Blond Hair, Blue Eyes:  Some Thoughts on the Aryan Ideal

What is beauty?  Specifically, what is it to be a beautiful person?  This has long been considered one of those imponderable questions, akin to asking about the meaning of life.  But this does not mean that we cannot have a valuable and substantive discussion.  Beauty, of course, is partly subjective, but it is also partly universal.  There are good reasons, biological reasons, for this.  Hence we can make a meaningful inquiry into the matter.  This, despite the fact that discussing beauty in the context of the White race is politically incorrect in the extreme.  Western political elites are currently doing all they can to push the supposed virtues of dark-skin aesthetics, and to offset or displace any visible presence of White beauty.  Despite this, they will fail—for good biological reasons.

When we observe peoples all around the world, we find at least one thing in common:  people everywhere value lightness.  People want light-skinned partners, light-skinned children, and they do everything possible to lighten their own skin.  Skin-whitening is big business globally, growing from around $8 billion to nearly $12 billion within the next few years.  (I set aside for the moment the desire of Whites for a tanned-body look; this is a special case that I will examine later.)  Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians all seek light skin, either of their own races or of the truly White-skinned north Europeans.  Along with this come ancillary values:  blond hair and blue eyes.  People of dark-skinned races frequently dye or lighten their hair, wear blond wigs or hairpieces, and otherwise employ various tactics to appear light-haired or blondish.  Blond hair is indeed rare; only around 5% of White adults are naturally blond.  And yet, some 60% to 70% of White women dye their hair blond at some point.

Blue eyes are more common, existing in something like a quarter of White Americans and perhaps half of White Britons.  And they do appear in many other racial groups; approximately 10% of all humans globally have some shade of blue eyes.  The percentage is highest, unsurprisingly, in the Scandinavian countries, where up to 90% are blue.  As with blond hair, blue eyes are almost universally seen as attractive.  We can rest assured, if there was some way to change eye color as there is with hair, millions would do it.

It is striking, then, that these universally-accepted qualities of beauty derive from, and primarily reside in, Whites of northern Europe.  The White race, it seems, contains within itself the global standard of beauty.  Whites could indeed be justifiably seen as the most beautiful race in the world.  This fact should be a source of pride for Whites everywhere, something they should never want to hide or diminish.

And yet, in our PC world of today, we are not allowed to speak this way.  It sounds far too “supremacist,” far too “racist,” for sensitive ears.  Our media and academic elites are far more concerned that the races and ethnicities lacking such qualities—virtually all blacks, and the vast majority of Arabs, Hispanics, Asians, and Jews—might “feel bad” if we highlight or praise White beauty, so they do everything conceivable to accentuate black, dark brown, and mulatto characteristics.  The result is that White beauty is disparaged, and the world everywhere becomes that much uglier.

One might ask:  Why is this even important?  Why the emphasis on blueness of eye color?  Or on blond hair?  Are such things just “pretty”?  And even if they are, why do so many people find blue eyes and blond hair attractive—as they undeniably do?  These are pregnant questions.  I will argue here that such features are not “just” appealing; or rather, they are appealing for very real and consequential reasons.  In this essay, I want to examine a number of diverse but related aspects of the blond-haired, blue-eyed ideal—an ideal that also goes by such names as ‘Nordic,’ ‘Scandinavian,’ and more controversially, ‘Aryan.’  Let’s first start by taking a look at the physiology of the Aryan people.

The Science of ‘Aryanism’

The Aryans have an interesting history, no doubt.  Consider the basic etymology involved here.  The root of the word, arya, is Sanskrit.  Originally, circa 2000 BC, it meant simply speakers of Sanskrit language; later it became associated with the lighter-skinned peoples of central Asia.  Due to their superior abilities and intelligence, and capacity for culture-building, the term ‘Aryan’ became synonymous with ‘the best’ or ‘the noble.’  As they expanded southward and eastward, they became the dominant ruling people.  In this sense, the Aryans are indeed rulers or masters of others; but it was by dint of their superior skills, intelligence, and morality.  In a way, it was a justly-earned dominance.

Scientists today almost uniformly avoid all talk of Aryans, preferring to reserve that term for linguistic and perhaps cultural groups of people.  And of course, the Nazi association makes the term largely taboo, in any case.  But science, thankfully, has the power to overcome taboos.  Recent scientific research has shed new light on the biological and historical origins of the light-skinned people of the north.

Let’s take the long view for a moment.  The human legacy goes back at least 7 million years, to the earliest appearance of the genera Australopithecus and Ardipithecus.  These were not yet of the genus Homo—‘human’—which would appear only around 2.5 million years ago.  But they were proto-humans, and were our common link to chimpanzees, who are our closest genetic relatives.  These proto-humans were, like modern chimps, fully hair-covered, with silky black hair.  Their skin, though, was light—even white.  Even today, if we were to shave bare a chimpanzee, he would be white.  The biological reasons for this are clear:  dark skin, like dark hair, is an evolved characteristic to protect from strong sun.  The dark pigmentation comes from melanin, which exists in two forms:  eumelanin and pheomelanin.  The former has a dark brown tone, the latter reddish.  The amount and combination of these two determine the actual color of one’s skin, hair, and eyes.  Functionally, melanin protects the body, the eyes, and specifically the DNA from damage by intense ultraviolet solar radiation.  It can be produced in a short-term and temporary manner, as in tanning, but over millennia, it can come to be a genetically-heritable, and thus “permanent,” change in skin tone or hair or eye color.

Melanin production, though, is biologically costly.  It takes effort and energy for the body to produce and maintain melanin, something it would rather not do, so to speak.  Having evolved in the equatorial regions of central Africa, proto-humans would have needed to incur the cost of heavy melanin production in their hair and eyes—but not their skin, being fully hair-covered.  Hence they, like modern chimps, would have had white skin, black hair, and dark brown eyes.

