Multiculturalism: For A Race That Will Accept Tyranny?

Rootless, spiritless underlings are desirable. A mestizo race of rootless cosmopolitan simpletons is the cultural-Marxist goal, in order to flood the West and balkanize the electorate to eradicate the voting power of those who still identify with their nation.

By introducing foreign groups with foreign propensities globalists can buy votes for their internationalist supranational brand of politics.

You also buy the apathetic, unintelligent genetics that will allow that internationalism to take hold and keep its grip; from there the globalist agenda is unclear — a nihilist consumer society, or one (eventually) guided by the principles of Luciferian Freemasonry, with all humankind under their boot?

This isn't a hypothetical conclusion - this is seen around the world in all nonwhite nations - the inhabitants and their unfavorable genetic behaviors and inclinations are being mass-imported into Europe as I write this. The EU is a sociopolitical welfare "paradise" designed to attract this mass immigration.

[caption id="attachment_16914" align="aligncenter" width="364"] Multiculturalism eliminates the races adapted in their own environments with their own cultures and customs. It destroys the vibrancy of true diversity; people living in their own nations with their own kind under their own laws and traditions.[/caption]

Asians/Indians are an ideal race for an underclass to be ruled over.

Asians/Indians (and to a lesser extent, Africans) are the best population to rule over if you're an Elite presiding over them. They have three major desirable traits to tyrants; passivity, lack of creativity, and moderate intelligence.

They have a proven record of being less resistant to tyranny — it's no coincidence that their cultures never birthed or maintained liberty, freedoms, and constitutionalism in any meaningful form whatsoever. So how can we expect them to uphold it in Europe? The answer is they likely will not only not do so, but due to their lacking social empathy — won't care to do so.

The People's Republic of China is a prime example of where tyranny has been allowed to flourish by a race of (mostly) gormless, submissive conformists, that lack the necessary creativity, general intelligence, and empathy to question, address, and maintain a healthy state and nation. Their conformity has assisted them though, as their in-group preference has been impenetrable to outside forces. While lacking creative faculties, the Chinese are intelligent enough to create a global industrial powerhouse, albeit at the expense of its workers' standard of living.

An example of racial advantage across national boundaries, as seen with Jews in the West - is in Indonesia, the Chinese Indonesian community make up 3% of the population, but control 70% of the economy.

In the Republic of India, similarly to China, a form of modern slavery is also in effect - people work long hours for barely any money - here, it is money, not wellbeing, that is the objective. An estimated IQ of Indians (from the subcontinent of India) living in the UK is 93, about 7 points below the average Briton. In India itself this figure is lower due to environmental reasons (lower standard of education, etc). Adding environmental factors; radiation, fluoridation, a sedentary lifestyle, additives, pesticides, vaccinations, chemtrailing, and brainwashing - and this figure is potentially lowered yet further.

These nonwhites are more easily exploited by multinational companies that disregard their quality of life, directly linked to their lower IQ - they fail to effectively unionize or ensure political systems defending individual rights. The Indians, as well as the Chinese, Africans and Arabs, generally accept this servitude - no glimmer of push-back or revolution as seen in France with the yellow vest movement. Nothing at all. They are at a lower state of consciousness, more firmly tied to the baseness of human animosity than whites.

Tyranny will reign over any nonwhite population. As evidenced around the world already.

Or, what whites consider "tyranny" is acceptable and tolerable to other races who don't generally practice values of liberty or constitutionalism.



The r-K selection theory is a theory which argues that different species face a trade-off between high rate of reproduction (r-strategy) and extensive care for their offspring (K-strategy). Humans may be the most K species of all.

J. Philippe Rushton applied r-K selection theory on human races and argued that human races differ regarding their degree K-strategy, which is argued to explain many racial differences.

He further argued that Europeans and East Asians evolved more toward a K-strategy than Africans because of a colder and more predictable climate and environment. Rushton argued that the survival challenges of making warm clothes, building durable shelter, preserving food, and strategically hunting large animals all selected genes for greater intelligence and social organization among the populations that migrated to cold climates.

