A Shift in Revulsion

mixed_up

The revulsion at race mixing was transformed into revulsion directed at “nazis”, because jews.

Science. 1973 Nov 23;182(4114):790-6.

Geneticists and the biology of race crossing.

Provine WB.

Abstract

Geneticists in England and the United States clearly reversed their published remarks on the effects of race crossing between 1930 and 1950. The reversal occurred in two steps. First came the change in the 1930′s from a condemnation of wide race crosses to an agnostic view. The second change, from the agnostic view to the belief that wide race crosses were at worst biologically harmless, took place during and shortly after World War II. The entire reversal occurred in the light of little new compelling data from studies of actual human race crosses. The lack of new data is unsurprising. Few geneticists wished to initiate experiments that took three human generations to complete. And controlled race crosses are hard to arrange, even with government grants. What might be more surprising was the willingness of geneticists to make such positive statements about race crossing when they had so little reliable genetic evidence. I interviewed or wrote to ten prominent geneticists who worked on human genetics between 1930 and 1950. Not one believed that new evidence on race crossing was the primary reason why geneticists changed their minds about the effects of race crossing. One plausible explanation, that the rise of “population thinking” (44) caused geneticists to change their minds, does not fit the evidence. Castle was no more of a “population” thinker than East, yet they differed radically in their conclusions about race crossing. What, then, did cause geneticists to change their minds? Most important was the revulsion of educated people in the United States and England to Nazi race doctrines and their use in justifying extermination of Jews. Few geneticists wanted to argue, as had the Nazis, that biology showed race crossing was harmful. Instead, having witnessed the horrible toll, geneticists naturally wanted to argue that biology showed race crossing was at worst harmless. No racist nation could misuse that conclusion. And geneticists did revise their biology to fit their feelings of revulsion. Geneticists’ ideas about the related question of hereditary mental differences between races is perhaps undergoing a similar development to that seen earlier in their ideas about race crossing. In 1951, judging from the response to the Unesco second statement on race and comments in genetics literature, most geneticists agreed with Muller that races probably differed in significant average mental traits. By 1969, when Arthur Jensen advocated this view in his controversial article (45), most geneticists who spoke publicly on the issue had adopted an agnostic position. Knowledge of hereditary racial differences in IQ had scarcely changed since 1951, but society had changed considerably in racial attitudes. It will be interesting to see if during the next several decades geneticists will argue, on the basis of little additional evidence, that hereditary mental differences between races do not exist. I am not condemning geneticists because social and political factors have influenced their scientific conclusions about race crossing and race differences. It is necessary and natural that changing social attitudes will influence areas of biology where little is known and the conclusions are possibly socially explosive. The real danger is not that biology changes with society, but that the public expects biology to provide the objective truth apart from social influences. Geneticists and the public should realize that the science of genetics is often closely intertwined with social attitudes and political considerations.

PMID: 4583525

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+

26 thoughts on “A Shift in Revulsion”

  1. “What, then, did cause geneticists to change their minds? Most important was the revulsion of educated people in the United States and England to Nazi race doctrines and their use in justifying extermination of Jews. Few geneticists wanted to argue, as had the Nazis, that biology showed race crossing was harmful.”

    Whites who racemix run the spectrum from poor and uneducated to wealthy elites like Ivanka. Our race is being culled, the future of the white race is not dependent on class and education. People who fall for jew tricks end up genetic failures. That’s a good thing.

    Also, genetic success means having grandkids, so even if a white couple has 2 children, if one child doesn’t have any children and the other child racemixes, then grandma & grandpa are genetic failures. A white person must have at least 1 white grandchild to be a genetic success.

  2. Tan, I know you were banned from Twitter but I was wondering if you are on Gab now? I couldn’t find an account for you there. You should open an account there if you haven’t already, your Twitter was great.

  3. I signed up for gab.ai and got an email telling me I was in line but it could take a few weeks to get an invite. Never got one. Forgot about it.

    I’m not eager to have everything I write flushed down the memory hole again. Here I can say whatever I want and quickly stand up a fresh copy elsewhere when my current service provider finally jews me.

  4. “I’m not eager to have everything I write flushed down the memory hole again.”

    What sucks about social media is that most people are attention whoring narcissists more concerned about their own presence/writing/cleverness than the plight of their race.

  5. Thanks for the link Chris.

    The jews didn’t start screeching about extermination in 1945, 1933, or 1890. And every Purim they joke about manipulating and exterminating their enemies.

    The jews have been laughing at and feeding on Europeans for millenia. Countless Whites have suffered and died as a result of their words and deeds. As Hunt illustrates, the crux of the jew “holocaust” narrative, which is only the latest manifestation of their broader victim narrative, isn’t how many jews got killed or how, it’s the premise that jew lives matter, and only jew lives matter.