By around 2 million years ago, the first humans began to appear, in the form of Homo habilis and Homo ergaster.  They started to walk upright and to run, and perhaps as result, began to lose body hair—when the thermal cost became too high.  (Rather like wearing a fur coat in summer.)  But shedding hair exposed the skin.  Thus, melanin production increased, and our skin became black.

Black-skinned early humans migrated into Eurasia around 1.8 million years ago, and as they moved north, likely experienced a lightening of their skin.  They would have first travelled through the Middle East, at about 30 or 35 degrees north latitude, and then on into Europe, at 45 or 50 degrees north.  There is a substantially weaker sun at such latitudes, and thus within a few thousand years, humans would have gradually lost melanin—in skin, in hair, and in eyes.  In a sense, human skin began to revert to its evolutionary natural tone—white.

In the North, something else happened:  humans first experienced winter.  That is, cold weather, ice, and snow.  As black Africans, we had no evolutionary experience with such things; but now, these intrepid northerners needed to adapt:  to stay warm, to cook and preserve food, and to build suitable shelters.  The intellectual and cognitive burden increased, and undoubtedly this new evolutionary pressure pushed us to think more, to think in more sophisticated ways, and thus to have more-evolved brain functions.  It also increased the need to cooperate, to trust one’s neighbors, and to create reliable and durable social networks.  In short, the northerners became more sociable, and they became smarter.[1]

Today we have evidence of light-skinned, ‘white’ people that lived in the Middle East around 25,000 years ago.  (Undoubtedly they existed long before that, but we lack the evidence to prove it.)  A separate group of humans apparently entered Europe via Spain around 19,000 years ago, and we have evidence that they had bluish eyes; this is our earliest indication that eye color had begun to lighten, upon reaching 40 degrees latitude or so.  (I note here that hominid eyes are “naturally” blue, that is, when lacking the protective melanin.  Blue is not a pigment or color per se, not like a ‘dye,’ but rather simply the absence of the darkening melanin.)

As people pressed further north into central Eurasia—say, above 50 degrees north latitude—skin and eyes would have naturally continued to lighten, and eventually the hair as well.  About the same time as bluish eyes appeared in Spain, blondish hair began to appear in north-central Asia.  By 8,000 BC, the ‘westerners’ that had come up through Spain, and the ‘easterners’ that came via the Middle East, met and began to interbreed in north-central Europe.  These people, now called Scandinavian Hunter-Gatherers, would have had all-white skin and a predominance of blue eyes and blond hair.  A final wave of immigrants, the Yamnaya, arrived around 3,000 BC; as they blended into the existing hunter-gatherers and began to settle into fixed agricultural communities, they formed the core of modern-day north Europeans.  These people, circa 3,000 BC, would have been the first true Aryans.  Over the next 2,000 years, they would come to dominate the scene in all of north-central Europe.

The result is striking, even today, and especially in the Nordic countries—those that lie above 55 or 60 degrees latitude.  I have spent some time in these countries in recent years, and the predominance of very blond people, especially blond women, is obvious.  (Women tend to have lighter blond hair than men, and children more than adults due to relative lack of testosterone.)  In my travels, it was not uncommon to see groups of three or four college-aged women, all of whom had long, flowing, pure blond hair.  I have seen young children with astonishingly blond hair—so depigmented as to be almost white.  They almost appear as albinos, but of course they are not.  The effect of the sun on human appearance and human genetics is truly amazing.[2]

Divine Northerners

For all of recorded history, people have told myths and stories of others living in the far-off lands of the north.  These would have been based on actual experience with these mysterious and striking people, some of whom would have traveled south.  Hardened to the rigorous climate, intrepid, smart, and able to construct civilizations and cultures, it is no wonder that such people took on a mythic quality.  And their striking physical appearance came to be the visible sign of such a noble personage.  In this way, blue eyes, blondness, and very white skin came to be seen as good, rare, desirable, and beautiful—perhaps divinely-inspired, perhaps godly.[3]

When it came to formalizing the official gods and myths of the various European cultures, then, it is unsurprising to find that the southern Europeans, in particular, would construct their gods and heroes in the image of these divine northerners.  This is reflected, very explicitly, in their writings.  Consider, for example, the incomparably important writings of Homer—the Iliad and the Odyssey, circa 800 BC.[4]

When we review the Iliad for relevant references, we find around 15 mentions of light-colored hair.  Most of these are applied to the Spartan king Menelaus, but also to the gods Apollo and Demeter, to the demigod hero Achilles, and to the figures of Meleager and the woman Agamede.  In all cases, Homer uses the same Greek word: xanthos.  Formally, xanthos means ‘yellow’ or ‘bright’, as in our English word ‘xanthic’ (“of, or relating to, a yellow color”).  Technically, every usage by Homer of xanthos should be translated as ‘blond.’  But, for poetic effect, the various translators of Homer have chosen a variety of related terms and phrases.  Thus, for example, we find reference to the “fiery hair” of Apollo (1.235), the “golden hair” of Meleager (2.737), the “red-haired Menelaus” (3.338), “blond Demeter” (5.575), “blond Agamede” (11.880), and the “red-gold” hair of Achilles (23.162)—all xanthos.  And this, in a single translator’s edition![5]

One also finds other translated references to “fair hair,” which we might presume to mean ‘blond.’  But in these instances, Homer uses the word eukomos, which literally means “good hair.”  This, of course, need not be blond, so we are left with an uncertain picture in mind.

Regarding light-colored or blue eyes, we find in the Iliad a single reference:  in Chapter One, Homer refers to the goddess Athena and her “clear grey eyes.”  In Greek, the word is glaukopis—literally, blue or blue-green (glaukon) eyes.  More often today we might refer to someone with “steel-blue” eyes, which is more flattering than “grey”—but the point is the same.

