Cognitive Biases, Polarization, Social Media and White Identity

Robert Wright’s review of Steven Pinker’s Enlightenment Now got me thinking about how politics is increasingly polarized—a good thing certainly, but Wright adds some interesting wrinkles. A few preliminaries:  Ricardo Duchesne has already said all the necessary things about Pinker’s hostility to identity politics—and White identity politics in particular as somehow irrational (thus ignoring entirely Frank Salter’s work on ethnic genetic interests). The basic situation is that Whites are uniquely prone to individualism. The Enlightenment that Pinker is so enthusiastic about is a direct result of Western individualism and hasn’t taken root in other cultures. The problem is that if you invite millions of other peoples and other religions into the West, identity politics are inevitable. Wright notes “the obvious downside of tribal antagonism—the way it leads nations to go to war or dissolve in civil strife, the way it fosters conflict along ethnic or religious lines.”  And the deeper problem is that there is every reason to suppose that individualism has been shaped by the unique evolutionary history of the West (the roots of Western individualism go back to prehistory, as among the Indo-Europeans), and that other peoples (certainly including Jews) will continue to practice identity politics for the foreseeable future.

The result is the classic group selection dilemma: inviting non-individualists into individualist societies means inviting people who will depart from the basic individualist assumptions of the society—the fundamental critique of Judaism made by Enlightenment intellectuals: As Count Clermont-Tonnere expressed it in addressing the French National Assembly in 1789, “The Jews should be denied everything as a nation, but granted everything as individuals… . The existence of a nation within a nation is unacceptable to our country.” From the standpoint of group selection theory, non-individualists in an individualist society are cheaters. So the problem confronting individualists in such a society is that if you don’t become part of an identity group, you will lose the competition—well-organized, intelligent groups always outcompete individualists. A basic theme of my book Separation and Its Discontents is that the most intense historical examples of anti-Semitism have arisen as a reaction to competition and group conflict with Jews. Eventually, even individualists assume a group identity. The Jewish solution (not all Jews, but that’s where the power has been at least since the 1940s) has been to encourage the migration of other identity groups to the West and to pathologize any hint of White identity politics while continuing to exist as a vibrant and influential entity with group interests within Western societies. I rather doubt this scenario will end well.

Pinker, who has assumed the Stephen Jay Gould Chair for Politically Correct Popularization of Evolutionary Biology/Psychology at Harvard, is one of those faux evolutionists who is on board with the research until it has anything to do with the evolution of group differences (except for Jewish IQ). Prof. Duchesne also emphasizes Pinker’s hostility to populism, which places Pinker in a long Jewish intellectual tradition going back to the 1930s and seen most strikingly among the New York Intellectuals (see also Chaps. 5 & 6 of CofC). Since objectivity and emotional involvement are key to this essay, I can’t help quoting  Peter Novick  from his book on objectivity among historians. Novick is quite explicit in finding that Jewish identification is important, attributing the negative view of American populism held by some American Jewish historians (Richard Hofstadter, Daniel Bell, and Seymour Martin Lipset) to the fact that “they were one generation removed from the Eastern European shtetl [small Jewish town], where insurgent gentile peasants meant pogrom.”  This is a great example of how identity and emotions springing from that identity can and do influence academic research. One wonder to what extent Pinker’s Jewish identity is linked to his horror of populism among White people and White identitarianism in general.

But back to Wright’s review. He begins by summarizing some of the critical points made in other reviews, such as that “Pinker attributes too much of our past progress to Enlightenment thought (giving short shrift, for example, to the role of Christian thinkers and activists in ending slavery).” This criticism is quite accurate. I rather doubt that slavery would have been eradicated in the West if arguments depended on reason and logic. Instead, they focused on empathy for suffering Africans, typically embedded in Christian religious thinking (instigated in England by the hyper-egalitarian Quakers and in the U.S. by their Puritan cousins). 

Wright’s basic point is that rationality is overrated as a cure to humanity’s woes. Wright takes it for granted that tribal antagonism will lead to conflict, and he emphasizes “the cognitive distortions that muddy our thinking about critical issues; it warps reason.” The problem is that basically we distrust and are prone to disliking people in other tribes. “The more you dislike the other tribe, the more uncritically you trust your experts and the more suspiciously you view the other tribe’s experts.” Moreover, “a key link in the tribalism-to-cognitive-distortion chain is this: The antagonism is directed not just toward the other tribe’s experts but toward their evidence. Seeing evidence inimical to your views arouses feelings of aversion, suspicion, perhaps even outrage.”  In explaining the contemporary scene, Wright emphasizes social media: “If you don’t believe me, just observe yourself while on social media. Pay close attention to your feelings as you encounter, respectively, evidence at odds with your views and evidence supportive of them. It’s not easy to do this. Feelings are designed by natural selection to guide your behavior automatically, without you reflecting on them dispassionately. But it’s doable.”

I agree about the first part, but not at all sure it’s doable. People get involved in what Jonathan Haidt calls “tribal moral communities” with strong ingroup-outgroup feelings. These communities are not necessarily ethnic or racial, and indeed those on the left often claim to be completely non-ethnic, although one has to take that with a large grain of salt given the ubiquity of leftist ethnic identity politics. Such communities are ubiquitous, ranging from the notorious politically liberal/left consensus of social psychology and other university departments in the humanities and social sciences, to Twitter users and their followers. When people are on social media, in general they associate with like-minded people who all hate the outgroup, so they are constantly reinforced in their views. For example, on Twitter, there is something called “Follow Back Resistance” ( where people can get like-minded Trump-haters to follow them if they follow back. Lots of them say they will block anyone who takes divergent views. So they live in their own world, unburdened by dissenting views, and certain that their hate-Trump-hating posts will be liked and retweeted by their followers.  Of course, the same thing happens on the right, although I don’t know of any formal follow-back program. And it goes way beyond Twitter. People read media that agrees with their point of view—Brietbart and Daily Caller versus Slate, Vox, and WaPo; Fox versus MSNBC, with CNN losing out because it is seen as not as far left as MSNBC. 

