developments has spread to a far broader political spectrum, these accusations have been some what toned down.
From the beginning most of the anti-immigrationalists with few exceptions have vehemently protested against being labeled with the negatively loaded word "racist", and have said again and again, that their protests definitively had nothing to do with skin color. Most of them have "sworn to their disapproval of racism", and have denied the importance of ethnic differences, and weighted cultural and religious differences as the deciding factors in their argument that mass-immigration is a threat to our societies, our culture and our way of life.
And this is readily understandable. The word "racism" roused associations to Nazism, persecution of Jews, slavery, repression of blacks, imperialism, colonialism, and a wide variety of atrocities of an almost incomprehensible magnitude.
The dogma of racism - a free gift to the pro multicult lobby?
In time this
"distancing one self from racism" has become some kind of unquestionable Law of Nature, a new paradigm, now being accepted by immigration promoters as well as their adversaries, with the exclusion of some groups on the "far right", and some individuals who thought it wiser to keep their thoughts to themselves.
Blonde Nordic girl
Is caring for our genetic inheritance really meaningless?
The question is, if we perhaps completely unnecesarily have given the multicult lobby some very important arguments, and have positioned ourselves in a corner. This almost entirely without a thorough debate about what the definition of "racism" really is, and without even taking into account if there possibly are legitimate arguments for considerations about the racial makeup of the population.
I will in what follows look a little more into the
concepts of racism, race, heredity etc. and present some arguments as a starting point for a discussion about the dogma which says that matters such as race, skin color and heredity by definition are completely meaningless, reprehensible and outrageous.
Racial awareness - a crime or a natural phenomenon?
How do we define the word racism?
We can start with looking at the word race. We do not want to become too academic, but look at it from a practical point of view. The term "human race" for example is not very useful, even though it is popular. In the English language we also have the word mankind, which is actually more precise when looking at it from a scientific point of view.
The right thing would be to define 'man' ('scuse me laydies) as a species. The Latin word for modern man is Homo Sapiens. For comparison, all domesticated dogs belong to the species Canis Familiaris.
weight ca. 2 kg
weight ca. 50 kg
|Same species, different races
In scientific terms, a race is a subdivision of a species. There are races (in English commonly called 'breeds') of dogs, pigeons, cats, chickens and rabbits.
The difference between a species and a race for our practical purposes is the following: Animals that belong to different species can not mate with one another and produce viable offspring that way1 while races can usually inter-mate and produce normal offspring. 1I know there are some exceptions, but most of the time this offspring will then be sterile, while inter racial breeding produces fertile offspring.
It is impossible to interbreed dogs and cats, or horses and cows. On the other hand, all dog races can mate and produce fertile offspring, without regards to enormous outward differences between them. A tiny Chihuahua and a giant Irish Wolfhound can produce viable and fertile offspring.
Some people may not like the concept of race when applied to humans, and would rather use words such as 'type' or avoid talking about it at all. But almost everybody knows very well what is meant by the word race, especially in those cases where the outward characteristics of ethnically different groups of people can easily be seen.
We could mention the Caucasian race (whites), the Negroid race (Negroes or blacks) and the Mongoloid race (yellow), all three of which are
different from each other. There are a few pitfalls though; Tamils (south India and Sri Lanka) are as black as Negroes (Africans) whilst they do not belong to the Negroid race. Their faces can actually show striking similarities with those of whites. Australian aboriginals although black do not belong to the Negroid group either, in spite of their color.
In order not to get caught up in too long a tale, I will define race as being defined by inborn (genetically defined) external characteristics, that differ between different groups of people.
Most of us will probably distinguish easily between mongoloids and whites, between whites and Negroes and between Negroes and mongoloids.
People with a trained eye and experience, will be able to even distinguish such closely related peoples as European Nationals from each other. I am pretty sure that I would be able to distinguish between Germans, English and Danes, in a statistic experiment with a sufficient number of subjects.
These differences will remain, even though these people would live in the same country for a number of generations sharing the same circumstances and culture, as long as they would not inter-breed. Still some characteristics that relate to prevailing ways of expressing emotion through the facial muscles, and the influence of speaking a given tongue throughout life would reduce the differences between external characteristics a little. (Culturally and / or linguistically influenced facial expression. Have you noticed the asymetrical movements of the mouth and smile commonly displayed by Americans? Cartoonists have for years..)
Beside these overt exterior characteristics there are also other inborn (genetical) differences between races which are less obvious.
|Armand Leroi, evolutionary biologist and researcher at Imperial College:
»..... race is not a social construction, but a real biologically based phenomenon.«
Neil Risch population geneticist at the University of California in San Francisco:
»Denying the existence of race as a biological phenomenen is a reflection of political correctness.«
from an article in Weekendavisen:
mere om forskerne og deres uenighed
Violence gene: The sentence of one killer in Italy has been reduced as he possesses a ‘violent gene’. Can DNA be used as a defence?
Genetics already plays a role in identifying the race of possible suspects, as in the ongoing British case of the Night Stalker. In that investigation, police have revealed that a genetic analysis of the Night Stalker’s DNA showed he was of Caribbean parentage. As the “violent” MAO-A variant is overrepresented in some ethnic groups, it is not far-fetched to think that a judge might take ethnicity into account when sentencing.
Some believe that the link between antisocial behaviour and genes is so strong that genetic information should be accorded the same status as mental illness or an abusive childhood in deciding punishment. In a 2002 report, for example, the influential Nuffield Council on Bioethics concluded that the use of genetic information to help determine custodial sentences (along with other information such as previous convictions) should not be ruled out.
Times Online 17 november 2009 - The Get Out of Jail Free gene
Some races tolerate strong sunlight (ultra violet) without being susceptible to skin cancer, have a higher or lower risk for catching certain diseases, or have a higher or a lower tolerance for certain chemicals such as alcohol and so on.
Some of these differences can be quite extensive and cause one race to need radically different dosage level when treated with certain medicine, or be expressed by differences in the age when menstruation and sexual maturity occurs. It can have also influence on how well one race or the other is equipped to perform in certain sports. These are scientifically proven facts most scholars agree on, and they can be discussed or written and theorized about, without offending anyone but the most ignorant or fanatical ideologically blinded dogmatic's.