In the Odyssey, we find fewer references to xanthos hair (e.g., the “yellow locks” or “russet curls” of Odysseus [13.455]), but more to the glaukopis of Athena (e.g. 2.424, 2.475, 13.325).  In all there are about half as many such references as in the Iliad.  But notably, in both works, the characteristic features belong to gods, goddesses, and heroes.  They are clearly marks of distinction and noble birth.

Homer’s contemporary, Hesiod, makes a handful of similar references in his much-shorter Theogony.  There we find four mentions of the glaukopis of Athena (lines 10, 575, 890, and 924), and he also writes of the “xanthos Ariadne” (line 950), presumably meaning her hair.  He then adds one new term:  khrusokomes, or ‘golden-haired.’  This is applied to the god Dionysus (line 950).

Other such ‘Aryan’ references would follow in subsequent centuries.  Around 525 BC, the philosopher Xenophanes examined the customs of the Thracian people—modern-day Bulgarians, roughly.  He wrote that “their gods are blue-eyed (glaukos) and red-haired (pyrros)”.[6]  The use of the word pyrros—from pyr, ‘fire’—is interesting; the gods no doubt had “fiery-red hair.”

Into the 400s BC, two great lyric poets of the ancient world, Pindar and Bacchylides, made several relevant references.  In Pindar we find mention of the xanthos Graces, xanthos Achilles, xanthos Danaans, khrusokomes Apollo, xanthos Menelaus, and for the first time ever, xanthos Athena—blond gods and heroes all.[7]  Regarding blue eyes, Pindar makes only three such mentions, all of the glaukopis of Athena.[8]  For his part, Bacchylides writes of xanthos Briseis, xanthos Athena, khrusokomes Apollo, khrusean Aphrodite, the surprisingly xanthai Spartans, and more generally of “the mortal men who crown their golden (xanthan) hair.”[9]  Bacchylides makes no reference to the blueness or greyness of anyone’s eyes.

Pindar, furthermore, was among the first to give the mysterious blond and blue-eyed northerners a name; he called them Hyperboreans.  This name means, literally, those dwelling beyond (hyper) the north winds (boreas).  His first and oldest ode (Pythian 10), circa 498 BC, provides an extended and fascinating account of these people:

Neither by ship nor on foot could you find the marvelous road to the meeting-place of the Hyperboreans.  Once Perseus, the leader of his people, entered their homes and feasted among them, when he found them sacrificing glorious hecatombs of donkeys to the god.  In the festivities of those people and in their praises, Apollo rejoices most, and he laughs when he sees the outright arrogance of the beasts.  The Muse is not absent from their customs; all around swirl the dances of girls, the lyre’s loud chords, and the cries of flutes.  They wreathe their hair with golden laurel branches and revel joyfully.  No sickness or ruinous old age is mixed into that sacred race; without toil or battles, they live without fear of strict Nemesis.  Breathing boldness of spirit, the son of Danae [Perseus] once went to that gathering of blessed men, and Athena led him there.  (lines 29-46)[10]

The Hyperboreans are thus beloved by the gods, happy and joyful, full of life, and free from pain and strife.  They are, indeed, a “sacred race” (hiera genea).

Sometime around 425 BC, the great historian Herodotus issued his classic text, Histories.  There he discusses the characteristics of many peoples and nations across the known world, including those of the Budinians, who were marked by their glaukos eyes and pyrron hair (4.108).  The specific location of these people is unclear, but they apparently hailed from just north of the Black Sea, in the southern part of modern-day Ukraine, an area identified as the original staging ground for the Indo-Europeans/Aryans on the basis of recent population genetic research.

Notably, Herodotus too elaborated on the Hyperboreans.  In his same work, he details a story of two Hyperborean girls who travelled south bearing gifts for the Greeks, only to end up dead in Delos—accident or murder, we are not sure.  A portion of his tale is as follows:

Concerning the Hyperborean people, neither the Scythians nor any other inhabitants of these lands tell us anything, except perhaps the Issedones. …  But Hesiod speaks of Hyperboreans, and Homer too in his poem The Heroes’ Sons, if that is truly the work of Homer.[11]

But the Delians say much more about them than any others do.  They say that offerings wrapped in straw are brought from the Hyperboreans to Scythia; when these have passed Scythia, each nation in turn receives them from its neighbors until they are carried to the Adriatic Sea, which is the most westerly limit of their journey; from there, they are brought on to the south, the people of Dodona being the first Greeks to receive them.  From Dodona they come down to the Melian gulf, and [ultimately] to Delos.  Thus, they say, these offerings come to Delos.

But on the first journey, the Hyperboreans sent two maidens bearing the offerings, to whom the Delians give the names Hyperoche and Laodice, and five men of their people with them as escort for safe conduct. …  But when those whom they sent never returned, they took it amiss that they should be condemned always to be sending people and not getting them back, and so they carry the offerings, wrapped in straw, to their borders, and tell their neighbors to send them on from their own country to the next. …  I know that they do this.  The Delian girls and boys cut their hair in honor of these Hyperborean maidens, who died at Delos…  In this way, then, these maidens are honored by the inhabitants of Delos. …

I have said enough of the Hyperboreans.  I won’t tell the story of Abaris, alleged to be a Hyperborean, who carried an arrow over the whole world, fasting all the while.  But if there are men beyond the north wind, then there are others beyond the south.  (4.32–36)

Not quite the “sacred race” of Pindar, but still a people portrayed as generous, noble, and exceptional.[12]

By the late BC and early AD period, Roman writers were making note of the same distinctive qualities.  Horace (23 BC) describes one Pyrrha in terms of her flavam comae—blond hair.  And he speaks of a Phyllis as having similarly flavae hair.[13]  In 100 AD, the great Roman historian Tacitus, in his highly consequential discussion of the Germanic people, refers to their caerulei oculi (“fiery blue eyes”) and their rutilae comae (“red hair”).  Two decades later, in his Satire 13, and speaking of the same people, Juvenal deployed the terms caerula and flavam to refer to the Germans’ blue eyes and (now) blond hair.  These were the first explicit historical connections between Germanism and Aryanism.