It’s common on the Alt Right to note that without the internet we would be nowhere in terms of public visibility. Before the internet it was all newsletters delivered by the Post Office in non-descript brown wrapping. But the same goes for the left. Prior to the internet, there was a sort of moderate-liberal/left media consensus—as represented by NPR, PBS, the New York Times, TIME, etc.—with National Review not really threatening the consensus. This consensus and its monopoly was jealously policed and guarded from views either too far left or too far right—imagine a world where George Will was considered to be about as conservative as permissible. Immigration and its effects were pretty much ignored, lulling the public to sleep on the biggest issue of all. And since that was the only game in town, that’s pretty much all people were exposed to.

But with the internet, the left has moved further to the left, and the right has moved to the right. Whereas libertarianism was about as conservative as permissable, now we see a lot of White identity material, and a lot of implicitly White media from people like Tucker Carlson on Fox News. On the other hand, it’s routine now to see people on the left hating White people and their culture, wanting to remove the statues and rewrite our history, wanting open borders. The Alt Right has a platform, but so do the antifa, Black Lives Matter, The Huffington Post, and Slate. As CNN is learning, there’s no profit to being in the middle when the rest of the culture is rapidly polarizing.

With every tribal moral community, there is a tendency to be more Catholic than the Pope, to be holier than thou. There is competition to be the most virtuous as defined by the community. So people get pulled in more extreme directions and they censure anyone who deviates from virtue as defined by the community. It’s amazing to me to look at the #FBR liberal/left Twitter feeds right now where all the talk is about Trump- and GOP-hate and getting rid of guns, while ignoring issues like the impending Syrian war instigated by the (completely unverified) gassing by Assad and Israeli domination of U.S. foreign policy.  On the right, the danger is that extremes like swastikas will be embraced as more “authentic.”

These are tribal moral communities, with the emphasis on ‘moral’. People inside the group see themselves as morally good, and those outside the group are evil. Actually, I don’t see this on the right to anywhere near the extent that it’s a disease of the left. Issues are framed as a contest between the forces of good (our glorious multicultural future) versus evil (the “White supremacist” American past being promoted by the Nazi in the White House). So anything is justified. “No free speech for fascists,” and it’s entirely moral for the antifa to crack heads. The media ought to throw out normal standards of journalism and do everything they can to destroy White identity politics. Opponents are seen as not just intellectually mistaken but as evil incarnate. If you are an #FBR person, you wouldn’t tweet about needing proof that Assad did the gas attack, because one of your followers is sure to say, “but what about the children? How can you be so cruel?” Proof be damned. It’s a moral issue.

Wright thinks that teaching Buddhist mindfulness meditation—basically awareness of how emotions influence cognition—in public schools would be a good idea. I’m sure we would all be helped by an awareness of how emotions can influence cognition.  Traditionally, academia socialized people to be objective and to try your best not to let emotions cloud your research. But that’s all gone now. Whole departments, like gender studies and social psychology, wear their politics on their sleeve. Their virtue signaling is a badge of honor—science is White supremacy. If objectivity is absent in much of academia—supposedly the source of all wisdom, why should we expect most people to want to or even be able to be objective? At this point, trying to get people, especially people on the left, to try to be objective would be greeted with nothing but hostility.

A big stumbling block  from my standpoint as an evolutionist is that, underneath it all, people really do have interests. I have a definite interest in the outcome of all this. I want my tribe to survive and prosper—the fundamental principle of natural selection. I think this is rational and completely defensible, but it may shape emotions when I look at news articles and Tweets. I am horrified at what is happening in South Africa and by the mounting hatred for White people and their culture throughout the West that we see every day in the media and on Twitter. I am probably more likely to think that articles that agree with this are accurate and completely distrust articles that don’t fit with this.

The problem is to get other Whites on board with this, but so many are shut off in the tribal moral communities of the left. Like trained seals, they react with horror at anything resembling White identity politics. To get to where White identitarians are, their cult-like thinking would have to get deprogrammed. They would have to fight through what the mainstream media is saying and what they learn in school; they would have to ignore all the costs of being a White identitarian—the ostracism, the moral shaming and possibility of job loss. But without White identity politics, we will indeed be destroyed. We have to hope that at some point the reality of our brave new world will be so obvious that even the most blindered among us will begin to see the light.

In a previous essay, I wrote that polarization is good. But it’s also very dangerous. One might say, that’s it’s only good if it helps us win. If not, then we will lose faster and more violently than we would have if the center-liberal/left consensus had remained in place. Because of polarization, the gloves are coming off. For the left, the end has always justified the means, and we see ever more clearly the anti-White hatred hiding behind all the virtue signaling. Nothing is prohibited if you are on a moral crusade against evil. Shut them down, make them lose their jobs, kill them if necessary.

We are entering very dangerous times.
37 replies
  1. kikz
    kikz says:

    J Peterson of recent fame is also a fan of Pinki…… in any discussion of the subject he disingenuously only presents the negative end of the ‘identity’ spectrum as pejoratively ‘identity politics/Hitler/PolPot’ fulltilt end of the negative. as far as i can discern, he has never done a point by point ‘slide’ in comparison, showing the positive’s of identity politics, such as group cohesion, safety, order, and usual prosperity of homogeneous societies. any bias i may have against pinki and his coethnics and exactly whose vest interests they have at heart, it’s justified… it has been borne out times beyond counting. i’ll share a ‘joke’ a jewish acquaintance of mine shared. we met in NC decades ago, odd duck, loved Smithfield ham, and decorated the most beautiful Christmas trees ;D…. “what’s jewish for fuku? trust me. what’s jewish for trust me? fuku. excellent article, many thx.