When we get to the psychic and psychological differences it becomes a more sensitive issue, but it looks like there are clear racially determined differences in what is called 'intelligence' (though still a concept about which there is quit some disagreement). It would hardly be illogical to assume that there is a possibility that there also could be racially determined differences in other less researched psychic area's; the ability to fantasize, how anger is manifested how quickly, or with what strength a sexual impulse translates into action or whatever one could think of.
I want to stress that these examples are purely hypothetical, and no part of some conviction I hold.)
When we look at different breeds of dogs for example, it is clear that different breeds (races) are born with very different temperaments; from very good-natured to very aggressive, from quiet to very hysterical. Of course it plays a big role that breeds of dogs have been bred with well defined purposes in mind, and that the circumstances in which they are being raised and trained also influence the way the genetically determined differences will express themselves. With the foregoing in mind it seems logical that also in humans the natural conditions and the selection process which they influence may have caused similar psychological differences as seen in dogs, but probably to a much smaller degree..
I would like to insert here, that the differences in intelligence (IQ) which have been measured between different racial groups are only small statistical fluctuations that do not have much practical importance in everyday life. I don't know much about the exact numbers and percentages, but to me the slight statistical chance that I (being a white person) would possibly be a little bit more intelligent than the next black person, would not actually start me thinking of myself as being a superior being belonging to a superior race, and I am equally not bothered realizing that some Chinese had better chances to win an IQ contest over me.
One could also argue that some races possibly have inherited or developed a better health and are physically stronger, by for a longer time having be subjected to natural selection and survival of the fittest, than those races that have a longer history of conquering nature, using technology and benefiting from modern medicine.
This rather lengthy introduction was meant to help arrive at some kind of definition of the concepts and language used. Before I go on to the next subject "racism", I'd like to argue that much of what is being said here about race and inherited inner/outer and possibly including psychological traits, also has parallels in other area's such as culture.
Just as racial differences (physical make up /height) makes Chinese generally better equipped at gymnastics, acrobatics, table tennis and badminton than at basket ball, it is logical to assume that cultural differences have some (statistical and not absolute) significance for a long range of activities in different area's of life, such as the ability to go through an academic education, to sing and dance, to express oneself through ones body or to make love. I suppose nobody will deny that cultural differences of this type play a big role even between members of the same nation and race.
In our Western society this is often called for the Social and Cultural Inheritance. Japanese are generally very disciplined and have a statistical advantage concerning partaking in and absorbing demanding education than members of societies where values such as discipline, following rules and obedience are less prominent. Everything has it's pro's and con's, and it has been claimed that Japanese, in spit of these well developed studying skills and good results in IQ tests, are less creative in technological area's and less independent than for instance Americans, who are less disciplined, but are supposedly better at developing entirely new concepts and have the ability to play with things without necessarily having very stringent and predefined idea's from the outset.
Altogether we are left with a very complex mixture of heritage, culture, and environment, and there are perhaps even more factors than these.
Genetics or environment? - Tendencies in newer reseach
In contemporary research there are tendencies which indicate that genetic factors are of far more importance than has been assumed during the last decades, which have been heavily affected by an ideological and political battle. Dominating trends in sociology, psychology and anthropology have had an ideological, and often left wing or humanistic interest in leveling out or obscuring differences between races, cultures, groups of people, and even between man and woman. The aim was of course, to fit in and adjust their theories and findings to Marxist - or other popular political doctrines.
For a long time it wasn't welcomed to present scientific results which were in opposition to currently popular dominant ideological doctrines. Yes it has been suspect to even do research to the extent and nature of differences. Authors of books such as "The Bell Curve" have been subjected to suspicion and malign, and writers and scholars such as Prof.Helmuth Nyborg in Denmark have come heavily under fire as well. Lately substantial genetically based differences in intelligence between Danes and (third world) immigrants were found in a survey developed by the Danish Army Academy , which caused many self declared "humanists" to go berserk in their attempts to explain away the results with politically correct and thus convenient explanations.
That this time is not entirely over yet is illustrated by a recent episode where the Finnish scientist Tatu Vanhanen (and father of the former Finnish Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen) was despised and persecuted because of some scientific theories and conclusions he had presented. All the same I think that the scientific paradigm has changed significantly inside many scientific communities which have been careful to avoid the broad spotlight and confrontation with ideological trendsetters and cultural mandarins.
In the political debate these culturally radical pseudo scientific but politically correct arguments still carry weight, and are still dominating in society as a whole.
After all these introductory maneuvers we have finally come to the word racism.
Again I will choose a pragmatic approach.
In our modern day and age this word has had more or less this meaning:
That one considers other races than one's own to be inferior.
'Danish girls 10 cents'
Convicted for rape but why not for racism too?
In practice the word racism has almost exclusively been used in those cases where white people held this conviction, even though this form of racism is also found among many different non white peoples. The Japanese e.g. traditionally have a clear feeling of superiority towards other races. In those cases where circumstances force the media to exhibit racist convictions held by non whites they have used phrases like "reversed racism" or "black racism". These
ridiculous rhetorics once more confirm the existence of a deeply rooted institutional prejudice against white people as the sole perpetrators of evil.
Lately the concept of racism has been extended to also include a feeling of superiority over people with a different culture than one's own even where external racial differences have been small such as with Turks, Arabs, Persians and Jews, who in many cases can be just as white as native Europeans, and where the rest of the visible racial markers also differ little from those of European descent.
It's quit amusing that the concept of racism has been rarely used in cases involving Northern Europeans versus e.g. Italians, French or Portuguese, even though many of them can have a darker skin color and also differ in other outwardly visible respects.
Thus 'racism' is now mainly something found in, or practiced by white Europeans. Contributing factors are of course the racial theories and policies practiced by the Third Reich, but also by the English towards the native populations in the colonies, the regime of Apartheid in South Africa and by slave-owners and their descendants in the American South.
Ever since then the word "racism" has been very conveniently used to generate guilt among white Europeans - with the implicit purpose to further immigration and the building of a multi-cultural / multi-racial society, which is seen by some radical 'idealists' as a worthy cause in itself. Racial mixing (inter-racial marriage) was also seen as a sought after and valued virtue that deserved encouragement, because some good people thought it 'would end all wars'. Even Denmark ’s Conservative Foreign Minister Per Stig Moeller was fantasizing about forced race mixing in a book Utopia and Reality' he wrote during the 1970 ties 1).