Such were the views of the ancient world.  Little changed, biologically, over the next two millennia, given that there were no major waves of migrations, nor yet any high-speed transport that would have enabled rapid population movement.  During this time, the superior Europeans set about creating Western civilization, advancing technology, and creating art and culture on an unprecedented scale.  Into the mid-nineteenth century, Aryanism had gained scientific credibility, and was taken mainstream by such men as Arthur de Gobineau, most notably in his Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races (1853).  Some decades later, Houston Chamberlain’s influential work Foundations of the Nineteenth Century (1899) further advanced the Aryan thesis.  Chamberlain placed particular emphasis on the Aryan-Germanic peoples who, he argued, had been responsible for the most significant advances in Western culture.  It was this belief in German superiority that led him to join the National Socialist party early on; Chamberlain was in fact a great supporter and advocate of Hitler, until his death in 1927.

It was via such men as Chamberlain and, later, Hitler and Alfred Rosenberg, that the concept of ‘Aryan’ became so closely associated with ‘Nazism.’  Thus it was that both the culture-building, idealistic Aryan and the Nordic-Scandinavian blue-eyed blond aesthetic were blended into the overall National Socialist worldview—for good or bad.  From then on, the Aryan ideal of beauty was stained with the supposed Nazi conception of a master race.  I will address this whole topic in a follow-up essay.

Closing Thoughts

What is the legacy of all this today?  Firstly, I think it shows that the Nordic/Aryan aesthetic is not just a matter of “good looks.”  It is a reflection of a long genetic history in northern climates, and is a parallel marker with several positive human qualities:  creative, trusting, culture-building, sociable, intelligent.  The same evolutionary forces that gave people blond hair, blue eyes, and white skin also gave them a number of salutary virtues.

Second, it marks a sharp contrast with the popular, Jewish/Hollywood image of mixed races, Blacks, Asians, mulattos, and generally “people of color.”  Jewish Hollywood wants to foist on Americans—and the whole world—an ideal of random race-mixing.  They do this via many images and storylines that simultaneously promote racial mixing and disparage White ideals, especially the classic Aryan/Nordic aesthetic.

For example, Hollywood loves to play up the “dumb blonde” stereotype.  Blondes are ok, but they have to be stupid, or naïve, or superficial.  But as a factual matter, this seems to be untrue.  In fact, there is some data for the contrary.  In an interesting paper from 2016 titled “Are Blondes Really Dumb?,” author Jay Zagorsky draws from a large national database to show that “blonde women have a higher mean IQ than women with brown, red, and black hair.”  Furthermore, blondes “are more likely classified as geniuses” than people of other hair colors.  The differences were more pronounced among women than men.[14]

Additionally, there is an old study—from almost 100 years ago—that argues for a similar result.  Professor G. Estabrooks compiled data on nearly 1,000 boys and girls, ranging in age from 9 to 16.  Based on a coarse sorting between “light” and “dark” hair, the light-haired children had an average IQ of 109, versus 106 for the dark-haired.  He also looked at correlation with eye color, and by this measure, the blue-eyed group had an average of 109, versus 105 for the brown-eyed.[15]  Obviously we would need further data to draw firm conclusions, but indications are that the ancient Aryan advantage has carried down, in some degree, to the present day.

And then we can look at entire nations.  Not long ago, Lynn and Meisenberg (2010) calculated average IQs for 108 countries.  Looking just within Europe, we find a significant difference between the four Nordic nations (Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark) and, for example, four south-European nations (Italy, Greece, Spain, Portugal); the former average 99, and latter 95.  Not a huge difference, but still significant.[16]  Once again, this is in line with our expectations.

Thus is my brief study of Aryan beauty.  I have no grand and glorious conclusions to offer, other than the simple observation that beauty matters.  Physical appearance is an expression of one’s genetic inheritance, and thus reflects the kind of person one is.  The same genes that give a certain physical appearance also give a certain state of mind, certain behavioral tendencies, and certain motivations and values.  Beauty is not just “skin deep,” as our PC crowd like to say.  Beauty matters.

Classic markers of White, Aryan beauty have been valued for millennia, and this likely was for very real, very objective, and very evolutionary reasons.  The blue-eyed blonds were smarter, more skilled, more industrious, and more robust.  They were more creative.  They were idealistic and altruistic.  They knew how to build and sustain civilizations.  They were, in short, better people.

Jews and leftist liberals don’t want to hear any of this—especially Jews, who are notably lacking in blond hair, blue eyes, and Aryan personality traits.  For leftists and Jews, everyone is “equal.”  For them, skin tone is little more than a biological paint, laid over a physical body that is otherwise identical in all humans.  This is sheer nonsense.  Privately, Jews know this, of course; but outwardly they all maintain a façade of egalitarianism because this significantly aids their cause among the Gentile majority.  When you are a Jewish supremacist, it is best to make outward proclamations of equality even as you project supremacist thinking onto your primary opponents, Aryans and Whites.

Whites everywhere need to relearn about their own glorious legacy and to regain an appreciation for their outstanding physical and intellectual virtues.  As a whole, Whites are the most beautiful, most productive, and most virtuous race on the planet.  This is acknowledged, directly and indirectly, in a million different ways, by people all across the Earth.  We are indeed “children of the gods,” as Plato proclaimed.  We are indeed a “sacred race,” as Pindar recognized.  We need to cast off those who would denigrate and debase us, reestablish our long-lost sense of self-confidence, and reclaim our rightful place in the world community.