  2. Floda
    Floda says:

    ‘The gloves are coming off’. That was my thought when Merkel said, let them in by the millions saying, ‘Wir schaffen das’, (we’ll cope with it.) How that will not end with violence in the streets is for me impossible to imagine. Our hostile elites letting millions of low IQ, military age Muslim and African males (without girlfriends) into the most technically advanced White Nations surely deserves a backlash of equal effrontery. I want revenge, and I see the German AFD party with 93 Seats in a parliament of about 700 is making real progress. They are exposing the globalist agenda and accusing Mercel quietly assuring Macron that French debts will be underwritten by German taxpayers. These sorts of allegations have never been publicly aired by Germany’s Pinocchio Press and this having an effect.

    The great pity is in Britain the UKIP party had about the same level of support by voters as the AFD but managed to get just one seat in Westminster. This is due to their ‘first past the post’ voting system. Germany by contrast, has a more ‘proportional representation’ system; get 13% of the National vote and get (roughly) 13% of the seats. Tommy Robinson says when the revolt begins it will be Germany where it does.

    In Australia we see a new kind of Gerrymander by the left using migration. Our Parliament has 150 seats. The present conservative Government has 76 of these, a slender lead, just one seat. Seats are allocated by the Electoral commision who have just announced tn the state of Victoria population has grown so much they will add an additional three seats. Migrants will tend to vote for the Labor party, so all things being equal, the Left win by a margin of two.

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        Tommy Robinson awakens many to the treachery going on by politicians, so he is a hero. He is not an expert at everything, including history or the Jews, and what happened is that the Jews have befriended him and helped him, meanwhile the ‘far-right’ made threats of violence to his family, and in so doing drove him into the arms of the Jews. Can you blame him? He sees Jews as enemies of the muslims (which is actually the case so no need for any deception here) and this makes the Jews his ally and friend. This is actually a logical position to take – for those who are still ignorant about what the top Jewish organisations get up to in the West, eg their support of mass immigration.

        One day it will become clearer to him.

        • Pierre de Craon
          Pierre de Craon says:

          He sees Jews as enemies of the muslims (which is actually the case so no need for any deception here) and this makes the Jews his ally and friend. [emphasis added]

          The word “actually” is a misnomer. In the Jews’ fairy tale of their centuries of suffering and victimization, Muslims are set down as villains in the annotated dramatis personae. Yet in historical practice they have served variously as aiders and abettors of the Jews’ ends and as grunts (infantrymen, combat troops) in the army of pillage and conquest whose officer corps consists solely of Jews. Surely it can’t be denied that toxic levels of Muslim immigration to the West would never have been possible without full-throated Jewish enablement of it.

          Also, here as elsewhere, the Jews’ attitude toward Muslims is predictably two-faced. It amounts to “ragheads in the environs of our Israeli storefront = bad” and “ragheads in Europe and elsewhere in the West = good.”

          One day it will become clearer to him.

          From Robinson’s track record, I’d wager that that day won’t arrive till the security personnel on his gravy train drop him unceremoniously on to the platform.

  3. David Ashton
    David Ashton says:

    Any views here on David Nirenberg’s “Anti-Judaism: The history of a way of thinking” (2015)?

    More relevant than the British PM’s nose or whether Mr & Mrs Muhammad were “really” Jewish, IMHO.

  4. Rob Bottom
    Rob Bottom says:

    There’s hope. I was liberal just a few years ago. Many like me have changed completely thanks to Black Lives Matter making martyrs of career criminals, forced tolerance of transgenderism, and the Muslim invasion of Europe. Once you’ve seen the FBI crime statistics, the global IQ distribution, and learn about the Jewish Question, the anti-White narrative is fully revealed. I doubt I could go back if I wanted to.

    Brexit, Trump, etc., and the outrageous levels of censorship online are proof that Whites are waking up. And it’s not just in one country. It’s across the entire Western world. And with the odds stacked against us, I don’t think there’s any danger in Whites becoming too extreme on the right.

    • Danelaw
      Danelaw says:

      I doubt it.


      In a previous essay, I wrote that polarization is good . But it’s also very dangerous. One might say, that’s it’s only good if it helps us win. If not, then we will lose faster and more violently than we would have if the center-liberal/left consensus had remained in place. Because of polarization, the gloves are coming off. For the left, the end has always justified the means, and we see ever more clearly the anti-White hatred hiding behind all the virtue signaling. Nothing is prohibited if you are on a moral crusade against evil. Shut them down, make them lose their jobs, kill them if necessary.

      We are entering very dangerous times.

      Jews are a menace but so are our own on the left who refuse acknowledge that the ship is sinking for fear of being called ” racist” and as noted above are hell-bent on shutting down alternative voices.

      Brexit is already being subverted plus a Marxist anti-white government is all but certain should the Zionist Tories lose big in upcoming local council elections. That will mean more Pakistani gangs will be allowed to rape white girls as is already happening.

      As for Trump his actions are not very inspiring lately – John Bolton, Putin and Syria. I hate to sound alarmist but collapse is just around the corner – that is what it will take more than anything else. The status quo is just not viable for long.

