The assault on biological science is arguably the biggest threat we face. What if turmoil in the Black Community isn't the result of racism, white privilege, implicit bias, police profiling, slavery, or "systematic oppression"? What if the cause is as simple as lead poisoning in urban environments or vitamin/nutrient deficiency in prenatal care? You can't solve real problems when you stop looking for real answers.


Modern society may be officially materialistic, but this does not stop humans from having immaterial experiences. Some of most potent immaterial experiences are negative ones, Dread, rage, revulsion, terror. We become conscious, at times, of something sinister in reality, something that is beyond our ability to confront, It exists edge of our consciousness, and we never perceive it clearly. Like a shadow lurking in darkness, just beyond what we can see. That something once would have been called the devil. When people these days hear that word, they think of something like a red man with horns, they miss what that iconography represented.

These days children aren’t raised to believe in the devil, but they are raised to believe in Hitler. Even in a secular society, people can’t escape the reality of evil. They feel it, and conceive of it, but they lack the spiritual vocabulary to account for it. So leftists come along and give them an account. They tell them there is this thing called 'racism' that’s the most horrible thing in the world, that it leads to death, mayhem, abuse, and misery, But a lot of things do that, To make racism special, to make it feel sinister, the left had to make sure never to define it, There really isn’t any adequate definition for 'racism', because it lacks definition, it becomes something ambiguous, amorphous, like a Rorschach blot, you can read into it what you want.

Liberals have tuned people to read into this blot their every intuition of evil, They see in it the devil they know exists but which their secular education denies, Their conception of 'racism' in their mind is a vortex of fear, rage, cruelty, inhumanity, and ultimately unintelligibility. Racism to them is primeval darkness that stands opposed to order. It's insanity. People don’t like being thought of as being racist any more than a medieval peasant would want to be thought of as being devil incarnate. People dislike being called racist, as it puts the image in their mind, of themselves being host to that evil, unclean power upon them. They’re repulsed by very thought.

People don’t even like to read or listen to people considered 'racist', as they're afraid that the sinister power behind their words will infect them, that somehow they’ll suddenly be invaded, and transformed from a good, liberal human, into a shade of ab-humanity, a shark-toothed, skinhead, swastika tattooed neo-nazi, hollow and soulless inside, whose only desire is to goosestep around giving Nazi salutes and hunting Jews. So they are horrified when the accusation is hurled at them, and will do anything to duck it. Racism is supernatural evil to the liberal mind, Calling someone 'racist' is like accusing him of being a witch, in days when witches were burned.

The people of a nation make up what may be called its genetic infrastructure. The genetic infrastructure of a nation is its most valuable material asset — more valuable than its roads and bridges, more valuable even than all the land contained within its borders. A nation's gross domestic product is driven by the productivity of its people. Sub-Saharan African countries are rich in natural resources but poor in terms of per capita GDP. Singapore, on the other hand, possesses virtually no natural resources yet exhibits very high standards of living. Haiti is situated on land suitable for a tropical paradise. But it is instead a land of abject poverty.

From the slums of Haiti to the ghettos of Detroit, from the favelas of Brazil to the townships of South Africa, people of sub-Saharan African descent express their genotype through the communities they create. The same can be said of people of European descent. From the frigid climes of Iceland to the Land Down Under, from the productive Boer farms of South Africa to the expat communities of Mexico, from Montana to the Gates of Vienna. European people grow societies with European characteristics wherever they go.

Wealth doesn't exist in the ground; it is created by minds that transform raw materials into useful products, and that transform useful products into more complex and more advanced products. Underlying all great inventions and innovations, from Johann Gutenberg's printing press to Elon Musk's spaceflight enterprise, are great minds. And underlying great minds is a material asset whose necessity in intellectual capital formation most economists either don't grasp or dare not mention.

That material asset is the deoxyribonucleic acid that exists within our cells. DNA is destiny — it determines whether a person will be male or female, have light skin or dark, be tall or short, posses the cognitive capacity needed to attain genius-level IQ or be afflicted with mental retardation. DNA shapes who we are as individuals. And our aggregated genetic qualities make up our nation's genetic infrastructure. When a nation's genetic infrastructure is strong and well-maintained, all citizens derive benefits.

Not only does a high-quality gene pool produce great thinkers and innovators on the right tail of the IQ bell curve. It also gives us ordinary folks in the middle of the IQ bell curve who are capable of being self-reliant. It gives us well-functioning communities where people can safely walk the streets at night and keep their doors unlocked during the day.

A person's genetic hard wiring is like a computer's processor. The more powerful the processor, the more tasks a computer can perform. The more genetically gifted a person is for a particular trait, the more he or she can achieve. The more a nation's gene pool improves, the more its economy and overall quality of life can advance. That is not to say that genes directly transmit the values and principles that are necessary for the creation of a free, prosperous, and glorious society. Just as software determines how a computer's processing capacity is utilized, ideas determine how a person's cognitive capacity is directed, whether for constructive or destructive ends.