    Any mentally and morally healthy non-jew should have no problem rejecting this jew-first premise, and beyond that, should recognize that the jews have constructed a series of narratives upon this premise and have used them as weapons.

    That’s what’s wrong with the “holocaust” narrative, the details don’t fucking matter.

  6. V, the main problem with Twitter for anyone who cares about the plight of the White race is that it’s increasingly moderated by the enemy. What was an open forum that enabled jew lies to be bypassed or challengeed is quickly going down the Facebook and jewsmedia comment section route, where any effective opposition is simply banned.

  7. Oh ok. Your complaint that your writing wasn’t preserved came across as the sort of thing a twitter whore would complain about.

  8. I’m interested in this topic. It was either Leo Frobenius or Albert Schweitzer who observed that mixed race (Black/White) were the most vicious (I read as unstable). The fact that there isn’t much research into this could mean that the evidence wouldn’t support our equality doctrine. There is some evidence of out-breeding depression. We could be doing real harm to future generations because of fear.
    http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding_depression_and_outbreeding_depression

  9. Helvena,
    Someone who is mixed race is not white. If one of their parents is black then all the characteristics that applies to blacks applies equally to the mulatto, ie vicious and unstable. The article you linked talks about how and where mulattos fit in a society. But why would that matter to us? Mulattos would not be accepted in a white ethno-state.
    I think the more important question is the effects of racemixing on a white racemixer, if they’re willing to abandon their children should they be welcome in a white ethno-state? Or are they damaged goods?

  10. Good article, thanks helvena.

    Of course Provine’s point is that the shift in attitudes about mixing wasn’t caused by objective scientific arguments, but by what I would call a moral fraud. In it’s more general form the jews make the self-serving argument that the “majority”/natives/host have a “moral duty” to serve “minorities”/immigrants/parasites. Note that Provine himself goes along with the fraud, at the end pretending that the shift was driven by an amorphous undifferentiated “the public”/”society” even though he had already identified the specific (((active ingredient))).

    Gobineau’s thesis, based on European history and popular among Whites up until WWII, was that selective/exclusive/purer breeding produces success, then conquest and dominance, which is ultimately destroyed by mixing/degeneration – in essence a Peter principle of race.

    The jew thesis, based on their parasitic history and relentlessly propagandized since WWII, is that mixing/degeneration (of non-jews) breeds success (for the jews).

  11. The article you linked talks about how and where mulattos fit in a society.

    No, it doesn’t V. Did you make an honest mistake or are you just here to stir shit?

  12. This just came across my Twitter feed: Human Hybridization and Neanderthals.

    SAPIENS is a totally jewed anthropology organ, and here they are actively promoting the destructive idea that “there may be benefits to interbreeding” between races/species even while acknowledging that it is otherwise a “very unusual mating behavior”.

  13. The idea that jews have no idea why anti semitism occurs or why they get kicked is pretty ridiculous. This assumes they are completely un-selfaware. Which we should know by now, there is no group as more aware as them as to who they are.

    I’ve been thinking that they know why antisemitism occurs. but just as they always do, they blame the host for noticing. Same goes for all the HoaxOcausts lately. The fliers and all the others hoaxes fit the narrative they have created and pushed with their control of the media/academia/movies etc. That its just evil White people who do this. when a jew is found out to have perpetrated the hoax,they can just blame White people for creating an environment that made the jew act out this way, to of course to combat antisemitism. assuming they dont just memory hole the HoaxOcaust.

    Just a thought. maybe you’d care to comment or elaborate of this thought?

  14. Any comments in this video by Varg?
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=02HZalIGsGg

    What I get is that Whites are modern day Neanderthals through evolving from that beginning state in Europe. Africans are not us we dont have any genetic or ancestral connection to them or Africa. At least not until a mixing much later on or from recent to present race mixing. If any African is in us at all it would have been possibly a migration into Africa then back out but not originating from Africa.

    Well, Asians are neither of us either. They are Denisovan not Neanderthal or Negroid.

  15. This is a blog where you keep track of jew wins. That’s all it is. It’s a scoreboard that reads jews 6 million wins, whites 0 wins. Blog after blog of how powerful jews are. According to you even when jews lose they still win and when whites win they didn’t really actually win. You are demoralizing whites. Any shit I’ve stirred with my 4 comments doesn’t come close to the shit you’ve stirred by describing every current event as another win for jews with no focus on when our race wins. The average jew would find your blog offensive but a rabbi would give you a nudge nudge wink wink.

