A recent article in Scientific American (“The Evolution of Prejudice: Scientists see the beginnings of racism in monkeys“) is less than advertised. The study shows that monkeys are sensitive to group boundaries–they are especially concerned with monkeys from outgroups even if they are former ingroup members with whom they are familiar. But even if true it would not provide a firm evolutionary basis for negative attitudes toward other races because the negative attitudes on occur if those other races are in different groups. The monkeys are keying on the group status of the other monkeys, not on genetic differences.
In fact, evolutionary psychologists have been busy showing that if one sets up two very very clearly marked racially integrated groups (i.e., with different colored uniforms–exactly the situation in most sports), people have negative views toward the outgroup that are independent of race (Cosmides, L., J., Tooby, & R. Kurzban. (2003). Perceptions of race. Trends in Cognitive Science 7:173–179).
This study adds to data social identity processes are an evolutionary adaptation –but we already knew that (see here, p. 33). And we know that chimpanzees have a strong sense of group boundaries. Social identity processes are certainly very important in producing negative attitudes toward outgroups–it is the basis for my theory of historical anti-Semitism (and for the negative attitudes typically held by Jews toward non-Jews) in Separation and Its Discontents. Especially in traditional societies, Jews typically looked very different from non-Jews and had a strong sense of being separate (see here). They were obviously on a different team.
The evidence in support of genetically sensitive psychological mechanisms comes from research on J. Philippe Rushton’s Genetic Similarity Theory and research on a human kinds module (see here, pp. 32-38). This research is convincing that indeed there is a natural tendency to associate with people like oneself and that race and ethnicity are natural categories of difference. These conclusions therefore go well beyond the implications of the Scientific American study.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Isn’t it a crazy world when we have to go over the obvious ?
It’ s like :
” yeah dahh ! , like I did not know that already since I have a brain , thanks ”
I do know that to the ” intellectual ” it is like :
” Ahhh , but I’m too smart and educated , I know better and it is very complex and I am not a red neck . Now let me enlighten you little people .. blah blah ..social construct ..blah … historic repression… blah blah blah … “
@MOD “on occur” “data social identity” ?
The white elite are self-selected for ‘consciously processing’ ways they can gain, or avoiding losing, status. The low social status of nationalism means that they won’t listen to arguments for it, no matter how cogent.
I think status ties deeply into the ills facing any sort of White nationalist movement and has for the last 30 years or so.
Status is another version of assigning oneself to a team, and for most humans, status equates itself with many rewards. Whites may see each other subconsciously as being on the same team, but it when it comes to any sort of extrinsic action, they will always decry Whites and hop onboard with the enemies of Whites. There is a rather complex system setup where being racially aware and White is equating oneself with being uneducated or a redneck. Publicly supporting Whites in any manner will often equate itself with an immediate loss of status.
Anybody in the advertising business knows that if you want someone to buy your product, you get rich and famous people to back it. That’s why they give out free clothing to celebrities. Humans have this innate desire to mimic the wealthy and powerful in order to imbue themselves with those “qualities” that make that person wealthy and successful. Humans are kind of stupid in this regard, and the people who sell products for a living know exactly which buttons to push to make sure a product sells for an outrageous amount.
That is why it’s important to have wealthy and successful people backing our cause. The catch is that if you’re wealthy and successful, the quickest way to lose that status is to back your own people.
I hate to say it, but if a few good lucking football players promoted White interests, you would see idiot Whites come flocking to our “team.” If Bill Gates suddenly decided to funnel money into promoting politicians who supported an end to illegal immigration and a return to a White European country, we would be on a whole new playing field (btw, I know how ridiculous the concept of Bill Gates actually helping his own people actually sounds).
Sorry, meant to say “good looking”
Neither Bible or Qur’an believes in the Darwin theory of Evolution. I remember telling my American English Literature professor who tried to convince his Muslim students at University the so-called ‘historical proofs’ of humans’ being descendents of apes that I would not mind him being a descendent of ape or monkeys, as long as he agrees that I am descendent from Adam and Eve.
Anti-Semitism is a weapon used these days to fight critism of the Zionist state of Israel.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/anti-semitism-zionists-tool-to-silence-the-critics/
If evolution is true, then no one gets to choose if they are descended from earlier primates or not. It is simply a fact. It isn’t something that is decided by an agreement.
Both the Bible and the Koran stem from an era when man’s knowledge was very limited, so what they believe in or what claims are made in these writings have no scientific consequence or validity.
They contain kernels of truth, but nothing more.
Science was a Greek invention, not a Semitic one.
Evolution is a scientific fact, but not in the sense that people perceive it. Micro-evolution is a fact, macro-evolution is a weak theory without any proof.
Darwin himself would not recognize his theory as taught today.
I repeat: what the Bible or the Koran say about matters of science is completely irrelevant.