As if ever one war has been averted between European Nations, between Hutus and Tutsis in Africa and between Indians and Pakistanis just because they belonged to a common racial group..
Superstitious Catholic Idiots
Would it be enough to define the concept of 'racism' as a feeling of superiority held by members of one cultural / racial group against people of other cultural or racial groups?
No, not really. If I called Italians or French for superstitious Catholic idiots, and boasted about our own fine superior Nordic industrious protestant culture, it would not be called racism. Before anything can be called 'racism' these days, there has to be a non European non white exotic element in the equation.
|The figures down here stem from a 1995 report from the "Commission for Racial Equality" (CRE - Trevor Philips), and were first kept a secret. Just like the anti-Semitism report from EUMC in Vienna which showed that anti-Semitism in Europe almost exclusively came from Muslim immigrants.
Total number of racist attacks: 381.000
White victims 238.000
Asian victims 101.000
Black victims 42.000
Needless to say: this report is nowhere to be found anymore at the CRE homepage..
In recent years there has been experimented with the concept of 'minorities', and now we have come so far that at least some people realize that racism can come from others than white Europeans. Some places in Europe even white people can now complain about racism committed by dark skinned people. Hurray! (An official British survey has shown that the degree of racist opinions in members of British immigrant communities is about seven times higher than white against colored racism!)
Progress can't be stopped, but in spite of these tiny steps forward the word racism still carries the implicit message that whites are perpetrators and any body from a little less white over brown to black are victims. An example of the outrageous difference there is when it comes to classify violent attacks as being racially motivated or not can be found in this pdf file from the British National Party where the treatment of two cases by the authorities and the press, one black and one white is being compared.
In the UK it is seen as racist, that the Patriotic Party BNP limits membership to
Britons (whites), while it is perfectly ok to have special associations for black, Muslim, gay, lesbian or Jewish police officers where heterosexual, non Muslim non Jewish whites are not allowed to join. A similar association of white police officers does not exist, and it would undoubtedly not be welcomed if some one tried to start one.
Still I suppose it is not (yet) against the law to 'be a racist', as long as one doesn’t tell anybody, but it is seen as despicable as long as you are white and is a good reason to take away your civil rights. For blacks and Asians who are racist, of course have a reason to feel that way!
After a number of well know people have been murdered, politicians and Jews have been threatened and harressed by Muslims we are slowly beeing allowed to speak a litle more open,
and in Denmark we don't get prosecuted (by the justice system that is..) if we are so bald as to say that our Christian culture is superior to Muslim culture,
(as our beloved minister of Cultural Affairs Brian Mikkelsen said recently) but not without protest from the ever vigilant defenders of 'humanist values' from the left.
click pic to see full size
Biological wisdom is undemocratic and discriminating
(Just so nobody gets the wrong idea; the short text right below is not by Brian Mikkelsen.)
Of course it is very discriminatory that men at bars and discos look for the best looking women first, and leave the pimpled, fat or breastless girls to play the slot machine. But perhaps a future socializing reform will deal with that problem too, and root out these anti-democratic male chauvinist instincts from the lower gut as well. For some, such as the leader of the Muslim loving Danish Radical party Marianne Jelved (pictured right) these reforms will come too late, unless
also old ladies will be protected by some future all encompassing anti-discrimination law. With a blindfold over the eyes and a double dose of government supplied Viagra the last remains of our lowly biological instinctive resistance to such an experiment may be brought to a halt.
But now back to being serious: It is forbidden to discriminate, which also means to 'differentiate' at least on the basis of the race, religion or culture.... of minorities!
Now I have been talking a lot about races and racism, and perhaps some readers are slowly starting to suspect that the author must be a vile racist himself, and that the whole purpose of this popular scientific chit chat is to promote a feeling of superiority over people of other races, religions, and cultures.
I will keep you in suspense a little longer.....
Jewish Girl Prank - Calls Her Parents
A defence for the right to hold race based opinions of superiority
All the same I'd like to defend the right to hold racist opinions for those who might hold them, just as the Catholic European Commissioner Butiglioni has the right to think (and say) that homosexuality is a sin.
Just as I said when I described some aspects of our biology's undemocratic nature when it comes to sexual attraction, such a feeling is in many cases something which is part of somebody's culture, belief system and/or identity.
By demanding that people give up these feelings, one is guilty of just that which one tries to fight.
It can be the most natural thing in the world for people from certain cultures, to think that their culture (or race) is superior to all other cultures / races, or even that all other cultures are sinful, dirty, appalling, offend their morals, or are disgusting to them in any other way.
This can be the case for a Catholic, a Protestant, a Muslim or a Jew. For a National Socialist the white race is superior by definition, the same way an orthodox Jew beliefs he belongs to "God's Chosen People”, and a Jehovah’s Witness beliefs all other people but Jehovah’s Witnesses will burn in hell when the Day of Judgment comes.
Family and Race
This worlds most 'germanic' countries when considering haplo groups (I1 + I2b + R1b-S116) [source]:
||Netherlands & Iceland
When His Royal Highness Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark at some time in the future will become King of Denmark it is solely because of his biological origin, just as Bill Gates' son will inherit an immense fortune, solely because of his 'ethnicity' as a descendent of Bill Gates. Both are examples of a preferential position which is based on biology (genetics), and are determined by law.
Race and family are, as we see demonstrated here, two sides of the same coin. It would be interesting if 'liberal' advocates for racial and cultural equality would also wish to abolish the utterly discriminating legislation which keeps this inequality in place.
The ideas of National Socialism as well as those of Orthodox Judaism are mainly based on race (genetics), as opposed to the ideas of Islam, Christianity and Buddhism, while Hinduism has a special point of reference; the Caste system, which is also based on birth, and thus genetics.
Something similar to the Caste system was/is still in place in European Royalty, nobility and extremely wealthy families.
Is this form of 'discrimination' more acceptable than e.g. discrimination on the basis of e.g. skin color and other external characteristics? And why is this form of discrimination not being addressed in any of the fine EU directives or UN's charter for human rights?
From family clan to race
White is beautiful !
In a country such as Denmark, it may be difficult to see immediately that family aspects and racial aspects are deeply connected, but let's have a look at countries such as Pakistan and Afghanistan. Here family clans are the pivots around which society is based.