      • Darian Diachok
        Darian Diachok says:

        An advisor to Trump said on a radio program yesterday that Trump was shocked that the animosity to him didn’t abate after the election, but in fact has geometrically increased. Our President is a practical man, a compassionate man geared to solving practical problems. Unlike Reagan who saw through the Left’s shallowness, Trump doesn’t appear to have intellectually or emotionally come to terms with the viciousness of the Left, which is willing to destroy the system it doesn’t understand or value to stay in power.

        • Leon Haller
          Leon Haller says:

          Reagan saw nothing, He was a jejune fool who did not even make any attempt to reduce the scale of the immigration invasion, something I and my California family were complaining about in the mid-70s. Quite the contrary, in fact. Our 30+ MILLION illegal aliens area direct result of the Gipper’s 1986 Amnesty. I can still recall the anger I felt when I learned of his treason.

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        The people will think differently when they are no longer rich and pampered and safe, eg after economic collapse. When that happens it will be like a lion waking up and shaking off a flea – that is how easy it will be. The only thing that could stop the lion doing this is that the lion does not want to save itself and hates itself. In other words, whites have 15% or more enemy within whites who persuade another 70% or so to join them in being hostile to themselves and taking the side of the flea.

    • Charlie
      Charlie says:

      “Once you’ve seen the FBI crime statistics”

      Over 30,000 White women are raped in the USA by black males annually. The same statistic for black women raped by White males is ZERO. In order to get enough White crime statistics the FBI doctors the numbers by adding Hispanic crime stats to the White stats in order to get a number at all.

      If 30,000 negro women were annually raped by White males, the streets would be running red with the blood of Whites and the cities would be burned to the ground with hoardes of savage negros roaming the streets with machetes and 9mm’s

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        re Charlie – A lot of the 30,000 will be whites who supported Black Lives Matter & supported Obama. I wonder what proportion of these supporters still support BLM do after the rape? And their family and friends? Each victim must know 10 people.
        Incidentally, the left’s response to the 30,000 to zero statistic is to not talk about it as that would be racist.

    • Junghans
      Junghans says:

      We certainly are entering dangerous times, as the kosher dominated media continues to delude & program Whites to their doom. I’m afraid that the Trump interlude (with his phony ‘civic nationalism’) has put too many gullible Whites back to sleep. Let’s hope that the Antifa Bolsheviks, along with the ‘Black Lives Matter’ Negroes, and ‘people of color’ start gate crashing the White suburbs in force, and soon. It’s the only anti-toxin that is going to get the attention of the complacent, sleeping White milk herd.

  5. tadzio308
    tadzio308 says:

    For a long time the official media graybeards have ponderously intoned that in America politics is played between the forty yard lines. This football analogy supposedly informs the unwashed of other opinions that you cannot be in the game unless you are center field.

    This fails on its own definition. It means that 80% of opinion is unattended to and that the 80% is evenly divided as on a football field. The Internet has exposed this fallacy. It should be noted that all scoring is done by crossing into one of the end zones.

    A hundred years or so the Irish poet W. B. Yeats noted, “The center cannot hold.”* We shall soon find out if “Anarchy is loosed upon the world,” because, “The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.” Another such moment may be upon us.

    *The Second Coming

    Turning and turning in the widening gyre
    The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.

    Surely some revelation is at hand;
    Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
    The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
    When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
    Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
    A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
    A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
    Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
    Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
    The darkness drops again; but now I know
    That twenty centuries of stony sleep
    Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
    And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
    Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

  6. Curmudgeon
    Curmudgeon says:

    A couple of things:
    – Teaching Buddhist mindfulness meditation in schools is okay, but Christian prayer – a different form of meditation – is not. Prayer was meant to be inner soul searching which would lead to self help, not asking for “things”.
    – Balance in academia is non-existent, and has destroyed education at all levels. Fifty years ago, any high school essay would have required two sides of a topic to be argued convincingly, and a conclusion based on the arguments. When my kids were in high school they stopped asking me to “proof read” because I kept asking where the opposing arguments were. The reply was always the same: they weren’t needed. This extended to university, where my son began making statements about a 19th century figure’s personal attributes. When I asked what his sources were, he named a recently published book and (((author))). He was offended when I asked how someone born more than 80 years after the historic figure’s death could comment on personal attributes, when the figure’s contemporaries did not draw the same conclusions.

    Alex Jones is correct, in that there is an information war going on. Jordan Peterson is correct when he says words have meaning. That does not mean that anything else they have to say is correct. We have been in an information war for more than 100 years, and the forces that control information flow have had a massive head start on the rest of us. Words have meaning, but the meaning changes depending on the context, and the context is the information war battleground.
    We have a lot of work to do.

    • David Ashton
      David Ashton says:

      “Words have meaning.” Well, they should have. What do the following words actually “mean”: racism, antisemitism, equality, homophobia, misogyny, hate-speech, Holocaust…?

      The UK and other governments have issued a detailed, albeit incomplete, set of “definitions” of “antisemitism”. As a prelude to criminalization?

      People who stick up for Palestinians are now “racists”.

      Humpty Dumpty has become Big Brother, but still on the wall.

  7. T
    T says:

    People inside the group see themselves as morally good, and those outside the group are evil. Actually, I don’t see this on the right to anywhere near the extent that it’s a disease of the left.

    If a person wants some insight on that just read up on Jim Jones and the People’s Temple. The People’s Temple based in San Francisco California had it all, ie the Marxist infiltration of the church, an obsession with the mixing of the races including promotion of cross racial adoption of children, fake hate crimes, full support from the Democratic political heirarchy, etc. US House Representative Leo Ryan of California after personally reviewing the situation in Jonestown and agreeing to take multiple ‘defectors’ with him was fully prepared to give the People’s Temple a clean bill of health right up until the very moment he himself was forcibly ‘suicided’ along with nine hundred or so members of the cult. Radical left lawyer and author Mark Lane whom was present at Jonestown at the time of the mass ‘revolutionairy suicide’ only barely escaped the same fate as Ryan’s by the hair of his chinny, chin, chin.