Unfortunately, the minds of most of the people who occupy positions of power and influence are filled with destructive ideas. As a consequence, the governments of all Western nations are actively pursuing destructive policies. Western countries are bent on are destroying their own genetic infrastructure — the one material asset that is indispensable to national identity and without whose preservation Western nations will cease to exist except as arbitrarily demarcated zones of dirt on a global map.

Instead of carrying out policies that would strengthen or at the very least preserve the existing genetic infrastructure, government officials are acting as vandals. They are using taxpayer money to vandalize the West's genetic heritage. They are subsidizing fertility among the dimmest segments of society through various social welfare programs. They are discouraging fertility among the brightest through feminist indoctrination at universities. At great cost, they are importing then housing, feeding, clothing, and schooling non-Western refugees who hail from backward war-torn countries. Commonly, these refugees are culturally hostile Muslims, from areas where inbreeding has been practiced for centuries. Cousin marriage map.

Now, a century and a half after the White inhabitants of North America had done the impossible and freed all the slaves, the Founding Fathers have turned out to be 100% correct about the inadvisability of indiscriminately importing members of essentially prehistoric foreign populations incapable of high-functioning residence in modern society. This is why the US has so badly beaten the speed record of the ancient Romans to reach its present advanced stage of degeneracy.

The bottom line regarding dysgenics is that while compassion dictates that no one be killed or abused for having a congenital disease or a low IQ, reproduction should never be socioeconomically skewed in favor of poorer specimens while better specimens go begging at the gene pool. That's a manifest recipe for disaster. Any one who has raised farm animals whose natures are as largely determined by DNA as those of people, can tell you that breeding any species with no form of quality control has a scientifically well-established history of leading ranchers to bankruptcy and failure. The same applies to people, and to nations. There's simply no way out of it but a hard, cold dose of rationality.

A message to Civic Nationalists

Culture and civilization are racial constructs. Races and civilizations are not cultural constructs. If your race dies out, so does your civilization and every bit of living history and identity it once had. Humans are not interchangeable blank slates that can be painted different colors depending on what society they live in. An African will always be an African and an Asian will always be an Asian no matter whether his/her family has lived in a white society for three generations or more. Nations are the product of the race that created and defined them, not the other way around. In order to preserve the historic and ethnic identity of your nation, you have to preserve your race. There is no other way around it.

What reason does any non-White have to preserve our culture and civilization if they don't have any connection to the history and race of the people that created it? Absolutely none. A nation, whose identity is so thoroughly defined by the ethnicity that produced it (something that should be the case for any healthy society), cannot possibly incorporate foreign racial groups into itself without diminishing, diluting, and ultimately destroying its innate racial identity. A nation made for multiple ethnicities is made for none at all, so how do you propose you'll foster a sense of
fraternity and identity between vastly different racial groups that share no bond through history or blood? It's simply impossible and unnatural, and will only result in ruin.

Everything about America - the real America - is European to the core. The institutions, history, identity, ethnicity - everything White European. America’s first immigration policy was even designed to only allow whites to immigrate. Being “American” was synonymous with being "European" since they were inseparable pieces of a greater whole. In an attempt to incorporate foreign races and cultures into the definition of "American", the innate European identity of our nation has been destroyed and replaced with this modern, soulless cosmopolitanism. Each and every non white that immigrates or is born here and supposedly “integrates” only does so on the most superficial level, and shares absolutely no deeper connection to the European race and culture that has defined our nation since the beginning, and thus will forever remain an outsider and foreigner living in another people's land.

This simple fact will always remain true no matter how much supposed "integration" these non-whites undergo. The only way any non-European can ever truly "become" part of the nation - not superficially but innately - is to redefine the very European nature of our society at its core, as to destroy what it originally stood for and represented. It's simply impossible to maintain a European civilization based around European values and maintain a European identity, if the European race is replaced with some other foreign race. If Somalis or Chinese replaced the British people, Britain would be dead, since the nation itself is so deeply defined by the British ethnicity and race. Our nations are not propositional. They aren't just a set of loose ideas that can change on a whim. Without Europeans, America would no longer be America, just as Canada would no longer be Canada, and Germany would no longer be Germany. This idea that we can just import foreigners and “integrate” them is dangerous.