These family clans are for the most part very much the result of inter-marriage of closely related people. This inbreeding results in a gliding transition between an extended family and a ‘race’, as anybody with some knowledge of animal breeding will know. In the breeding of domesticated animals closely related individuals are being cross-bred until certain characteristics become prevalent, and if the difference between this blood line and the original blood line becomes big enough, a new 'race' has been created. This way hundreds of races of dogs, cats, rabbits and poultry have been created, each of which can be very different from each other in their outward appearance, behavior and temperament.
I will hereafter define a race as: a collection of genetically closely related individuals with a certain number of characteristics, which set them apart from other such collections of individuals.
Does race make a difference? And is every attachment to race and biological descent a curse which must be fought?
Some people, like Lenin, Stalin and Pol Pot certainly thought so, and therefore did everything within their power in order to fight attachment to race, family, religion and tradition in order to replace it with the pure teachings of Marxism, in which everybody is equal and only has to answer to the State.
Racial awareness also called 'racialism' versus racism
Here we are slowly moving away from the old concept of racism, with one of it's most prominent features a feeling of superiority, and to over to the concept of 'racial awareness'.
A certain degree of racial awareness is probably inherited and existent all people as far as it has not been repressed with the help of conscious propaganda. Even though most notions which concern themselves with the concept of race are being denounced as criminal and reprehensive by the 'holier-than-thou', I have never heard protests from these circles over the slogan 'Black is Beautiful' or 'Black Power', used by Blacks in the US to boost their self-esteem.
Psychological studies have shown that in those countries where the choice of a mate is relatively 'free' an important factor supposely is how many characteristics the potential mate shares with that individuals mother in case of a male, and with the individuals father in case of a female. It may be here, in the in the early stages of the imprinting process racial awareness has it's root. The psychological studies I am refering to probably have individuals belonging to the same race as the subjects of their research, and this imprinting process is directed to differences of a smaller magnitude, than those found between different races such as Blacks and Whites.
A partial explanation of the relatively small degree of racial mixing between Blacks and Whites in the US, where a relatively large number of almost pure Negros still exist after hundreds of years of coexistence could be the relatively large differences in outward physical appearance.
Sonay Ahmad Mohammad
Murdered in cold blood
by her own father Ashraf, for
having a Danish boyfriend.
A similar fate strikes thousands
Muslim woman every year.
It is quit obvious that Whites in Denmark have fewer problems with getting involved with e.g. Arabs, Persians and Turks. (In these cases it is almost always the Muslim families who violently object to such connections, with threats, violence, abduction and even murder.)
Would it be possible that the less obvious racial differences play a role here? The socio-economical differences between the two groups (Danish versus Turks/Arabs) are if not as big as those between Negroes and Caucasians in the US, but still of a similar character, and the cultural differences are probably much larger, due to the deep division between the Christian and Muslim cultures, where the majority of Americans, Black or White still are Christians.
According to this theory, when it comes to the perception and appreciation of racial differences there are responses in individuals caused by innate properties or imprints very early on in life.
Thus one would expect that an individual would be more easily attracted to representatives for other races which have a greater resemblance one's own, than to representatives for races that look very different. There would probably be differences between the sexes in this respect as well. While a White male would be more easily drawn towards the average oriental woman than to a Black woman, this balance would probably be different for a White woman, since oriental men generally are too short and too frail to satisfy typical inborn or early imprinted female preferences.
What plays a role here, is that while an oriental woman for a typical Western European male appears as very feminine, because of her slender build, height and (lack of) body hair an oriental man who generally has less pronounced masculine characteristics, will not as easily be seen as a suitable partner by a White woman. It is common knowledge that woman prefer man who are taller and bigger than themselves and possesses strong male characteristics. When it comes to the unconscious, but therefore not less decisive biological instincts and impulses, a 165 cm tall Vietnamese man would not qualify very well as a possible mate.
Many white males on the contrary, would prefer a Thai or Philipino woman to a 185 cm tall Venus Williams, in spite of her being a pretty lady.
Where am I going with all this?
Yes, I would like to show that there are many big and small biological and sex related reasons for people to experiencing varying degrees of attraction connected to race, physical appearance and other differences even before we reach the area of culture and psychology.
Even the most convinced 'anti-racist person', no matter how 'liberal' they may be intellectually, can avoid being influenced by these biological factors.
Race means nothing - theory or truth?
A theoretical conviction to the idea of 'race means nothing' is not synonymous with not experiencing in some way or other, obvious differences between one race or another or perhaps even be influenced by such differences, just as most people are being influenced in their perception and appreciation of another person by factors like the symmetry of a face, the jaw line, the eyebrows, the qualities of facial hair, amongst others.
Oh those blue eyes!!
The reflexes and reactions which are triggered by outward characteristics can even be in complete opposition to other factors, such as the level of sympathy one may or may not have for a certain ethnic group or race. I can use my own experience as an example. Generally I quite like Africans (meaning Negroes from Africa). In my experience they are generally spontaneous, happy and friendly people, in most cases even though some of them could be Muslims. I am much more prejudiced against Arabs, not saying there aren't any Arabs I like at all, but I am trying to generalize from a statistical point of view.
Still I would certainly be more easily be physically attracted to an Arab woman, than to a coal black frizzy haired Negro girl, no matter the big white and very charming smile, which even triggers my immediate sympathy. Perhaps I am the only one with that experience, but I don't think so.
My conclusion is, that sympathies, antipathies, attraction and repulsion are beyond the control of the conscious mind, that they are in laymen’s terms, things I 'can't help myself for feeling', just as some men can't help being attracted to copious woman with big breasts, to the more slender type, in the worst case to other men, or even to red high heeled patent-leather shoes with mother of pearl ornaments.
It is completely legitimate to have, (or one might say to be subjected to) feelings like that, and it can never be subject to moral judgment or condemnation. If a white man prefers white woman to black, or vice versa, does not automatically make him a 'racist', and even a 'racist' could become atrackted to a person from another race, no matter his or her's ideals, convictions or beliefs.
The development of races
|A study by experts in Germany suggests people with blonde hair are an endangered species and will become extinct by 2202.
There are too few people carrying genes for blondnes. In order for a child to have blonde hair, it must have the gene on both sides of the family in the grandparents' generation.