    Unlike many other figures who are considered cult leaders, Jones enjoyed public support and contact with some of the highest level politicians in the United States.

    With the move to San Francisco came increasing political involvement by the Temple. After the group’s participation proved instrumental in the mayoral election victory of George Moscone in 1975, Moscone appointed Jones as the Chairman of the San Francisco Housing Authority Commission. Unlike many other figures who are considered cult leaders, Jones enjoyed public support and contact with some of the highest level politicians in the United States. Jones personally met with vice presidential candidate Walter Mondale and First Lady Rosalynn Carter. Guests at a large 1976 testimonial dinner for Jones included Governor Jerry Brown, Lieutenant Governor Mervyn Dymally, and Assemblyman Willie Brown, among others.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown#Deaths_in_Jonestown

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_cult_of_multi_culturalism

  8. RoyAlbrecht
    RoyAlbrecht says:

    “…the roots of Western individualism go back to prehistory…”

    Agreed.
    But what did the earth look like and what did the various sub-Races, in general, hold as sacred and aspire towards during these “…pre-historic…” (as if there was no history before way back then) times?
    How much is still hidden by Jews with stolen forensic evidence?
    From what I have read in translations of ancient Sanskrit lore,-
    in my efforts to understand what actually happened to me one fortuitous night high up in the Columbian Altiplano after years or arguably even decades of ascetic preparation,-
    which is, as far as I know, the oldest widely published “…history…” I have come across…,
    is that the earth was widely uncontaminated and humans looked both outward (as in “…outer space”…) and inward (as in the “inner ‘Spiritual’ (photo[n]-gravimetric) space”).

    Since the latter of these two pursuits were at the same time both widely subjective in that they could only really be understood by the individual but, once experience, became an incredibly binding and one might say Racially Binding Phenomenon, one can surmise that Whites were once the most united force on the planet.

    Moreover, as far as I have surmised, the most widely esteemed “…Individuals…” on the planet,
    even to this day,
    came from Aryan Races.
    Christ was a Nazarene (from Nazareth), a city known by all historical accounts to hold a disproportionately large percentage of Aryans.
    Gautama Siddhartha, had eyes the colour of Lapis Lazuli.
    The entire Brahman Caste was in those days knows to have phenotypically Nordic features and although today have been diluted with the dark Dravidian DNA, are still much lighter in both skin and eye colour…, not to mention anthropometrically European.
    The Innu of Hokkaido, from which the Imperial lines and the Samurai both share copious amounts of DNA, also hold trace amounts of “prehistoric” Scandinavian DNA traceable back nearly 10,000 years.
    The same can be said of the Ojibwas Chiefly and Medicine-man classes of Northern Ontario among other Amerindian tribes, Easter Islanders, Incas, and God only knows who else? Has the Kennewick Man controversy been resolved?
    So here we have cases of both “…inwardly and outwardly looking…” peoples, to say nothing of the original seafaring Scandinavians, from which they bequeathed their trace amounts of Euro-DNA.

    The primary ethnocentric difference between both “…modern day…” Europeans and the modern day, shall I use the “…pre-politically correct…” era descriptive of, the “lesser” Races, is that North Western Europeans were both higher priority targets of and therefore succumbed earlier to Filthy, Satanic, Jewish Gradual-ized Lies than the lesser Races did.

    ___________________________________

    “…well-organized, intelligent groups always outcompete individualists.”

    I would proffer to say individualists who hold glimpses into their own “…photo-gravimetric existences…” as a priority over priorities of acquiring “…gross material…” will automatically attain a bond through a “…force…” much deeper and stronger than the meager force which holds together Sub-Race in the quest for resources in a Satanic, Jew-Inspired Rat Race down a Shit Hole…, if I may be so blunt.

    _____________________________________________

    “…Wright’s basic point is that rationality is overrated as a cure to humanity’s woes. Wright takes it for granted that tribal antagonism will lead to conflict, and he emphasizes “the cognitive distortions that muddy our thinking about critical issues; it warps reason.” The problem is that basically we distrust and are prone to disliking people in other tribes. “The more you dislike the other tribe, the more uncritically you trust your experts and the more suspiciously you view the other tribe’s experts.” Moreover, “a key link in the tribalism-to-cognitive-distortion chain is this: The antagonism is directed not just toward the other tribe’s experts but toward their evidence. Seeing evidence inimical to your views arouses feelings of aversion, suspicion, perhaps even outrage.” In explaining the contemporary scene, Wright emphasizes social media: “If you don’t believe me, just observe yourself while on social media. Pay close attention to your feelings as you encounter, respectively, evidence at odds with your views and evidence supportive of them. It’s not easy to do this. Feelings are designed by natural selection to guide your behavior automatically, without you reflecting on them dispassionately. But it’s doable.”…”

    This whole paragraph makes little sense to me because “…our…” so called “…evidence…, experts…, views…, thinking…, etc…” have actually been implanted gradually over time by (((“…ANOTHER…” Race of “people”)))…, [I’m speaking very generously here].

    The difference between “…paying close attention…” and having “…innate knowledge of both the path and the outcome of the path…” is that the latter is point of reference that lends itself to instantaneously recognizing false doctrine without the need for any thought.

    _______________________________________________________

    • PaleoAtlantid
      PaleoAtlantid says:

      Thor Heyerdahl, in his book ‘The Kontiki Expedition’ makes similar ethnographic observations. It slipped under the PC radar back in 1948.