Nonwhites tend to have no or few biological traits responsible for an expression of healthy individualism, as informed by a more K-selective profile — because of this, their version of sociological collectivism is inherently conducive to tyrannous rule — and allows a substantial measure of corruption to pervade their societies.

Some Asians are reasonably intelligent, but very susceptible to societal norms, they generally lack the useful "collective individualism" of the white man.

They are very passive and will tolerate a lot of nanny-statism. They're reasonably smart so you'll get enough people to man the high IQ positions in society like that of a surgeon and professor. But most of all they're happy to live in overcrowded cities in their shoebox apartments where they can content themselves with the latest gadgets and takeout.



They cram themselves into overstretched public transport and civil services. They work for peanuts and won't complain about paying obscenely high taxes, let alone ask where that money is going.

The bottom line: nonwhites are overwhelmingly apathetic, uncreative unquestioning consumers concerned with their immediate needs. Whites are questioning creative empaths and social gadflies; able to challenge systems, norms and institutions and have the foresight to make necessary amendments, having a more innate ability to effectively organize themselves.

[caption id="attachment_16913" align="aligncenter" width="629"] The typical rush hour in the Asian third world. In any self-respecting white nation there would be an uproar at such poor standards.[/caption]

A race that was forged under cold, scarce and other unfavorable environmental limitations is the only option for preserving freedoms and civilization.

The Nordic and Germanic white race are the single race forged most aptly under scarce conditions, their descendants have created nearly all in the world of note. Is it any wonder Germany is known as Das Land der Dichter und Denker (“the land of poets and thinkers”).

Their stock built the economic, social, and political systems and machinations that define the modern world. All races adapted to their environments, whether that was in body or mind or a mix of the two. But in the modern era the white man emerged as the most advantageous breed of hominid. It is undeniable that either the salvation of eugenicist policymaking is accepted, or the world slips back into the dark ages; a cluster of primitive warring states - until the graces of eugenicist evolutionary selection - or otherwise - enable a better course for human sensibility.

Their propensity for order, creativity and healthy individualism generated the most advanced society known to man; their track record is undeniable. It makes sense to be a white advocate.

The book "Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950" stated that "Whether measured in people or events, 97 percent of accomplishment in the scientific inventories occurred in Europe and North America" (white people).

No whites, no civilization.

The IQ researcher Helmuth Nyborg wrote in 2012 that "The bleak situation is characteristic of the rest of Europe too, perhaps with Eastern Europe as an exception. [...] Ethnic Europeans will soon be wiped out of their own countries by this ever-expanding colossal demographic transition. Their national average IQs go down in the process, and when an average national IQ of 90 is reached, down go also their democracies and welfare. This also happens to European-Americans in the US. [...] To sum up, not only Denmark but Europe and the US get dumber by internal dysgenic decay and by northbound mass-immigration. This will have catastrophic consequences for Western democracy and welfare, but non-Western countries will also suffer. Unfortunately, most ruling (left- or right-oriented) Western leaders are not only seriously misguided by the illusion of equality but also blatantly ignorant of biological realities, so they can’t see the elephant in the room. They eventually will, but that will be beyond the point of no return."

Marxist-globalist Utopians think race-mixing will create human equality. It won't work as they envision it. 

Journalist Peter Hitchens once said that “The problem of utopia is that it can only be approached across a sea of blood, and you never arrive.”

Either Marxist-globalists want a slave class or they genuinely want to "guide human reproduction wisely", as stated on the Georgia Guidestones. The latter I'd prefer to the former. The outcome of their international experiment is yet to be fully seen, the prognosis is worrisome though.

DNA Co-Discoverer James Watson's Honours Stripped Over His Factual Comments On Race

The Nobel Prize winning co-discoverer of DNA, molecular biologist, geneticist and zoologist James Watson has been stripped of his honours over his scientifically informed comments on the genetic IQ differences between the races.

In January 2019, following the broadcast of a PBS television documentary which was filmed last summer in which Watson repeated his long-held views on race and genetics, the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory revoked honorary titles that it had awarded to him, and cut all remaining ties with him.

This is the state of science in the Western world.