Researchers predict the last truly natural blonde will be born in Finland - the country with the highest proportion of blondes. source: BBC
When we think about how different races have come into existence and have developed their outwardly different characteristics, one does not get around the idea, that apart from the different climatological and other environmental factors together with the degree of physical isolation of different tribes, there may also be more or less conscious choices that play a part.
Every society and every people or race has its own ideals of beauty and in societies where the choice of a partner is something which is at least partly influenced by the individuals involved, this will also result in the way that particular tribe or race develops biologically in time. According to the well known Darwinistic principles, men with a greater potential strength, health and power, and therefore with the best chances of providing for a larger number of children with a better chance of survival will choose those woman who are, depending on cultural ideals and the demands of biology, the most beautiful and the most suitable.
Depending on the exterior circumstances, the conditions of life, geography and biology, every culture will prefer certain types, and look at others as less desirable. A technologically advanced society, where plain survival is no longer the primary concern, will probably give a higher priority to outward appearance than a culture where people are mainly concerned with the fight against a harsh natural environment and bare survival.
In this technologically advanced society, it will be of less importance if woman have wide hips and strong legs, and are able to give birth to a great number of children, than in a society where chances for survival are not that good. In the latter society prioritizing facial features, figure, erotically loaded and other luxury items would be too costly. What is chosen is that which is biologically the most important: good health, and the ability to give birth to as much strong and healthy offspring as possible.
As an example we could look at the culture of ancient Rome, and at the Inuit culture in the Arctic.
Two extremely different cultures: Romans and Inuit
Roman society was characterized by abundance and luxory. Temperatures were comfortable, it was relatively easy to catch fish, herd cattle or sheep and cultivate the land in order to feed the polulation. Life or death were mostly decided by battle and fights between individuals and groups in stead of being decided by a common struggle against nature.
At least for the higher classes life was comfortable, there was time to practice many forms of artistic expression, to groom one self, and to rest. There was a strongly developed and complex social life, and much social exchange between many different people.
For the Inuit on the other hand, almost every day was dominated by the struggle for survival, only interrupted by long periods where people were confined to the igloo because of bad weather. Here the woman still had to work hard with needle and thread, chewing of leather and taking care of the children. Whenever the weather permitted it there was lots of work to do; hunting, fishing and travelling to new hunting grounds.
Inuit woman Qule
When confined to the igloo, social contacts were very much limited to the immediate family and a small group at the most. There was no luxory, and there was little reason and certainly not much surplus energy for war.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and thus a subjective matter, but would it be safe to say that in some imaginary inter-racial beauty competition the average Inuit woman would not score very high? Roman woman on the other hand would have had much better chances of developing towards some idealized form of beauty. The possibility of selection towards luxory ideals of that type would also have been quit limited because of the small available number of partners in the Inuit case.
Indeed, in case of the Inuit the genetical variation was so little that every opportunity to introduce fresh blood into the gene pool was seized; hence the 'wifes swapping' customs of the Inuit which has been described in literature. Now I talked a lot about the appearance of woman, but the same factors mentioned before will ofcourse also have meant something for the development of the appearance of the males, depending on the culture and the mating patterns of the societies involved.
Sold without guarantee!
What about cultures which traditionally kept woman veiled until they were "sold"? Would it be completely wrong to expect that development towards beauty ideals in such cultures could have been inhibited as well?
It seems to me Arab men are relatively better looking than their sisters.
We can continue this line of thinking and take the Vikings as an example. Wouldn't they have chosen only to take the best looking woman with them, as part of the loot after raiding villages and towns in the lands they visited, taking the limited space on their ships into account? Could it be that the legendary beauty of Scandinavian woman has been influenced by such factors, as well as by the comparatively free possibilities for choosing mates in the Nordic countries?
A fine product of many years
of conscious and sub-conscious selection (discrimination)
For the Nordic "Jacob" there was no "Leah" he would have been forced to marry first, before he could add the beautiful Rachel to his harem..
It can be easily seen that there are great differences in the average level of beauty in woman, even in racially and culturally closely related populations. Take a walk through the streets of Copenhagen, and through the average middle German town. I am sure most people will be able to note the difference. It is not only the hair color that makes the difference, but also things like the facial features, physical harmony, to be short the general impression which will set the average Scandinavian woman apart from her average German sisters.
Many of the above observations are simplified, and I do not even mention the countless other factors which could play a role.
These examples are only meant to support my general assumption that our appearance, just as our race is not just something entirely random, but part of a pattern, just as - and connected to our cultural development.
I sincerely apologize, should I with the above examples have offended Greenlanders or other members of the Inuit people, whom I very much love and respect. Appearance may not be the most important item, and ideals of beauty are also depending on one's own cultural background..
Our children should look like ourselves, and not like the mail man.
In a TV program broadcasted by the Danish Public Service station DR2 we recently witnessed the strong efforts of children who were conceived with the help of anonymous donors as well as adopted children, to find their fathers. Even though they were raised in loving families with surrogate fathers, the urge to know their own genetic roots showed to be incredibly strong. The testimonials of these children convincingly contradicted the politically correct theories which have dominated until recently.
DR2s Tema tirsdag den 19. juli 2005
Min Far er en sæddonor
Our individual and group conditioned partialities have played a role through the development of many generations.
It is commonly seen as natural that parents enjoy finding similarities between their children and themselves, and prefer their children do not look like the proverbial mail man.
People who suffer from conditions which prevent them from having children the natural way, try every other possibility such as artificial insemination, donor sperm, egg transplantation, and even surrogate mothers, just to have some kind of genetical connection to their future child, before when everything else fails, adopt some little frizzy haired baby from Africa, when it proves to be too difficult to adopt a healthy child of their own race.
An exception is the small group consisting of the intellectual holier-than-thou, who purposely adopt a child from a different race thereby reinforcing their own anti-racist goodness and acting out their ideals of a multi racial society.
Even though many probably wouldn't admit it after years of having been brainwashed and being scared away from displaying even the slightest sign of 'racism', racial concerns do play a role for most people. By consciously realizing this and admitting it openly they are afraid to categorize themselves as being morally inferior and "bad" people. This mechanism is exactly the same that kept some man from admitting their own homosexuality to others and many times even to themselves.
Appearance and Identity
Our external appearance is the net result of thousands of years of evolution, affected by factors such as culture, attraction, preferences and yes, love.... Our appearance and race are essential parts of our self-perception, a part of our identity. We can follow the outward appearance of our ancestors through photographs, paintings, sculptures and accounts from the world of literature.