      • RoyAlbrecht
        RoyAlbrecht says:

        Precisely from where I got my first inkling of the Easter Island phenomenon…, never having been there myself.

        The New Zealand – Maori tribal phenomenon also gotten from second hand sources, having never been there.

        But having grown up in Canada, you can not convince me that Amerindians are the same as the original Asians that crossed the Alaskan Ice Age Land Bridge.

        For these reasons, although I do not look to “…Third Worlders…” for solutions, and a disproportionate percentage of them are professional gas sniffers, jail birds and Chugs, many of them also highly prize fairness in dealings and honourable behaviour to an extent far greater than the so called elite Jews.

        Moreover, they have been around Whites long enough to be able to recognize the difference between “White ” behaviour and Jewish Criminality…, and they much prefer the former.

        Interbreeding is not my agenda but cooperation on the JQ certainly is.

  9. m___
    m___ says:

    Elite globalism against the global masses of ordinary people, that are not able psychologically to regroup along these lines of division. Religions, race, territories hold back from a standing chance to fight. Individual ouliers are suffocated by their own groups.

  10. Andrea Ostrov Letania
    Andrea Ostrov Letania says:

    Pinker’s hostility to identity politics—and White identity politics in particular as somehow irrational

    Jews like Pinker say ‘white identity’ politics is irrational BUT they identify whiteness as preferable when it comes to immigration destination. After all, whenever Jews got a chance to migrate, they chose white nations above others.

    So, Jews say it’s irrational for whites to identify as white, but it’s somehow rational for Jews to spot and identify whiteness as the most desirable destination places for migration and settlement.

    Funny that Jews bitch about white identity and ‘white supremacism’, but their immigration preferences are always toward whiteness. Even in Africa, the favorite destination for Jews was white-supremacist ruled South Africa where they made the greatest fortunes thanks to white rule of law and well-managed society.. Jews didn’t want to settle in African nations ruled by blacks. Even as Jews berate whites and white identity, they only want to live in white nations.

    Jews had a chance to move to less white and more diverse Latin America or to North America that was more white and less diverse and mixed. Jews wanted to move to Anglo-Germanic-made nations.

    If it’s irrational for whites to notice their own race and identity, why is it rational for Jews to notice whiteness and prefer it as their ideal place of settlement?

    If American Jews love immigration and diversity, they should all pack up and move to Africa or Latin America. Who’s stopping them? I’m sure plenty of Latin and African nations will welcome Jews coming with all their money and riches.

    The Jewish paradox makes perverse sense. Precisely because Jews want to enter and take over white societies(the best in the world), they must invalidate white identity and unity. After all, if whites had a powerful sense of identity and solidarity, they might value what they have, come together, defend it, and keep Jews out.
    So, in order for Jews to enter and take over white worlds, they must convince whites that whiteness is irrational. So, whites must not ‘see white’ even as Jews ‘see white’ as favored immigration destination.

    Now, all non-white groups have picked up the same trick. They are all white-preferist in their migration choices. Indeed, they prefer whiteness over their own kind. Asian-Indians prefer to live with whites than with their own kind. East Asian women would rather have half-white kids with white men than live in Asia with their own kind. African men would rather have mulatto babies with white women and live in white nations than live in black Africa. Latin Americans want to run excessive Diversity to white majority US.

    They are all white preferist. They think whiteness is better economically, politically, ethically, aesthetically, and etc. They are closet ‘white supremacists’ and prefer to live in white world than in their own. But they are too ashamed to admit this because it would mean they have inferiority complex.

    Also, in order to gain access to white nations, they must convince white people that Diversity is good and that whiteness is somehow ‘racist’ and only be redeemed by invasion by non-whites.
    Ironically, they degrade and discredit whiteness in order to gain access to it.

    It’s like this. Suppose Kevin MacDonald had a big lump of gold while I got a a lump of lead.
    Suppose I want to take his gold.
    Now, if I told him that he got something precious while I got something crappy, he will hold onto his gold.

    So, I must go for another tactic. I would try to convince him that his gold has little value, indeed is equal to my lead or even less precious. I would try to convince him that it’s irrational for him to see his gold as precious. In the name of Metal Equality, all metals are equal in value, so maybe he should give me his gold for my lead.

    Suppose Macdonald is dumb enough to fall of this. Then, he would be a total cucky-wuck.
    I would have convinced him that his gold is worthless precisely because, deep down inside, I see it as worth a million.

    Never trust Jews. Don’t be like Indians who sold Manhattan for a bead necklace.

  11. Armor
    Armor says:

    Robert Wright says that Buddhist meditation can help people reach intellectual objectivity. This is certainly not going to end racial frictions, but maybe it could help White people understand that the Jews want to wipe us out and that we need to become ruthless. Those who already know about the Jews don’t need to take up Buddhist meditation, except if Wright thinks it can help us devise a plan to get rid of ZOG.

    Wright: “The more you dislike the other tribe, the more uncritically you trust your experts and the more suspiciously you view the other tribe’s experts.”

    As White people, our problem is not that we trust our experts blindly. Our problem is that we are not allowed to have our own experts, advocates or spokesmen. Instead, we have Jewish experts passing off as our own people. And they keep telling us that we are evil and need to be diversified to death.

    As for Pinker, he says we must help students become better logical and critical thinkers so that everyone can get along better in the future. He should be careful what he wishes for. If our critical skills improve and we cease to be conformist lemmings, we will necessarily turn against the Jews. We will tell them to stop talking rubbish all the time, and we will expel the brown hordes before it is too late. Right now, the biggest obstacle to critical thinking is Jewish power.