The now 90-year-old, who was conveniently targeted in a smear campaign at an opportune moment; is currently in a nursing home recovering from a car accident that happened last October, and is sadly said to have "very minimal" awareness of his surroundings.

His family stated that he is unable to reply due to his condition. This is not a man who can readily defend himself and the scientific basis of his views, he is physically not able to fulfill his right of reply. 

Therefore, it is the responsibility of other intellectuals and other public figures and the public alike to come forward and defend Mr. Watson's reputation in the face of the liberal "scientific" establishment and ongoing media campaign to discredit him — despite his monumental achievements and utter credibility in the field of genetics, from which his comments stemmed.

In the new documentary on PBS celebrating his life, an interviewer asks the 90-year-old scientist if, given the backlash he suffered after his comments about race and intelligence, his views had changed.

His answer leaves no room for uncertainty:

“No, not at all,” Watson says. 

"There’s a difference on the average between blacks and whites on IQ tests. I would say the difference is genetic.”

He has also previously said that stereotypes associated with racial and ethnic groups have a genetic basis: Jews being intelligent, Chinese being intelligent but not creative because of selection for conformity, and Indians being servile.

His informed stance is unwavering, Watson won't budge, stating that his intention was to promote science, not racism:

"I have never thought of myself as a racist. I don't see myself as a racist. I am mortified by it. It was the worst thing in my life."

Despite his protestations, which fell on deaf ears — they want Watson and his public profile scrubbed from all scientific literature and thoroughly vilified, in the midst of a car crash incident, they have gone for the jugular.

On "Anti-Semitism"

Watson has also brilliantly opposed the idea of Jewish exceptionalism. No group ought to be immune to the rigor of open discourse. Another likely reason why the Jewish dominated establishment has decided to discredit him; he dared to be epistemic.

In another interview in 2007, this time with the magazine Esquire, Dr Watson said that “some anti-Semitism is justified”.

“Just like some anti-Irish feeling is justified. If you can’t be criticized, that’s very dangerous. You lose the concept of a free society,” he said.

In the same interview he praised Ashkenazi Jews, suggesting they are more intelligent than other ethnic groups.

Watson is factually correct. But not "politically correct". This is another chapter in the dystopian censorship of our time.

The Coming 80 IQ "Precariat" Slave Underclass

The admixture of poor genetics and the subsidization and subsequent rise of poor genetics with the genetic quality of the de facto ruling class remaining the same will mean the rise of a precariat, ~80 IQ underclass ruled over by a ruling class about 30-40 IQ points (Ashkenazi Jewish IQ) above the average 80 IQ person — if the threat of eminent genetic & amplified social stratification doesn't sound problematic, I don't know what does — especially when it is well documented in scientific literature that genetics largely define us characteristically; and, on the macroscopic level, the characteristics of distinct nations of peoples — nearly every reliably measured psychological trait, especially IQ, is significantly influenced by genetic factors.

To look at at on an individual basis is too short-sighted, it's like saying "let's allow the third world to flood into Europe and assess them all as individuals" — ah, by which time the vast bulk of the deviant swathes have established themselves as parasites and run rampant. It's impractical to be too liberal on matters like this; a meritocratic, and most importantly pragmatic immigration policy is needed, a migrant comes to work, they have a purpose here, they are assessed on their qualifications and due placement in wider society — to accept a large group from a region known for its poor genetics and third world tendencies and to hope to assess them all as "individuals" is a pipe dream.

There must be compromise, sometimes absolute acts are necessary to solve partial issues.

Today's open-door migrant policy-makers know very well that most of the third world migrants won't be employed, will disproportionately commit the most crime, will disproportionately be welfare claimants; the statistics prove it (e.g. all available studies find that non-European immigrants to Britain cost about $10 billion/year).

Thus the authorities duck away when asked to list the background of migrant criminals, the media preaches how it is "irrelevant" to question the demographics behind society's major negative trends.

Mass migration is not about economics, or even assisting an ageing Europe (pro-natal policies can easily amend that) this is about replacement, nothing less — the installment of an uncouth, dysgenic rabble that is more easily ruled over, the New World Order wants boots on the ground, a large impoverished workforce that will fall in line — third world African and Arab migrants offer this.