Thomas Dalton, PhD, has authored or edited several books and articles on politics, history, and religion, with a special focus on National Socialism in Germany.  His works include a new translation series of Mein Kampf, and the books Eternal Strangers (2020), The Jewish Hand in the World Wars (2019), and Debating the Holocaust (4th ed, 2020).  Most recently he has edited a new edition of Rosenberg’s classic work Myth of the 20th Century and a new book of political cartoons, Pan-Judah!.  All these are available at  See also his personal website

[1] Today this is known as the ‘Cold Winters Thesis’.  See, for example, “Only in America: Cold Winters Theory, race, IQ, and well-being” (B. Pesta and P. Poznanski, 2014), Intelligence 46; and R. Lynn, Race Differences in Intelligence (2015).  This idea is sometimes viewed as a modern reactionary theory, but in fact it goes back at least to Arthur Schopenhauer.  In 1851, he said

Only after man propagated his stock during a long period of time outside his natural [African] habitat between the tropics and extended it…into the more frigid zones, did he become fair and finally white. …  The highest civilization and culture, apart from the ancient Hindus and Egyptians, are found exclusively among the white races. …  All this is due to the fact that necessity is the mother of invention because those tribes that emigrated early to the north, and there gradually became white, had to develop all their intellectual powers and invent and perfect all the arts in their struggle with need, want, and misery, which in their many forms were brought about by the climate.  This they had to do in order to make up for the parsimony of nature, and out of it all came their high civilization. (Parerga and Paralipomena, vol. 2, Oxford University Press, pp. 157-159).

[2] In notable contrast to the native Scandinavians are the imported black African and Middle-Eastern “refugees” that are now quite visible in all major cities there.  One cannot help but feel that there is something profoundly anti-natural about this situation, that somehow these recent immigrants simply do not belong there.  It feels like a crime against nature.

[3] This, in fact, was exactly Plato’s view.  In his Republic we find a passage in which he is discussing various physical attributes of boys and young men, including skin tone.  Some boys are swarthy and dark-toned, but “the pale ones are children of the gods (leukous de theōn paidas einai)” (474d).

[4] We believe that Homer lived sometime around 800 BC in the region called Ionia, comprising the far west coast of modern-day Turkey.  This area had been part of the Greek proto-empire since at least the 1000s BC.

[5] Robert Fagles’ translation (1990).  The line numberings of Fagles are slightly different than other translations, unfortunately.

[6] Fragment 3, from Clement, Miscellanies.

[7] Source information:  xanthos Graces (Nem 5.55), xanthos Achilles (Nem 3.45), xanthos Danaans (Nem 9.15), khrusokomes Apollo (Olym 6.42; Pyth 2.15; Olym 7.34; Isth 7.49), xanthos Menelaus (Nem 7.30), and, xanthos Athena (Nem 10.8).

[8] Source information: Nem 7.30; Olym 7.34; Nem 10.8.  Note:  If Athena is now both blond-haired and blue-eyed, she is surely the definitive Aryan goddess.

[9] Source information:  xanthos Briseis (Ode 13.135), xanthos Athena (Ode 5.90), khrusokomes Apollo (Ode 4.1), khrusean Aphrodite (Ode 9.70), xanthai Spartans (Ode 20.1), and “the mortal men who crown their golden (xanthan) hair” (Ode 9.20).

[10] Further brief references to Hyperboreans occur in Isthmian 6 (circa 484 BC) and Olympian 3 (circa 476 BC).

[11] Any such references by Hesiod or Homer are lost to history.

[12] I note in passing that no less a figure than Nietzsche was evidently inspired by this same northern people.  At the very beginning of his landmark essay Antichrist, he states “We are Hyperboreans.”  “We”—Nietzsche and his followers—intellectually dwell among the ice and snow, far away from the comfortable, complacent, so-called civilized people; “we know very well how far off we live,” he says.

[13] In Odes 1.5 and 2.4, respectively.

[14] In Economics Bulletin, 36(1): 401-410 (2016).

[15] “Intelligence and pigmentation of hair and eyes in elementary school children,” American Journal of Psychology 41(1): 106-108 (1929).

[16] “National IQs calculated and validated for 108 nations,” Intelligence 38:353-360 (2010).  Particularly striking is a comparison of ‘light-skinned nations’ with ‘dark-skinned nations.’  But I will leave this for another time.

88 replies
  1. Karl Haemers
    Karl Haemers says:

    Fascinating analysis. I would never have expected an essay on white beauty to include entries by Homer.
    If life in northern winter climates was so difficult it actually changed the human brain, why did they do it? Why not migrate south again and live the good easy life where it was warmer? There was plenty of room I would think.

      • Kris
        Kris says:

        They must be ‘angelic’ too. Dalton is right out of the old school Instaurationists who fetishized Nordics and Nordicism, an ideology we need to revive like another hole in the head.

        • Canadianer
          Canadianer says:

          You miss the fact that blonde jews are just mixed race mestizos that grew up around nordic people in Europe. The rest of their ancestry is arab from the middle east. They are not true nordics since they are halfbreed middle-easterners. This should be basic stuff that doesn’t need explaining. Laura loomer is an example of a Jew with some blondeness but you can tell from her facial features that she is a LONG way from a purebred Noric racial type.

      • Luke
        Luke says:

        The result of gene hijacking. Professor MacDonald’s Culture of Critique devotes considerable time to explaining how jews have adopted, as part of their evolutionary survival strategies, to try to ensure some of their fellow jews will seek to marry into the White European elite classes and thereby position themselves as close as possible to the ruling power structure and to also put themselves in closer proximity to White gentile wealth, so they can wind up being beneficiaries of that wealth when the rich White gentile dies or, say, meets with an unexpected and convenient early demise.

    • Peter London
      Peter London says:

      During the Jews’ ‘exile’ in Europe they have attracted plenty of European converts, mostly female. Some of the Ashkenazim probably have very little truly Semitic ancestry.