  12. Pierre de Craon
    Pierre de Craon says:

    Don’t be like Indians who sold Manhattan for a bead necklace.

    Why not?

    (Sorry; I couldn’t persuade the video to embed itself.)

  13. Chet
    Chet says:

    Everyone click on the link ‘Science is White Supremacy’ that Prof. MacDonald provided in this article, and read the whole thing. My take: Objectivity is racist. If the best empirical findings don’t comport with equality dogma, tear it all down. Dark Ages here we come.

  14. Uncle Aussie
    Uncle Aussie says:

    I would just point out to my countryman, Floda, that the ruling LNP is not a Right party either.

    Mr Dutton, the Minister for Immigration, is flooding Australia with non-whites just as the Labor Party does at every opportunity. They just go about it in a more cunning way.

    That is our great tragedy…no choice.

  15. HK Wills
    HK Wills says:

    Pinker’s tactic is to capture the perceived intellectual high ground of science and reason and make it appear the foundation of the (Leftist) subversion project. As science enjoys a very high prestige and “only stupid people oppose reason” as the arbiter of disputes it is a clever move. Of course the reasoning he would proffer is skewed and dishonest. Yet it neutralizes the impulse of populism – which he demonizes – which has the numbers on its side. He and his tribe must shift the battleground to one his small army (2% of the population) can win and plays to their strength: high verbal IQ and a seemingly endless font of sophistry and misdirection. It taps into the belief in the old saying that only losers resort to using their fists. From a Darwinian perspective the means for resolving political and cultural disputes is unimportant: all that matters in the long run is success.

  16. Charlie
    Charlie says:

    ALL Whites need to Boycott and Spread the efforts of ALL Western Media and Corporations that are promoting Inter-Racial relationships. These advertisements are nothing more than Genocide of the White Race something that would not be tolerated by any other race and certainly not if it were aimed at Jooz

  17. Leon Q. Haller
    Leon Q. Haller says:

    As I have been pointing out for 15 years or more, the White race is fated to extinction unless we pursue White Zion. This is not the Ethnostate strategy, except as an ultimate destination (yes, we must have apartheidist “racial reservations”, but the question is how to acquire them).

    Whites are evolutionarily maladapted. We are the greatest race in terms of the objective, transcendent measures and (“eternal”) values in which I believe, but I suspect KMac does not, but we have reached an evolutionary bottleneck for which our race is uniquely ill-adapted (ironically, one brought about by our own past “do-gooderist” shortsightedness in increasing nonwhite reproductive fitness, combined with negative Jewish “ethical” influences and too much greedmongering and short-termism among our own “leaders”). Only those White genomic lines which are strong in genetically determined racial identity and fellowship will emerge this century intact (un-miscegenated) – but they will find themselves completely at the physical and legal mercy of nonwhite overlords. Eventually, even if our nonwhite masters do not set about exterminating us (the last pure Whites left on Earth, to be outnumbered 50 or even 100-1 by nonwhites), either in an ideological and industrial fashion (as the Asians would do), or in simple street butchery (the likely methods of Muslims and blacks), there will be tremendous pressure (perhaps even legal mandates) on individual White females to “voluntarily” marry nonwhites. Given that even ugly White females are better looking than ugly nonwhites (and the better looking White females are the most desirable females of all), it is highly likely that already genetically recessive Whites will simply be bred into extinction – assuming there are no explosive antiwhite pogroms (which we are already seeing in Southern Africa, but also in embryo throughout the still White majority nations) which get out of hand and lead to the violent annihilation of the race in shot order.

    Now all White Preservationists agree that we must have defensible territory physically and politically controlled by Whites. But how do we get that? For all the brilliance and bravery of people like Kevin MacDonald and Jared Taylor they never seem to propose anything practical beyond ending the immigration invasion(s), and encouraging Whites to stand up for themselves and protest their obvious racial oppression (as evidenced by affirmative racism, tearing down monuments to great White men, etc).

    I suggest the ONLY option WPs have, given the profound, genetically driven disagreements on race among Whites themselves (which is the real and ultimate problem leading to White extinction: White racial self-hatred, played upon so well by Jewry, combined with completely warped and misplaced racial ethics, itself a pre-or arational product of the evolutionarily maladapted modal White psyche) is what I call “White Zion”: mass territorial ingathering of WPs (NOT Whites per se, which would include many defective liberal genomes, which in turn would constitute a future threat to the state).

    But isn’t this simply the Ethnostate? No, because there is one further precondition. The Ethnostate strategy assumes that if enough WPs in-gather within a particular area eventually political independence and sovereignty will somehow be handed to us. I find this assumption totally unwarranted. Our salivating alien overlords will never allow us to escape their clutches. Why should they? Why would New Mongrel USA circa 2050 simply allow 20 or 30 million of its most desirable citizens – White men who do the real work and pay the taxes, White females whom many nonwhites would like as sexual partners – to stay in place and “leave”, taking their skills and general desirability as exploitable beings along with a chunk of now Mongrel-controlled territory with them/us?

    White Zionist strategy assumes this won’t happen. It also assumes there will never be a general White uprising against continued national mongrelization. This is the “boiling frog” strategy that WPs had named and were discussing no later than by the mid-70s. By the time enough Whites notice that they are in “boiling water”, they will be powerless (as quite possibly we are already today in 2018) to undo the situation. Moreover even as the standard of living for Whites keeps falling, occasional reactive mitigative strategies (eg, Trump’s deregulatory and tax reform measures, which have already had positive economic effects – but which in turn lessen the attractiveness of the genuinely radical and, in the short term, massively destabilizing measures needed for long term survival) ensure that White revolution (as might erupt if millions of Whites were being dragged from their homes by Federal KGBist elements, or simply massacred en masse in the streets by minorities) is never quite worth it to ordinary Whites. Our race is dying, but most Whites can kinda/sorta get by and lead satisfactory enough lives, while the individual costs of protest, let alone physical revolt, are prohibitive, and the chances of success continually diminish.