The imposition of the third world (generally poorer genes) on the first world (generally better genes) by force, under the cover of a hard-fought establishment propaganda campaign claiming "integration" and "assimilation" can happen between racial groups of greatly differing intelligence (it can't, by the way) — combined with the safety net of welfare guarantees, means the proliferation of bad genetics — I predict this will soon mean the average person's IQ will be 20 IQ points lower than it currently is in the Western world within the next century.

Nature naturally classifies itself implicitly; nature herself has established inequality of minds, of characters, and capacities — elite-funded social justice is attempting to bury this truth; that inequality is inherent in nature and is inevitable whether we like it or not — those in power know this, their social campaigns have had us forget that "equality" is a farce, only they benefit from "equality" — allowing different incompatible groups equal say is asking for tribalism to take hold, making it easy for picking apart with sensationalist rhetoric and demagoguery in the democratic process, diversity is balkanisation of the electorate with the media pitching the groups against one another, rich versus poor, black versus white, man versus woman — any modicum of reason is lost in the process.

They claim the African is just "oppressed", never given his chance to shine — they blame the white man for oppressing the other races, when it was just nature taking its course. The strong, naturally, found their way to dominance — the weak faded away, or took on a lesser role.

“The earth continues to go round, whether it's the man who kills the tiger or the tiger who eats the man. The stronger asserts his will, it's the law of nature." — Adolf Hitler

It harms the best of us, and emboldens the weakest; forced "equality" is forced redistribution, a way of keeping a homogeneous underclass, and its overlords' positions, intact — because of this, it comes down to how we can best practically mitigate inequality in nature in a sensible way — a comprehensive eugenics program should be important in ensuring the biological stratification of humans doesn't become yet more divergent and yet more damaging to collective human freedoms, civility, and intelligence — any given society is the average of its individuals, do we want to pursue a Western world populated by below average individuals (who are allowed to vote, by the way). Is it wise to degrade the average individual? I don't think so.

Our negligent allowance of the mass importation and subsidization of poor genetics while knowing that these people know nothing of freedoms, nothing of human rights, nothing of free press, basic liberties and so on (they don't seem to value them, either) — and, they are living apart from those who could influence them positively; their ignorance is being preserved and legitimized, they pass on nothing of value to the new generations that will follow; the third world social bubble ensues.

How will it vote? How will it shape the West? Will it stand firm in individuality, or cave to crony collectivism? I think most of us can see the collision course in motion.

---

How is the new ~80 IQ model citizen created?

80 IQ point average is an optimistic number.

To find the new average IQ, just draw up the average recorded scores of the major ethnic groups arriving in the current "migrant crisis" P.S. it's called a "migrant crisis" to hide the fact it is completely orchestrated.

The newly introduced groups will settle and proliferate faster than native Caucasian populations and rise to demographic prominence.

Conversely, native Caucasians will either engage in miscegenation, or dwindle due to the falling white birthrate, compounded by organised social and toxicological affronts to white fertility.

Let's look at this graph; the major countries of migrant origin include Syria, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Albania, Iraq, Eritrea, Serbia, Pakistan, Ukraine, Nigeria, Somalia, Russia, Macedonia, Gambia, Iran, Bangladesh, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Senegal.

The non inter-European migrants are mostly Arabian and African in origin, both of these regions have a combined average biological IQ in the 70-80 region, as a previous article outlined; that's barely functional in society, literally baseline functionality.

Some of the most oppressive and thoroughly corrupt regimes have been in countries of races maladjusted to holding such power to account.

• Look to China with its one-party system with elections now recently discontinued, the people live as slaves, subjected to extreme censorship laws and a brutal regime that will not hesitate to crush dissenters.


• Look to the nations of Africa, military dictatorships that have no civil order whatsoever; it's pretty much always been that way.


• South America is the same story, drug lords rule here, imperial Western interests hold big sway in agreement with the cartels.


• And so on...

In the West — there is corruption, I'm not denying it.

But it is largely held at bay by an inquisitive, constitutionally switched-on populace, the West is more free than anywhere else for that reason alone — why else is it the premier global migrant destination? Because the people have defended their rights to property, to free speech, to self-determination — albeit not their banking systems and many areas and decisions of their government.