Even the Africans Who have existed in America since the beginning are still a completely distinct ethnic and cultural group that never has and never will share a racial bond or identity with the white Europeans who built America. What interest. or even capacity, does a Pakistani, an African, or a Chinese have in maintaining the European identity of our nation? Absolutely none. Since they are a product of non-white immigration, they have a vested interest in continuing this system. Why would any Hispanic Immigrant be opposed to further Hispanic immigration? That would be hypocritical of them since they themselves are a product of this System to begin with, and owe their very existence to it. Like I’ve already mentioned, even a "successful" integration would only ever be superficial. These races will always remain foreigners living in another people's nation unless the very core identity of the nation usurped and destroyed in order to incorporate them.

We already know for a fact that races are tribal, so importing any amount of a foreign race will naturally result in ethnocentric preferences and behaviour within these groups, a breakdown of trust, and a dilution of national identity. These in-group preferences happen naturally and oftentimes subconsciously regardless of how much conditioning you try to force upon these non-whites. The reality of Human racial tribalism and in-group preference is not debatable. It is a fact that has been proven by multiple studies observing diversity in communities and observations of historical trends. Ethnocentrism is naturally how human communities have formed and how nations have always defined themselves. Only in recent decades have the disastrous and destructive policies of multi-racialism/multiculturalism been implemented and institutionalized, and the devastating effects on national identity and cohesion it's had are plainly obvious.

It is simply ludicrous to believe that one can preserve ones European national Identity and the integrity of the White race and civilization, while at the same time importing foreigners who naturally, both consciously and subconsciously, work against this in the many ways I've already mentioned. Multi-racialism and multiculturalism are destructive fallacies that are resulting in the mass-replacement of white Europeans in our nations, the destruction of our national identities, and the endangerment of our civilization's long-term survival.

Libertarianism is the victory of economic man over spiritual man. I dont mean this in a religious sense, mean it in a philosophical sense, like Plato, people who see beyond mere materialism and logic. Libertarianism is extremely logical, but pure logic has little to no meaning to animals, and we are animals. From a standpoint of reasoning, there is a great simplicity in saying any human should be able to go anywhere without any legal restriction and all the problems it creates will sort themselves out.

Pretty much every libertarian knows if you throw the borders wide open to a first world nation that the entire third world will flood into it. The sanitation systems will be overloaded, there wont be enough housing, the culture will collapse, etc. It means the end of that civilization. But what replaces it? When the dust settles, what will that civilization look like? A hand full of people will have gotten VERY rich off the chaos, and the new immigrants will mostly be housed in ramshackled poorly assembled housing. The same mud huts they left behind at home. What kind of ideologue would want that fate for their nation, their people, their immediate family to live in that kind of society? Yes, it's "fair" because anyone can go anywhere. It's perfectly logical, and in the end, everyone will be perfectly miserable.

We're not machines, we're human. We're territorial. We prefer our in-group over the out-group even though we have no valid or logical reason to. We like our culture better than others even though it may not be superior. We like our architecture, our art, our music. We get attached to it. Imagine a tree in your yard that is there for a long time, it's just a tree, but if some asshole cuts it down you would miss it when it was gone. We form attachments to stupid things. This incidentally is the difference between a man and a sociopath. The sociopath is incapable of feeling attachment to any person or thing. So we see what kind of person would not feel angry or upset at their race and culture being threatened. They're a shell of a man, devoid of a heart or soul.

We are animals, we're not perfectly logical and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. So what if we're tribal? So what if we illogically prefer one culture over another? Every experiment, every government action that has tried to strip people of their blood, their culture, their heritage has ended DISASTROUSLY and always will because we're not perfectly logical blank slates. There is nothing wrong with loving your land, your culture, your people and wanting to see it preserved. There is nothing wrong with being an animal instead of a perfectly logical robot.

In the end it will happen to everyone. All those people who work so hard trying to tear down "western culture", "the patriarchy" or whatever boogyman they call it will be less happy with the mess that follows. They'll find themselves one day living in the third world slums of New York, and find some new boogeyman to blame the failure of their policies. They will miss their hipster neighborhood, although they may never admit it. They will miss their days of sitting in a warm house and griping on tumblr as they collect NEETbux instead of shivering in a dilapidated shack after the government runs out of money to deal with the rampaging horde. Even those who hate this culture the most will eventually miss it

You dont have to be a nationalist to be against immigration and anti-racism. Those are correct positions that will bring harmony and stability to society. "Liberty" isn’t for everyone. Most people don’t want it and wouldn’t know what to do with it if they had it. The absence of liberty isnt slavery, just subordination. Most people like being told what to think, what to do. Most of the people who think of themselves as "free thinkers", only do so because they were told they ought to. Why do you think so few people are libertarians? The minority of people who actually do think for themselves will usually come out on top, no matter what class of society they're born into. For them, there's always some degree of upward mobility.

If you want liberty for yourself, you're only going to get it by getting one up over the ignorant masses who want to take your liberty. Let a bunch of South American Communists into your country, they'll just vote for Communism. Let people who survive only on welfare and never contribute have a vote, and they’ll vote for more welfare. Realize that liberty is only for the privileged few, who understand and desire it. Otherwise, they will rule over you.