Her hair is probably dyed, but also in southern Europe blonde is an ideal of beauty. I have chosen this picture not only for Alessandra's looks, but also to provoke the spinal reflexes the bare name probably invokes with some people.
I just can take idiots serious anymore..
Ok, I'll admit there is still a little Bart Simpson inside me somewhere.. Honi soit qui mal y pense..
Some poem describing a girl’s face, "her blonde hair which falls lightly on to her shoulders, her cherry mouth, a little freckle on her nose", will never mean the same to an African as to a European.
African woman’s freckles cannot be seen that easy, and what is "hair that falls lightly"?
Culture and race are more closely connected than many people would wish to admit. Our race and our culture are a project which our ancestors began, and which has not yet ended.
In a free society our children are the products of thousands of years of more or less conscious breeding. In times of war the purposeful practice of raping the woman of the subjugated people is one way to establish dominance and a way to destroy this people's racial integrity.
Characteristically the common spread practice of raping the woman of non believers is extremely popular among the followers of one of the world’s most aggressive cults; Islam. Muslim immigrants are infamous for this practice even in times of peace, all the way from Copenhagen Denmark in the Northern hemisphere to our southern antipodes in Sydney Australia, while at the same time relentlessly trying to impose their religion and culture on their host societies by other means.
Does it matter at all, if our genetic heritage disappears?
Would it really be completely trivial if our race and outward appearance would be replaced by a mixture of some coffee brown variety in the course of only a few generations? Would it be completely trivial if blue, grey and green eyes were something which could only be seen in old photographs, films and paintings, perhaps to surface in some families on rare occasions?
Would we have the same connection with our past, with our natural environment and climate, with our art and literature?
Because this is the way things could easily go, if no counter measures are taken. Negroid genes, frizzy hair and brown eyes are biologically dominant. Our White European characteristics would quickly give way in a mixed race, and leave us all with a strong Negroid stamp. Is it "racist" to concern oneself with matters like this?
If these concerns are "racist", then what about the overwhelming number of adopted children who when growing up start to wonder over their own appearance and become extremely interested in finding their biological origins? Why do they wish to search foreign continents to try and find their biological parents?
The European Race is threatened:
European woman produce to little offspring, a senior medical doctor warns.
Bad sperm quality, bad ovaries, very effective birth control and mothers who are too old. These are the main reasons why the European stock is threatened by extinction. This is the opinion of senior staff doctor Anders Nyboe Andersen from Rigshospitalet's (State Hospital) fertility clinic. European woman simply don't give birth to enough children, he says. He thinks we have to start acting now if we wish to maintain society as we know it today. Danish: Ekstra Bladet 10. July 2005
Is it not because our biological instincts are inextricably bound to the flesh and blood from which we originated, as is so clearly demonstrated by the example of the adopted children? Our relation to our own race is no more than an extension of this instinct, and is therefore of far more importance than the preachers of modern "humanism" would like us to believe. This of course applies to a higher degree to people who are in contact with their own biology and senses, and to a lower degree to people for whom rational and intellectual aspects are the predominant aspects of their personality.
An explanation for the assumption above is that wisdom, knowledge and the patterns of behavior which spring from our biology, are not as easily manipulated through group pressure, indoctrination (often disguised as education) and brainwashing techniques, as are acquired intellectual concepts and beliefs. It has been shown that the same woman, e.g. militant feminists, who for years have advertised the idea of exact male / female equality (sameness), often resulting in feminized male behavior, contrary to their own ideals actually themselves do prefer men who possess the completely opposite "alpha male" properties, as do woman in general.. Danish only: Dominante mænd er de mest sexede: biologien og dufte styrer.
Our own flesh and blood, or purposeful breeding for quality?
Suggest to even the most radical liberal couple, who are at risk of carrying unwanted defects in their genes, and suggest to them that in stead of having their own children, which would give them a chance to have a highly intelligent child and no risk for genetically disseminated diseases like diabetes or other ills. (This way the woman could carry the child herself after an egg implant or artificial insemination, and not have to sacrifice experiencing the process of carrying a child, giving birth and breastfeeding.)
I am quite sure most would say no thanks to this option. So it is clear that it is important to most people whatever their intellectual beliefs, that they carry on their own genes, no matter how the final biological quality of their efforts could risk to turn out.
Would it then not be logically to take this one step further and say:
If it so important for individual people to have children of their own flesh and blood, is it not just as important that the whole group to which they belong; e.g. the entire Danish population, uses it's energy and resources to further their collective genes, in stead of furthering the genes of random poor people from the third world, the inhabitants of Romanian institutions for the mentally deficient, unwanted babies from Vietnamese or Korean prostitutes, damaged children of drug addicts who have been abandoned in Brazilian slums, or whatever else may be currently available on the international adoption market?
Officially sanctioned racism Update December 22 2007: European Union Ideology based on Supremacist Theories
Trevor Philips - former BBC chief Now director for the agency for racial equality.
(Immigrant from British Guyana)
This friendly smiling fellow favors special treatment of individuals based on ethnicity. The same mentality is found among the leaders of the multiethnic propaganda station Denmark's Radio. Danish: følg linket og læs om indvandringslobbiens strategier.
It seems as if those institutions which are trying to further the anti-racist, multi cultural / multi ethnic society such as Denmark’s Radio in Denmark and the BBC in England, actually are much more aware of racial differences than their official propaganda would like to admit.
Beside the official objective to: "hire members of ethnic communities in numbers which are representative for their share of the population", these institutions also hire suspiciously many Danish or British born nationals of mixed or foreign race as well as immigrants. It has actually become a qualification in itself to be something else than an ethnic Dane or Brit.
It is to be expected that Danes of mixed or foreign racial ancestry in spite of a 100 % Danish cultural background will have a tendency to identify more with foreigners than indigenous Danes. The same goes for White people who have come to Denmark as refugees or are children of refugees. Shall we guess that Denmark's Radio, (or the BBC for that matter) classifies these people as "Danes" when the politically correct calculations to determine how many representatives for "ethnic minorities" will have to be hired to fill the quota's are computed?