Frank Edwin Stone – were you born yesterday or what?
Bible says the creation of human is 4,000 year old, which scientifically incorrect.
Canadian professor Keith L. Moore wrote in the 1980s: “For the past three years, I have worked with the Embryology Committee of King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, helping them to interpret the many statements in the Qur’an and the Sunnah referring to human reproduction and prenatal development. At first I was astonished by the accuracy of the statements that were recorded in the seventh century AD, before the science of embryology was established. Although I was aware of the glorious history of Muslim scientists in the 10th century AD, and of some of their contributions to Medicine, I knew nothing about the religious facts and beliefs contained in the Qur’an and Sunnah. It is important for Islamic and other students to understand the meaning of these Qur’anic statements about human development, based on current scientific knowledge.”
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/02/15/thou-must-seek-knowledge/
Out of the ancient Muslim scientists you list on your blog, almost all are Persians, thus Aryans, one is a Berber and only one is an Arab.
I repeat my statement: science was a Greek invention, which spread through the conquests of Alexander the Great, to the cousins of the Greeks in Persia.
By the time of the Arab Muslim conquest of Persia, it was well established there.
The preeminent Aryan (Persian) role in Muslim learning is well known.
There are nuggets of truth, as I already said, in both the Koran and the Bible, but none of it is scientifically relevant.
Of course, one can make a career like Zacharia Sitchin and Erich von Daniken by publishing books with outlandish, speculative theories about extraterrestrials and such things, but that is far more speculative entertainment than scientific theorizing.
But, but, darling – don’t you know the so-called ‘Persians’ became Muslims by the end of 7th century.
In history, those people were never called ‘Persian’ they called themselves ‘Iryan (Aryan)’. It were the British colonialists who coined the name ‘Persia’ for them as later they called Palestinian, “the Israelis”.
I am sure the Canadian professor Keith L. Moore who credited Holy Qur’an for inspiring him in the discovery of embryo – would not be able to some ‘self-denial’ fool.
http://truereligiondebate.wordpress.com/2008/03/03/non-muslim-scientists-embraced-islam-after-discovering-the-miracles-of-the-noble-quran/
The Persians may have superficially became Muslims, but their ideas about the hidden imam and the secret teaching sure sound a lot like Zoroastrianism, don’t they?
Rehmat, WHY did the Persians become Muslims? Where they convinced by the beauty and logic of their neighbor’s religion? Did they adopt Islam to raise their level of civilization? What on earth could have been the reason that they converted to the ‘religion of peace?’
As for what they are called—they were called Persians at least as far back as Herodotus. They are called that because the Greeks came into contact with people from what is now Fars Province–then pronounced Pars. In Greek, Parsian became Persian. Those Persians who keep there ancient faith root their demonym from this origin–the PARsis. The Persians call their language FARSi.
In fact, in the time of Herodotus, the Persians were not one people–there were all the Medes (who were conquered by Cambyses), etc.
So it seems that you don’t know much about the Persians.
Rehmat:
You are hilarious. Keep up the satire!
You quoted someone saying, “Although I was aware of the glorious history of Muslim scientists in the 10th century AD…”
Did Larry David write that for laughs?
Are the monkeys in question different “races” or sub-species? Most of us are familiar with sub-species of dogs (poodles, huskies, etc.) but I do not believe most people know which groups of monkey species can interbreed. As far as I know they are mostly distinct species that do not interbreed. How say you?
The chimps seem to just be neighboring populations from the same species, almost certainly of the same race and sub-species of chimp.
Chimps are noted for forming bands called communities which almost never are large in number.
For this reason Chimps of the same race and sub-species are going to often find themselves in different communities, and it’s at this level of communities that Chimp warfare is carried out.
Chimps just aren’t sophisticated enough to form the kind of very large groups Humans are capable of.
A recent article in Scientific American (“The Evolution of Prejudice: Scientists see the beginnings of racism in monkeys“)…
Reading the article it seems extremely didactic for something published in a magazine about science.
Why does the article use the loaded word “taint”?
Obviously there are at least some situations where automatic prejudices would be useful.
Otherwise why would they exist?
It’s like anger, fear, jealousy and other emotions; they wouldn’t have persisted this long if there wasn’t a use for them.
Would it make sense for a magazine about science to write of the “taint of anger” without giving any consideration to even the possibility that there could be some situations and contexts where a certain amount of anger could be useful?
Scientific American is taking a very one-sided view of things.
Yeah, I don’t Scientific American is really aimed at American scientists.
“It’s like anger, fear, jealousy and other emotions; they wouldn’t have persisted this long if there wasn’t a use for them.”
Very true. And “anger, fear and jealousy” are just the extreme versions of very positive emotions or traits, such as “courage, caution and commitment.” They’re part and parcel…do away with fear and you do away with caution.
I should say extreme versions OR components of…
(good points, Reginald.)