    Whites are in a truly vicious circle. We’re trapped on a slowly sinking boat, but one for which the costs of trying to prevent the sinking are very high now, while the costs of doing nothing are only horrendous far into the future. Of course, as we get closer to the actual sinking, there are and will be ever more strident calls to do something to prevent it (thus as I predicted in 2007, the future would see the rise of a far more assertive White politics – and now we have a widespread alt-right). But there will also be more water than ever taken on board. Whites are always acting too little, too late to save themselves.

    White Zionism posits that this process will never stop. Maybe a majority of Whites will one day “awaken”, but if it hasn’t happened by now, when it does happen they will be powerless to save themselves.

    The solution? White preservationists of all types and all countries must silently but relentlessly migrate to one common place, an already sovereign nation which we can demographico-electorally conquer (and thus over time legislatively transform into an Ethnostate) in the same way that nonwhites have demographically conquered California. If the global White population stands at about 500 million (and falling), at least 50 million would agree with White Zionist aims, and perhaps 5 million could be expected to be genuine WZ pioneers (whose hard initial settlement would be the foundation to attract less hardy future White immigrants – exactly as happened wrt the European settlement of North America, Southern Africa and the Antipodes).

    Worldwide ingathering of pro-Whites into a “White Zion”, a nation which pro-Whites can control and mold as WE wish, is the ONLY hope to prevent eventual White extinction.

    I have made comments like this multiple times at TOO. Not once have I received a response. If not White Zion, what other solutions do we have to save ourselves? If the Western nations STILL cannot even stop the nonwhite invasions, and expel their ILLEGAL trespassers, how will we achieve a racially cleansed apartheid nation of our own? WZ is the only possibility absent general national collapse and civil race war, in which, however, there is no guarantee Whites will emerge victorious, either in Europe (whose domestic Muslim warriors would likely be aided by weapons and incursions from the Middle East and the Maghreb), or North America, where are youth numbers are below parity (given the vast hordes of worthless White race liberals as well as outright traitors).

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      Leon Q Haller “If the global White population stands at about 500 million (and falling), at least 50 million would agree with White Zionist aims, and perhaps 5 million could be expected to be genuine WZ pioneers ”
      Firstly, people are not really interested at present in white only countries, or white causes, not even 5 million, in contrast with other races who think of nothing else. For example, look how the blacks reacted when two blacks were ejected from Starbucks for not buying anything. And they were joined in their campaigning and outrage by whites. Contrast this with the way a couple from Britain First were jailed for shouting abuse at muslims – no outcry at all from whites. The whites are not interested in the plight of their fellow whites being jailed. The Britain First pair shouted through letterboxes – result, jail. Blacks shout in Starbucks with megaphones – result, CEO starts grovelling. Whites are not keen enough (in numbers) to do anything to stop white replacement. So the first drawback of your idea is that most whites are so non-racist that they have not the inclination to stop their own demise. Non-racist populations such as white Europe will be conquered by racist ones.
      The rich whites cannot even spare a few million for sites like this one.

      Secondly, the children of the white zion country would not have views that matched their parents – it only takes 15% of keen globalists to emerge in the next generation to completely change the country, ie to do what Sweden is currently doing to itself.

      However, the whites can behave differently if the factors change, ie they are no longer safe, rich and pampered. When your problem is how to get food you start to think differently

  18. Armor
    Armor says:

    “People inside the group see themselves as morally good, and those outside the group are evil. Actually, I don’t see this on the right to anywhere near the extent that it’s a disease of the left.”

    Many leftists are morally flawed, but the big factor is Jewish control of the media. Objectively, we are the good guys. Our ideal is “live and let live”, whereas the Jewish morality is to live and wipe out the Whites. We cannot use the media to call them evil, as they are the ones who own the media. They are able to call us evil and prevent the formation of a pro-White anti-Jewish moral community.

    The left/right divide has become irrelevant. It used to be something like this:
    Left ———–|—– Right
    Poorer half —–|—– Richest half of the population
    More govt ——|—– Less government
    More equality —|—– Less redistribution

    The Left and the Right used to OPPOSE each other. Now, they basically AGREE about the main issue. Among White people, both left-wing and right-wing voters agree that the third-world invasion must be stopped. That would make all White people richer, happier, safer… So, the opposition is no longer between two groups of White voters, but between ZOG and White people. White people keep trying to vote against immigration, and ZOG keeps bringing in more non-whites.

    Most of the top politicians, both left and right, have been co-opted by ZOG. They support our replacement by non-Whites. Among White voters, both the right and the left are opposed to the invasion, but the right more strongly so.
    – The nationalists are the most lucid part of the population.
    – Conservatives are a little less lucid.
    – Left-wing voters even a little less.

    The cure for the lack of lucidity would be a big public pro-White TV station.

    – White people in the far-left actually support the invasion. But they are a small part of the White population, even though they are given access to the media. They don’t even want to replace anyone. They are too stupid to figure out that the third-world invasion leads to rapid race replacement.

    We are told that the pro-immigration leftists are driven by a misguided kind of idealism. I think they are driven by an instinctive need to obey and enforce authority. They are authoritarian lemmings who watch too much Jewish TV. If the government and the media were pro-White, they would be fiercely pro-White too. As for the leaders of the far left, many of them are financially rewarded in their careers as journalists, teachers, trade unionists, cultural organizers…

Comments are closed.