This way it becomes quite easy to further exactly those political and moral views the organization subscribes to, and makes it practically feasible to have a far stronger representation of individuals with xenophile tendencies than by really hiring an average of the Danish population, immigrants included.
Every time the Evening News and other programs pan across a crowd, they inevitably focus on people of other ethnic descent (race) whether it has anything to do with the general subject or not. Should a black child be present at a royal event, like the presentation of Princess Mary's and crown prince Frederick’s newborn baby, one can be sure that this child will be in focus. Nobody can have missed the fact that Denmark's Radio and the BBC advertise all and any events which involve non whites. A music band with colored participant is sure to get attention and will be promoted. A completely colored band even more so.
Apart from that, this racist propaganda is very often also of a gender fascist type, where aggressive potent extremely black Black's are commonly shown together with extremely blonde large breasted girls who play the part of sex objects, where they often appear in numbers; the underlying message being, that the rich potent black rapper stud can choose freely among the white herd of eagerly waiting white females.
The opposite is seldom seen. Even in recruitment advertisements for the Danish Police a dark skinned foreigner appears together with a blond Danish girl in a patrol car, and certainly not the other way around. This could offend e.g. Muslims, who do not even allow their woman to mix with White Danish men. But the Danes are forced to accept seeing their woman alone in a patrol car together with a male Muslim immigrant, in spite of what is known about their general lack of respect for females and non Muslim females in particular, and the over representation of Muslims immigrants in the official rape statistics.
Racist thinking and practice is highly popular in the so called "anti-racist" media. Racism against the indigenous Danish people is also seen in the creation of special courses targeting "ethnic minorities" where these ethnics can be prepared to fill the dead certain positions in journalism, police, army, prison system and politics. It is called "positive discrimination" (affirmative action) but in reality it is nothing less than discriminations against ethnic Danes.
Not so well qualified subjects from "ethnic minorities" are preferred over better qualified Danes.
Even the state participates in these expressions of racism under the motto "integration policies".
Policies that are aimed at distributing the number of employees in the state, private companies or in politics on a racial basis are not only racist in itself, but are even more erroneous when one examines the underlying realities. If one takes the average level of education among immigrants and their offspring into account, the conclusion may very well be that these groups are already overrepresented in politics and in a number of organizations. Nobody complains about the classes of supermarket cashiers or dock workers not being represented in parliament.
Positive discrimination or affirmative action is already being officially implemented in the US with disastrous results.
At the same time we are listening to twenty four hours a day propaganda about how ethnicity does not mean anything; the racism of the Danes and the equality of all people.
But the propagandist media already have discovered, much earlier and better than many nationally inclined Danes, how important race and descent are to an individuals identity, for with whom one identifies, and for what goals one persues.
Apart from that many immigrant groups are as mentioned before far more restrictive than Danes when it comes to who members of their ethnic group but especially woman, are allowed to mate with. And we are not only talking about Muslims, this goes for e.g. Hindus and Vietnamese as well.
- There are several possible definitions for the concept of "racism".
- There are more positions on "racism" than a simple for or against.
- Racism is in no way exclusive to or practiced only by White Europeans.
- The fact that one attributes one's own biological / genetic heritage importance and ascribes it with positive values, does not necessarily mean that one holds other races to be inferior.
- It is perfectly okay to be conscious of one's race; to be racially aware.
- Nation, culture and racial composition are inseparable entities.
- What is commonly described as "racism" can also be understood as a defense for the biological / genetical heritage of a people.
- Whites have as much right to be proud of being white as Black's have the right to be proud of being black.
- The fact that some Whites at some time in history have used simplified race theories as means for oppressing other races is neither reason to feel guilt nor a reason to let ourselves be oppressed in turn.
- An ethnically and culturally homogeneous society has greater possibilities to develop solidarity and harmony, than a multi-ethnic / multi-cultural society, which will always carry the seeds of conflict.
- A society with a basis of solidarity can exist with ethnic and cultural minorities, as long as the numbers of these minorities don't surpass certain critical levels, and as long as these minorities do not crave or obtain equal status compared to the ethnic / cultural majority, or even obtains special rights.
- Militant racism from both sides increases relative to the percentage of minority group members in the population.
- The White European race is a minority compared to the world population, and is greatly outnumbered by Asians and Blacks.
- When comparing the larger racial groups1), it is only the White race which is threatened by extinction. (extinction = degree of race mixing where typical representatives of a race become rare)
- Only in those places where White people of European descent are a majority: Europe, USA, Australia, and Canada there is an influx of foreign genes big enough to finally cause the extinction of these people in their own home areas. (The role of the Europeans in the Americas, Canada, Australia and New Zealand as colonizers is recognized, but not accepted as an argument to let ourselves become the new victims for that reason.)
- Nowhere in Africa, Arabia, or in Asia is there a presence of Whites in numbers which in any way threaten the indigenous peoples existence as separate races.
- The biological urge to spread and further ones own offspring (genes) is by far the most important and basic natural instinct, which has pervaded all forms of life from the most primitive to the most advanced, since the beginning of evolution. Suppression of this urge is against the laws of nature and suicidal.
1) Smaller racial groups: Native Indian tribes, Inuit’s, Aboriginals, Maoris and other groups who exist in relatively sparse numbers.
We live in a world in which we make great efforts to preserve genetical variation as represented by many animal species and the survival of those species and even sub species.
Zoo’s have developed complex breeding programs that watch over the purity of various racial strains of captive animals which are threatened with extinction in the wild are being bred on order to ensure their survival and racial purity.
There sometimes significantly less external difference between various animal subspecies including strains of Danish salmon than there is between an average Italian and a Dane.
Snaebel / Snæbel (rare Danish trout)
100 million dkr, or $16 million or £9 million to save this species. But no such concerns for the native European human race, in spite of expert warnings.
About the project (Danish)
Why is the survival of the Bengal tiger as a separate subspecies, or of several Danish subspecies of salmon important, and subject to much attention and financial support (recently $ US 16 million or £ 9 million from the EU for saving a rare salmon the Snaebel) while at the same time even voicing concern for the survival of the European people is taboo and terrible?
A seemingly innocent species such as the European rabbit became a plague for the unique Australian wildlife, the same goes for the import of pigs, foxes and cats. They became pests, because the indigenous wildlife had no defenses against these foreign animals. This is why the import and subsequent introduction in nature of foreign fauna and flora is forbidden in most civilized countries around the world.