If you’re one of the people who believe it's all down to culture, why on Earth would you choose that as the most rational explanation for what you see? You’ve seen evidence that even when born and bred into white culture, blacks still do worse. Even the richest blacks only barely do better than the poorest whites. Yet it's all down to culture? Despite thousands of years with no contact (and therefore possible oppression) from other races, blacks created nothing. Despite hundreds of years of opportunity in white societies, blacks have never been truly successful. Despite money almost literally being thrown at them, despite prioritizing them over everyone else for jobs, blacks still remain in the dirt in every civilization, every culture, everywhere. Despite there being literally billions of blacks since contact with (and therefore possible adoption of) "superior white culture", many times more Whites than have existed at the same time, there has not been even one black Mozart, or Beethoven, or Newton, or even a less influential scientist (of which whites have bucketfuls) like Bacon or Maxwell or Faraday. Despite there being many African nations since the beginning of civilization, not even one has come even close to the success of even the poorest and smallest European nations.

And you think them equal? Despite tens of thousands of years of separation from the other races with no selection pressures for adaption, you think they've stayed the same as the others? Stayed equal? Despite every civilization that has encountered them thinking them inferior — from the Egyptians, to the Arabs, to the Romans and Europeans, to the Chinese, and to the Jews — you think they're the same? Despite crime and violence and disorder and chaos wherever they go, you think that they are the same? Despite persistent, consistent, measurable, and universal gaps in IQ distributions — the same ones that are strongly linked to any number of good indicators, such as success, prosperity, and low crime — you think they are no different?

And where does this culture come from? Is it just created in a vacuum? How does this "superior culture" come about? How could a superior culture come about if the people it is created by are not superior themselves?

Let's try a thought experiment. Assuming that all humans everywhere had the same predisposition to success and civilization-building, where would we expect the most successful societies to come about? If there are no differences in the people, the difference must come from the land. So, logically, the most powerful and successful civilizations must come from the most rich land. And which is better land? Africa, with its temperate and steady climate, good farmland, diversity of crops and wildlife, tons of ores and natural resources such as coal and oil, as well as large amounts
of lumber? Or Europe, with its frigid and fluctuating climate, killing conditions (such as in winter), treacherous and often unfarmable terrain, limited usable crops and wildlife, and difficult-to-extract natural resources?

And what happens when we try to address these problems, assuming that it is all down to culture? We punish success, reward failure, tie lodestones around the necks of the successful, and forcibly integrate those who should never be integrated, inciting untold friction, suffering, cultural alienation, hatred, and effectively shoot our societies in the head. All for the sake of a belief not only without evidence, but also, as proven already in this section, demonstrably false, that is held to religiously. And to solve this you'll cause more hatred, violence, and killing just as all leftist ideologies have everywhere when their deluded fantasies fail to live up to reality, from the French Revolution to modern African Marxists.


I feel no pity or camaraderie for any of the non-White races for one simple reason. None of them are trying to save us. In the darkest hour of European history, as we lay bleeding on the ground from traitorous knives in the dark, we know who our true friends are. All non-White races either look on hungrily like vultures, or stand aloof and uncaring as to our fate. All we have done, all we have given them, everything we have innovated and invented and wrought for them, and it all amounts to nothing in their eyes.

Were the positions reversed, you would hear a great outcry from the European peoples to save and preserve our non-European neighbors. But when it is us who are threatened with extinction, with extermination, with cultural and racial death, you hear nothing. Arabs do not march in the streets and shout that White Christians have a right to exist. Japanese activists do not crowd their own streets and wave signs while screaming for justice for the Europeans. There is only silence.

That alone tells you all you need to know about the relationship between the European races and the non-European races.

There will never be peace between the races. Your dreams of peace with the savage is no more ridiculous than the dreams of Utopian multiculturalism as espoused by the traitorous leftists. They need to go away. Back to their own countries will not suffice - they have resources we can use, which they cannot, and will not.

The White characteristic of pathological altruism is self destructive if other races begin to exploit it, as the Jews have been doing for so long. If you apply science and reason to yourself as well as any animal, then you'll quickly see that it does not benefit the lion that the hyena, the crocodile, the leopard, and the human exist — and it would benefit them that such creatures did not. The same it true amongst hominid clades.

Our existence is a struggle, and these other clades are our competition — that the Jew uses the current state of affairs to exacerbate our contest in order to shroud their own aims in the same battle does not make the conflict, the contest, the struggle, any less real.

There can be only one of four outcomes.

1.You are destroyed.

2.You are destroyer.

3.You consume that which you refuse to destroy, and are weakened by it.

4. You are consumed by that which you refused to destroy, and it is made stronger by it. There is no alternative.