    • B. Smith
      B. Smith says:

      Jews traffic white women and use them to produce jews that can pass for white. Jew theory is that even one drop of jew blood in a human being inclines that individual to be a traitor to humanity.

      So gene-stealing for camouflage — what about it?

  2. Peter
    Peter says:

    I think it may have been from this website that I realized that “dumb blonde” was a stupid expression not based on reality. If it were true, Europe would not have led the world for so long and Germany and England would not have been the leaders and competitors in so many areas for so long. This suggests the opposite. That the smartest people have blonde hair. I don’t believe that either, but I suspect the expression “dumb blonde” was possibly conceived in Hollywood by a Jew, just as the expression “eurotrash” (a term from the Jewish sitcom Seinfeld) and they may have invented “NAZI”, “white supremacist” and other insulting terms for all the insults they claim they had to endure from others.

  3. James Bowery
    James Bowery says:

    While there may be things of higher urgency*, is there anything of greater priority to white preservation than creating an artificial selection regime (a true culture) is, at the very least, not inferior to the one that created whites? If not, then what could be of higher scientific priority than the rediscovery of that culture?

    *Urgency serves transient necessities.

  4. Jack McArthur
    Jack McArthur says:

    “Such were the views of the ancient world”
    Except the Greek sources he either ignores or is ignorant about. Take for example the Hyksos whom the philo-Greeks always seek to ignore or downplay because it links the Greeks with the Jews which the most ancient Churches also allude to in their bibles i.e. 1 Maccabees (and which was also found in the Dead Sea scrolls library).

    As an aside the previous article by Tobias links to an essay by Andrew Joyce and the Hyksos. A couple of points:

    The following links show a photograph of a man with the hieroglyphs of Hyksos at the rhs side of his head. It dates from before the Hyksos infiltration and takeover of ancient Egypt.

    They are paying homage to their Egyptian benefactors who from ancient times had allowed the Palestinians (Amu) to graze in the Delta area in times of need (Breasted Records).

    Take a good look at the coat the Hyksos is wearing and recall Genesis 37:3

    “Now Israel [i.e. Jacob] loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age: and he made him a coat of many colours.

    Jacob is a Hyksos name.

    A New Kingdom text from Ancient Egypt describes something which, as best I know. was unique to the Hyksos i.e. they only worshipped one god who was a version of Seth who would later become the proto Satan.

    Then king Apophis made him Seth as lord, and he did not serve any god who was in the land except Seth. And he built him a temple as a perfect and eternal house beside the palace of King Apophis, (Te Velde, p. 121)

    Note the Ancient Egyptian scribes delighted in puns and there seems to me to be a direct link between the Hyksos ruler Apophis and the arch enemy of creation Apophis in Egyptian myth. If these connections are accepted then the roots of the malevolent tribe being the eternal destroyers goes way back before the bible by a millennia or so.

    Furthermore is it just coincidence that the Hyksos did not take over Egypt through battle but my immigration and stealth same as now the West, and the US in particular, has been taken over by the tribe?
    Ancient Egypt were warned in a pyramid text a few centuries before the Hyksos period not to let such barbarians in. The U.S had centuries of history to draw on regarding the tribe and their abuse of their hosts but ignored it.

    What can cause this blindness? The book I reference above by the Egyptologist Te Velde is called “Seth – God of Confusion”.

    When Jesus says the father of the Jews is the devil…….

  5. Margit
    Margit says:

    I’m just reading the author’s highly interesting book “Debating the Holocaust”, and therefore really appreciate his measured analytical approach. The above article is another great example of his stupendous skills.

  6. B. Smith
    B. Smith says:

    Thank you for the inspiring reminder of the beauty that lives within our race. And from which greater things are yet to spring forth!

    I do believe the Jews and their foolish pets literally hate us because we are beautiful.

    And considering the genetic evidence that white people are, generally speaking, hybrids with Cro-Magnon while blacks for example are hybridized with homo-erectus…

    And that Cro-Magnon seems to have burst onto the scene fully formed and a notch up over all other hominids in intellect and spirit…

    Then we really may have been the children of the (sky-traveling) “gods” — or at least in part of their seeding of this planet.

    But however our origins really were, the beauty and grace (and will to walk the upward path of destiny), that yet lives in our folk must never end!

  7. John
    John says:

    Survival is primal, therefore, those of us who are in touch with Nature must form our own communities along with the longterm plan of reclaiming our Homelands. We owe this to our posterity, it is our duty.

  8. Birhan Dargey
    Birhan Dargey says:

    WHY do jews have a love/hate obsession with Aryan Beauty…famous jews (women) want to be portrayed in pictures by beutiful aryans

  9. Anthony Kimball
    Anthony Kimball says:

    The white race IS the supreme race. Any of us in this movement are already more than well aware of this fact. We wouldn’t be in this movement if we were ignorant of, or didn’t passionately care about, our own history, culture and achievements. We also know who our enemy is, but if the most our people is willing to do in the face of everything that has been done to us by them is chatter on, then there will be no chance of driving them from the earth permanently and “reclaiming our rightful place”. At the moment, our enemy is laughing in our collective face…and for good reason. They will only stop laughing and start fearing us when (IF) we finally decide to stop chattering and start ACTING.

  10. Tom Michael
    Tom Michael says:

    I’d recommend reading Peter Frost at his website Evo and Proud – his interest is in sexual selection, particularly related to eye, hair and skin pigmentation among Northern Europeans.

  11. James Clayton
    James Clayton says:

    You’ll notice that “vitamin D” supplementation is increasing in popularity, for lack of a better term, due to an adequate serum level ostensibly conferring immune system benefits. Hypervitaminosis (D and A) again, terms for a phenomenon less well understood when the term was coined, seems to be something less to fear in a population threatened not only by osteoporosis but pulmonary infections than insufficient serum levels. In my experience, WIKIPEDIA, untrustworthy on subjects close to those we’re discussing here which, thanks to the instant piece by Dr. Dalton will likely get worse on Vitamin D. WIKIPEDIA has been a good point of departure for the layman reading biochemistry; still let particularly the White reader beware and also look elsewhere than just here,,made%20in%20the%20skin%20following%20UVB%20light%20exposure.