  16. Chris, I could write a book about “anti-semitism”. I would call it Parasitism and its Discontents.

    And another book about the clash of jew narrative with White science, regarding Out of Africa, Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA, race and species, etc. That one I’d call One Race The Migrating Mixing Nigger Race.

    Or maybe they could be just another couple of podcasts.

  17. @ Chris. From what I’ve read Varg is correct. Carleton Coon, IMHO, is still the best on race although I like Carleton Putnam also. In Putnam’s RACE AND REALITY, he talks about how the 5th district court reversed a lower court’s ruling and ignored race research in favor of avoiding hurt feelings. Empirical evidence be damned.

  18. Hey Tan, I’m willing to bet that Hitler knew everything about the Jews that Kevin MacDonald does. So how come Kmac doesn’t like calling a spade a spade and fighting fire with fire? I think it is just a question of balls, and a lack thereof. (Hitler had balls and Kmac is a pussy.)

  19. My own racial consciousness began by internet searches for the varying intelligences of racial IQ scores. I was quickly drawn to Vdare articles by Steve Sailor and Jared Taylor about ten ago. However, it was the articles Kevin MacDonald provided by the same website which, in nearly the same breath of my internet searches, that enlightened me to the JQ. Within four months I had investigated Holocaust denial, although it took me a few years to finally accept that it was indeed a hoax. For the first two years of my racial awakening, I guess, I still held out hope that Jews would realize that their racial interests are irrevocably tied to the racial interests Europeans. It was only then that I began to accept that Jews were indeed the incorrigible enemies of European racial interests; thanks to Majority Rights and Age of Treason.

  20. At this point I believe figures such as Harold Covington are more valuable in effecting a lasting change in the survival of the White race than is a Kevin MacDonald. For how many decades have we had purveyors of the knowledge that our race is doomed unless…? Unless White men with character decide to take a stand according to a definite strategy. That strategy is the Northwest Imperitive.

  21. Duchesne’s historical philosophizing is entertaining.

    Decline is irreversible. The relentless occupation of the West by hordes of Muslims and Africans is an expression of White male decadence and effeminacy. Only out of the coming chaos and violence will strong White men rise to resurrect the West.

    The fact is that judaization long preceded islamization, never mind niggerization. Failure to check infiltration and manipulation by jews is the first and foremost failure – a failure historically enabled by decadent effeminate intellectualizing.

    Everything Western philosophers have ever pointed to as symptomatic of decline is a more or less directly intended consequence of a long-term broader agenda driven by a highly aware, ruthless, organized alien organism already inside the gates.

    The relentless outpouring of spin and the heaping of scorn upon everyone but the jews driving this agenda is an expression of jew power. Hosts come and go. Only when the parasite is ended will the parasite-host cycle end.

  22. If you dont mind approving? I wrote a response to this blame Whitey piece, that was not published on the site, surprise ?

    This mindset is quite prevalent in the altright/proWhite circles. Shifting blame to the victims, yes victim blaming. At least the antiWhites and “pro” Whites have a commong base, Whites suck. We either did this to ourselves or deserve it. Regardless, both hide the jewish root, its almost as if this entire “movemtent” is run by jews.

    My response:
    This overly long essay goes on and on to say that feminism is just a symptom and not the actual problem and that it’s weak White men who done did dis here. I dont know who said it is or was? But this essay doesn’t correctly identity the cause of that symptom. Instead blaming weak White men as the problem for feminism. Going on to ignore that these two symptoms (feminism, weak white men) share a common and very important cause or root, the jew. Underestimating the jew and like this article, completely ignoring or fooling yourself into believing that they arent that much of a problem, is WHY we are in this present state.

    People are not saying jew enough. If it were the case, constantly and relentlessly naming the jew, far more would be wise to them. The fact this author engages in the very same falsehood he is attempting to incorrectly diagnose, as weak white men, by doing this knowingly or not he is in fact proving to be one himself by not addressing the actual root by mistake or intentionally. And shows he has no idea what he’s talking about when “diagnosing” “our” problem.

    Blaming White women and men is false. Especially if we use the language the author does. Noticing symptoms without truly understanding why they are showing themselves, does nothing to fix anything. In fact it does more harm.

    I am not saying that jews are all powerful or that Whites cant improve. But in order for Whites to improve, they must be made aware of the WHY we are in this situation. And that is underestimating jews. And people who know, pulling punches, silencing or ridiculing those who name the jew. Progress is not ignoring them or by using coded language. For us to progress we must tirelessly and relentlessly attack those that are harming us. It is not White men, not women nor any other jew-isms, but the jew itself. Jews have the vindictive intent to genocide us and weaponize our own against us.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>