It's the last holdout of liberty and true individual prosperity in the world.



Causes of national differences? (Mostly) genes.

Sources: refer to this webpage.

• Since the 20th century, there have been worldwide continual increases in measured IQ. This rise has been correlated with degrees of rising education levels, and as such may provide a partial explanation for observed differences in average IQ scores between nations. One recent study suggests that the Flynn effect has ended in some developed nations such as Denmark and Norway, and suggests that this is due to immigration from countries with lower education levels or due to changes in education policies within the countries. Wicherts et al. have suggested that national differences in IQ could be because African countries have not yet experienced the improvements that cause the Flynn effect in the developed world, such as improvements in nutrition and health, and educational attainment.


• Kanazawa writes that cold climate and harsh winters (the study uses mean annual temperature) as well as environment novelty (the study uses three different measures of distance from the ancestral environment in sub-Saharan Africa: ordinary distance and differences in latitudes and longitudes) have been proposed as important factors behind the genetic evolution of human intelligence. The study found independent support for both theories and argues that they together explain half to two-thirds of variance in national IQ. This study has been criticized by Wicherts et al. (2012) for multiple alleged flaws, including assuming that the Earth is flat, and that humans migrated in the most direct possible route, even if that route involved crossing the ocean. They conclude that these flaws "...should have precluded publication of the paper as constituted at the time of review."


• The sub-Saharan African IQ estimated from TIMSS studies from 72.4 to 65.9, rounded to 66.


• The present research found that the Muslim country mean IQ of 81 is half a standard deviation below the mean IQ of non-Muslim nations and is not related to strength of Muslim culture as defined by the percentage of Muslims in the country. The mean IQ of 84 in Arab countries is not associated with per capita income and is incompatible with the intellectual achievements of the golden age of the Muslim Empire. Possible explanations for this decline include hybridization with sub-Saharan Africans, dysgenic decrease in the more educated Muslims employing birth control as suggested by Meisenberg, the Muslim religion not fostering critical thinking, and the intellectual contributions being both exaggerated and made by non-Muslims.


• Wicherts, Borsboom, and Dolan (2010) criticized this and some other evolutionary studies for problems such as ignoring or assuming that the Flynn effect is equal worldwide and assuming that there have been no migrations and changes in climate over the course of evolution. "In addition, we show that national IQs are strongly confounded with the current developmental status of countries. National IQs correlate with all the variables that have been suggested to have caused the Flynn Effect in the developed world."


• Eppig, Fincher, and Thornhill (2010) states that distance from Africa, temperature, and most importantly by a large margin, prevalence of infectious disease predict national IQs. Education, literacy, GDP, and nutrition were not important as independent factors (however, the prevalence of infectious diseases is likely greatly affected by these factors). The authors argue that "From an energetics standpoint, a developing human will have difficulty building a brain and fighting off infectious diseases at the same time, as both are very metabolically costly tasks" and that "the Flynn effect may be caused in part by the decrease in the intensity of infectious diseases as nations develop."


• Becker and Rindermann (2016) found a moderate correlation between genetic distances, particularly with respect to geographic latitude, and cross-national IQ differences, even when controlled for factors such as Human Development Index, indicating an evolutionary explanation. Woodley of Menie et al. (2016) found that the frequencies of eight SNPs predictive of IQ correlated negatively with national fertility, and furthermore that the SNP meta-gene negatively predicts national fertility when HDI is controlled, "suggesting the existence of a selection pressure" that may reduce global g by 0.253 points per decade.

Ultimately a slave underclass forming the bulk of voters will mean liberties being chipped away faster, wage and living standards dropping big time, and an overall regression into the serfdom seen in previous eras.

The crucial voices of the reasonable will be drowned out. Full-on mob rule will take hold — the prospects for a continued orderly and rational civilization will die with the emergence of this mutating mob as it sinks its talons into the very things that uphold Western civilization; not realizing that in myopically seizing these things, it will come to destroy them too. When you come from a place of barbarism, you grab at what you can and hold tight, you don't think about the wider picture, especially with bad genetics it makes things yet harder.