On wonders, regarding the ‘Jewish Team’, if or how, Dawkins’ concept of the “selfish gene” may apply to group solidarity?
That’s an interesting point Junghans. Dawkins regards the individual gene as the primary subject of replication, whereas Macdonald applies his theory to human groups on the basis of sociobiology (or so I understand him), which is presumably consistent with biology-in-general. There must be a way to reconcile the two positions, but I’m not sure how that argument would go.
This all seems obvious. What used to be called Common Sense ! Only those who have turned away from the State controlled academics and media are still able to locate this sense.
“Talmud is world’s greatest religious literature,” professor Israel Shahak.
More than 90% of world’s 14.7 million Jews follow Talmud.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/02/12/israelis-people-raised-on-hatred/
Hello Kevin , Have any studies been done with the dieing monkey troupes hair and seeing how a troupe then interact?
If Ryan K had ever kept a cat or dog or seen animals at work (horses,deer,etc) he would not have made a basic knowledge error,ie the monkeys may not even notice colour of hair or have colour vision, they key in on smell as do nearly all other mammals & animals
Jew rips of Jews- but did he rip of Gentiles even worse?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/20/arts/design/wildenstein-art-gallery-is-beset-by-lawsuits.html?_r=1&hp
Excellent post, John @ april 13 9:04 pm
It’s always good to read the comment of an intelligent race realist.
“There is a rather complex system setup where being racially aware and White is equating oneself with being uneducated or a redneck. Publicly supporting Whites in any manner will often equate itself with an immediate loss of status.”
Sure, status has a little “complexity.”
One factor in the complexity is a simple conformity dynamic. I recently saw an old Candid Camera having 3 plants who entered an elevator with a hapless camera victim. They all faced the back, against convention. At first he stood forward. But when the elevator opened a floor up, he had turned to face the back like them, as silly as it was. This was the conformity principle. But if there had been only ONE rebel in the group resisting the Candid Camera staff and continuing to face front, the young man would have bucked them, too.
Another factor in the complexity is simple fear.
The “redneck” factor is an intentionally crafted propaganda meme and easily falls to pieces.
Complexity is dynamic, always changeable. All 3 of those factors turn our way by simply speaking out in our own name. The “redneck” meme is easily shattered. Kevin MacDonald is one recent example. I am a long-haired astrologer, grew up Catholic, now an advocate of Aryan yoga. I’m seeing a wider and wider variety of Whites rebelling. There will be more.
By doing your part to speak out and stand by your views publicly you destroy fear, destroy the “redneck” stereotype, and give options against conformity. Truly, if the the elevator rider in Candid Camera had seen even ONE person continuing to face the front, he would have stuck to his guns. Even 2 people can feel like an army.
None of this situation is stable, and it has been artificially constructed. Speaking out, you change the “complexity” that controls status and create an ocean of new status-builders.
Complexity is transient. A few basic principles, including courage and truth, drive both status and complexity.
_____________________
Great new articles here by the way:
http://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2011/04/10/zionism-undone/
Read both Part 1 and Part II! Rally yourself!
On April 30, 2011 – The Wall Street- based newspaper, International Business Times, published Dow Jones columnist Palash Ghosh’s article entitled “Bizarre tale of Savitri Devi, the Hindu Nazi’. In the article Ghosh for the pleasure of his Zionist masters painted Dr. Savitri Devi (1905-1982), a French socialist thinker, author and believer in Adolf Hitler’s concept of White Aryan race superiority – as a ‘Jew-hater’. As strange it may look – Savitri also carried some soft spot in her heart for the victims of the western colonialists. The Nazi racism and the Swastika (a Hindu religious symbol) attracted her to the caste-based Hinduism………
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/05/05/savitri-devi-a-hindu-nazi/
“caste-based Hinduism” is precisely the forerunner of the Nuremberg laws. The Nazi fascination and kinship with India is based on their common Aryan heritage.
The Aryan tribes who invaded India abhorred mixing with the conquered dark population and created an elaborate caste system to keep their race from being destroyed by race mixing.
The Sanskrit word for caste is ” varna” which means color.
In spite of the strict varna based caste system, the white conquerors of India slowly submerged into the conquered population over two thousand years.
Gautama Siddharta, the Buddha, was an Aryan,from the Saskya clan. He was described being over six foot tall with blue eyes. This was around 1500 years ago.
One thousand years after Buddha, the monk Bodhidharma was described by the Chinese, to whom he introduced Buddhism, as a blue-eyed foreigner.
Today the only places where remnants of the original Aryans can be found are the wild, lawless, border areas of Pakistan, Afghanistan and to a certain degree Tajikistan and Kurdistan.
The Kalash people are mistakenly thought to have descended from Alexander the Great ‘s troops, when in reality they are descendents of the original Vedic Aryan tribes, with a high degree of Nordic features.