    For example, try this on the effect on White people as opposed to everyone else on the risks and benefits on assuring a sufficient blood level of D3, here,

    “High vitamin D levels that exceed recommended ranges — an increasingly common trend in the population — show no association with all-cause mortality, while the better-known risks of vitamin D deficiency appear notably stronger in Whites than any other race or ethnicity, according to new research.

    “‘Given the rapid increase in the incidence of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25 [OH]D) values greater than 50 ng/mL in the population, our finding is reassuring that all-cause mortality was not increased in this group,’ say Daniel V. Dudenkov, MD, of the Mayo Clinic, in Rochester, Minnesota, and colleagues, in their study, published online May 2 in Mayo Clinic Proceedings. …”

  12. Hillary Goldberg Levin
    Hillary Goldberg Levin says:

    Nearly every jewish media mogul has to have a hot blonde shiksa gf or wife.
    What does that tell you?

  13. Tim Stotts
    Tim Stotts says:

    Another inspiring and well researched essay from Dr. Thomas Dalton. As a European man living in Asia, I have always noticed images of white European people used in advertising here to promote products and services to Asians. Images of Caucasian people appear almost more than images of Asians. It seemed odd to me when I first came here. I began to also notice the huge market demand for skin lightening products and plastic surgery to create more European-looking rounded eyes and to add bridges to flat noses. Nordic features and skin tones are highly preferred all over Asia and felt to be universally more beautiful. This is not a recent fad or social media trend either. For centuries white skin has been considered more beautiful among Asians and is associated with wealth and power, particularly with the Chinese from which most cultural influence in Asia descends. Reinforcing this preference are Asian models, celebrities and famous actors who are more often than not products of mixed European and Asian blood or have spent lots of money on cosmetic surgery and skin whitening to appear as beautiful and desirable as possible ie. caucasian with a hint of Asia. I’ve noticed this preference replicated throughout my travels in Latin America as well. Skin lightening products are also a huge industry in Africa as lighter skinned Africans are considered more beautiful and upwardly mobile than darker skinned Africans. Humanity of all races seem to consciously or unconsciously prefer the white European standard in human beauty. This seems to be archetypical and a naturally occurring phenomenon. Only in America have I seen attempts to culturally reverse this natural tendency, but it is doomed to fail. As Dr. Dalton correctly states, mother nature has gifted our race in many ways which has been universally admired for thousands of years. Our natural predator has tried to change this by demonizing us and our appearance as something evil. The more recent media labels of “Orange Man” for President Trump and the anti-white racial slur of “Karen” directed against white women are a few examples of mainstreaming this racial hatred based on our appearance. Blond hair, blue eyes and white skin is what evil looks like now as long as leftists and Jews continue to dominate the media and destroy our Western civilization.

    • Luke
      Luke says:

      To the extent that jewish Hollywood and the jewish controlled and dominated advertising industry once went so overboard on using White females to sell their products and especially so, when advertising them in non-White, non-European nations – essentially elevating White female beauty to become the world standard and, I am convinced, with an ulterior and malicious intent – they did so as a means of instilling a sense of lust and covetousness within non-white males and brainwash them to wanting to poach White women from the White man’s natural reproductive mating pool.

      The genocidal effectiveness of this jewish strategy can be seen by the explosion of super wealthy non-white men around the world, be they oil rich Arab Sheiks, Narco Drug Cartel Bosses, black Hollywood or NFL or NBA celebrities or sports athletes – 9 times out of 10, these darkies will surround themselves with a harem of great looking White European females.

      However, with the recent acceleration of jewish driven hate and venom being spewed at Whites here in America, it was inevitable that White females would not be able to be exempted from this jewish hate indefinitely. So, I think this is why the jewish media have been so busy brainwashing White females to destroy their natural beauty by getting all of these disgusting tattoos all over their bodies; this is basically no different than a mestizo with a can of spray paint, painting ugly graffiti on every fence or on the side of every building in town. White female beauty, just like the beauty of a nation built by Whites with White European standards and cleanliness and based on morality as defined and policed by Whites enrages the jew, so does the beauty of our women. So, jews are compelled to find ways to destroy White female beauty and the three most successful strategies are:

      1. Brainwash the embarrassingly gullible and easily influenced White females into thinking that covering their bodies with gross tattoos is ‘trendy’ and ‘fashionable’.
      2. Using Hollywood celebs like Rosey O’Donnell, Rosanne Barr and Oprah to brainwash White females into abandoning their concern for exercising and keeping their figures slim and attractive to men and instead, promoting the idea that being fat and disgusting is A-OK and if men don’t like it, tough noogies.
      3. Again, using Hollywood and the mainstream media and TV networks to promote race mixing between White women and blacks, or with any male who isn’t White.

      All three of the above strategies are designed to destroy White beauty or to make sure the beauty of White European genetics are now passed down to a future generation of White Europeans.

      • Luke
        Luke says:

        I meant to say:

        All three of the above strategies are designed to destroy White beauty or to make sure the beauty of White European genetics are NOT passed down to a future generation of White Europeans.