Why is it forbidden to use the same arguments against the import of alien tribes to Denmark (and the rest of Europe) whose members have a way of thought and patterns of action to which naïve, feminized and culture Christian Danes with their “turn the other cheek” mentality have very little defense, and are thus obvious victims for aggressive representatives and general expansionist strategies of these imported tribes?
My personal opinions
- I have no feelings of superiority which puts the European White race over other races.
- I very much respect many cultures and races, and do not by definition regard White Euro/American culture as being superior and better than other cultures / races. I actually am very critical of big parts of this culture, amongst other things of its suicidal tendencies.
- I am happy for the inspiration and input from other cultures and races, and experience many of these elements as an enrichment.
- I think that the racial aspect is a very important part of the European peoples, including Danish identity, and feel that extensive and ideologically motivated plans to stimulate or even enforce race mixing is a conscious and criminal attempt to undermine this identity.
- I do not object to a slow evolutionary mixing with people from other races, mixed marriages because of love of free individuals for each other and the influx of genes of other races into the general population, as was the case in Denmark thirty to forty years ago. But…..
- I do protest and object to the enforced and consciously staged revolutionary destruction of the European racial and cultural homogeneity with the purpose of creating an artificial racially mixed and multi-cultural utopian society.
Therefore I want to encourage all people of European descent, and especially the nationalists among them who "condemn racism" to reconsider the concepts of race and racism, and become aware of the fact that though “race” may not be the most important single issue in the on going cultural struggle, it still is an important factor which legitimacy deserves recognition and needs to be discussed.
Leave a comment on this article here: blog.balder.org immigration and racism
Important Update December 22 2007
In the article above which I think is about a couple of years old, I suspected that the so called anti-racist establishment and institutions actually are the ones who are actively supporting real racist policies on an organized basis.
The shocking discovery this month December 2007; racist supremacist theories and plans for a world government are the basis of the biggest anti-racist campaigner: The European Union.
My suspicion is now corroberated by the writings of one of the most important, if not the Founding Father(s) of the European Union.
European Union Ideology based on Supremacist Theories
1) Per Stig Møller "Utopi og virkelighed", 1973 (Stig Vendelkærs forlag)
s. 96: " Det blev raceblandingen tid. Blandede ægteskaber blev således påbudt ved lov omkring 2050. Ud af dem opstod en ny race, nye værdier, en ny verden, en ny civilisation "
s. 96: " Skabelsen af den nye fælles-race var den gamle verdens sidste, tragisk-heroiske indsats for at overleve. Det lykkedes. Den er mere hårdfør end nogen af de tidligere kendte racer, mere bred i sin forståelse. Det er, som om de tidligere racer blot har været forstudier til denne ".
s. 107: " Parrene rykker ofte hen, hvor de synes at kunne lære mere, og hvert syvende år skal de simpelthen rykke "
”... den eneste løsning er, at disse raceblandinger får fremskaffet de evner, der kan få os til at overleve. DER kommer tvangen ind, men det er som følge af, at vi lader stå til i den demokratiske sløsagtighed. Men i den endelige utopi, hvor vi har fået opløst tvangen og bureaukratiet, i det jeg kalder totaldemokratiet, eksisterer tvangen jo slet ikke. ”
s. 163: ”Ja, jeg skriver at man skal flytte hvert syvende år. Det er en regel i det samfund. Men det er en regel, der er til fordel for de enkelte borgere, ligesom skolegangen jo også er en tvang.”
s. 167-168: ”Og der vil jeg med tvangen og racen gøre opmærksom på - og det er efter min mening en meget modig vision - at mennesket kun gennem denne raceblanding får egenskaber, som kan sætte det i stand til at hæmme den vestlige verdens ekspansion, og samtidig give det fornemmelse af, at der er mere mellem himmel og jord, som andre racer har, og give det fornemmelse af fællesskab, som andre racer har."
Flere citater fra Per Stig Møllers "Utopi og virkelighed".
2) DRs strategi bliver bl.a. beskrevet i indlægget fra Lisbeth Knudsen
...Lisbeth Knudsen gik derefter over til at fortælle om DR’s arbejde med stafetten det forløbne år. En af de vigtige punkter var at finde ud af, hvorledes der kan arbejdes på at fremstille etniske minoriteter som en del af normalbilledet i den danske hverdag. En af måderne at gøre dette på, er at opbygge et kildenetværk blandt etniske minoriteter, så det f.eks. i en given situation vil være muligt at benytte sig af etniske minoriteter, der udtaler sig som eksperter på et givent område – og ikke kun når det drejer sig om forhold vedr. etniske minoriteter.... kilde
Other articles about the subject : (balder.org is in no way responsible for the content, or necessarily agrees with views presented on other websites.)
Update 21 februar 2008: Aktuel diskussion om racespørgsmålet med bl.a. Fjordman
The K9 Comparison—What Dogs Tell Us About Humans
September 2007 - Study: Humans' DNA not quite so similar
Elder Brother: The Great Race Debate by Arthur White, Ph.D.
Fjordman about Caucasophobia - Accepted racism
International diskussion om race og racens betydning
Rasisme, rase og innvandring av Carlos Bakke (Norsk Artikel der ligger ret tæt op af artiklen på denne side)
Ekstra Bladet: Den europæiske art er truet
Ole Kreibergs tanker om racens betydning øverst på listen
Sebastian Opgave - Indeholder foruden meget viden om bl.a. historie og Islam også nogle interessante tanker angående race, racisme mm. Ret genialt faktisk...
Races, Languages, and Eugenics
The Races of Europe
What is Racism? - Thomas Jackson
Stanford University: Racial Groupings match genetic profiles
Racial Nationalism - Simon Rigelsfords mening
Official Danish Army Report: Immigrants significantly less intelligent than native Danes
Article at VDare with many links to studies on the subject of race
The Racial Compact A call for Racial Preservation, Independence, Rights and Good Will
80% of Europeans Descend From Stone Age Hunters
Blog for British Nationalism
Richard Lynn - Intelligence and the Wealth and Poverty of Nations
Book review of “Breeding between the Lines” by Alon Ziv
I love blue eyes - Am I a racist?
|© articles can be freely copied for non commercial use if the originating website is mentioned. On the Internet this must be a direct link to the article. |Balder Blog