  14. Richard McCulloch
    Richard McCulloch says:

    Dr. Dalton’s figure that “only around 5% of White adults are naturally blond” is much lower than the figures from anthropological studies, and much lower than what most of us would probably estimate from personal observation. To get a figure that low would probably require limiting the definition of blond to the very light A-E shades on the Fischer-Saller hair-color scale ( whereas the standard anthropological definition would include all shades of hair color from A to O (P-Y being the brown to black shades). By that standard definition the surveys consistently found that the native populations (before 1945 the European populations were almost all native) of Scandinavia, the coastal regions of the Baltic states, northern Germany, the northern Netherlands and eastern England were at least 65% blond, and the remainder of Germany, the Netherlands and England, as well as Flanders, Bohemia, eastern Austria, northern Switzerland, eastern Scotland, northwest Russia and the Normandy region of France, were at least 50% blond. . The remainder of northern France, Russia and Ukraine, as well as Ireland, western Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, western Austria, Poland and Slovakia were 35-50% blond.
    Some years ago I used my 1967 high school yearbook to calculate the proportion of blonds in my graduating class, many of whom I’d know since elementary school. I limited the survey to those of presumably northern European ancestry and found that 48% of the 224 males and 43% of the 266 females were blond. This is lower than the figures in the anthropological studies, probably because my blond classification was more narrow, being limited to the circa A-J range instead of the broader standard A-O range.
    Dr. Dalton states that the Scandinavian Hunter Gatherers (SHGs) were descended from the “‘westerners’ that had come up through Spain, and the ‘easterners’ that came via the Middle East, [who] met and began to interbreed in north-central Europe.” The current scientific consensus is that the SHGs were already in place circa 8,000 years ago and were largely descended from the Ancient North Eurasians (who have provided the earliest know sample of the gene for blond hair circa 18,000 years ago), long before the arrival of the mixed descendants of the Neolithic Anatolian Farmers (Dr. Dalton’s Middle-Easterners) to that region. The genetic evidence indicates that the SHGs had light/intermediate skin color, mostly “blue” eyes and a mixture of light and dark hair. The Yamnaya from the steppe who expanded to northern Europe starting circa 5,000 years ago were also largely descended from the Ancient North Eurasians, had light/intermediate skin color, variable eye color and some with blond hair.
    I put “blue” in quotation marks because anthropological surveys of eye color typically refer to “light” vs “dark” eyes, with the dark category usually limited to the brown shades and all other colors from hazel to ice blue included in the light category. By this standard all of the British Isles, Germany, Czechia, Slovakia, Poland, Russia, northern Ukraine, France and Switzerland, and all regions further north, are majority light-eyed, with Scandinavia, Ireland, Scotland, eastern and northern England, Normandy and northern Germany over 70% light-eyed.
    It is quite possible, perhaps even likely, that the proportions of light hair and eye colors in the northern half of Europe are higher now than they were in prehistoric times (i.e., for northern Europe the pre-Roman period would be prehistoric). Certainly the modern proportions are higher than those found in the admittedly limited number of prehistoric samples. This tends to indicate a continuing evolution or selection, whether natural, sexual or cultural, in favor of these traits.

      • Richard McCulloch
        Richard McCulloch says:

        I assume Dr. Dalton got his figures from Wikipedia (
        “Because blond hair tends to turn brown with age, natural blond hair is significantly less common in adulthood;[35][36] according to the sociologist Christie Davies, only around five percent of adults in Europe and North America are naturally blond.[35] A study conducted in 2003 concluded that only four percent of American adults are naturally blond.[36] A significant majority of Caucasian women (perhaps as high as three in four)[clarification needed] dye their hair blond”

        The most obvious problem is that the category of American adults are only about 65% European and less than 60% Northern European, which is the population to which the term “Aryan” ideal applies.
        The other problem is the source, the sociologist Christie Davies. This subject seems to be totally beyond his area of expertise, which was the sociology of morality ( Why couldn’t the Wikipedia author at least seek sources in physical anthropology? Of course, this whole area of study has been discouraged since the war and the most reliable surveys were done earlier — early enough to be available for Carleton Coon.

        Eupedia is perhaps the best on-line source I’ve found that discusses this area of anthropological study in a serious scholarly way.

        I relied more directly on a map that I downloaded several years ago and can’t locate on the web at this time using a reverse image search. Unfortunately I can’t attach it to this post but I’ll send it email if you want to refer to it.

        • charles frey
          charles frey says:

          I enjoyed Anthropology at university. In north Georgia we excavated Cherokee cultures, which the U of Michigan carbon-dated for us at ca. 8,000 years.

          Anthropology everywhere uses the German word ” nachdunkeln ” for the propensity of blond hair to turn darker with age.

          Literally ” after [ nach ] or subsequent darkening “. Regrettably, the following process is baldness.

    • Jeff
      Jeff says:

      I have seen tons of Slavs (which are not a race) : Poles. Russians, Ukrainians etc…Many of them are White, lots of them have clearly asiatic/tartaric background. One small example: The dictator of Belarussia Lukashenko.

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      Dear DR. McCulloch
      Thank you for this information. I was very much surprised when I saw the 5% figure for all White adults with naturally blonde hair. And only 10% with blue eyes! Blue eyes are exceedingly common, and certainly in my family which were southwestern German. Apart from my mother who had brown eyes/dark brunette hair, no one else had such eyes and hair, from me & my two siblings, their children, and the next two generations of kids! Not a one. My eyes are green-gray but they’re light, and came from my grandmother on my blonde, blue-eyed father’s side.

      I’ve always read that blue eyes are always dominant over brown eyes. From my parents on down, I can count 8 true blondes out of 17 individuals. I’m not one of them. But there’s not a single other brunette – only lightish brownettes.

      Just some anecdotal evidence.

      • Jim Prideaux
        Jim Prideaux says:

        I’ve always read that blue eyes are always dominant over brown eyes.

        I’m afraid you have it backwards, Carolyn. Blue eyes are a recessive trait, brown a dominant trait.

        Thus, it’s all the more worthy of note, as this study shows, that 57.4 percent of white Americans born between 1895 and 1905 had blue eyes. A 2002 study done at Loyola University of Chicago—referred to here and elsewhere, though I can’t find a link to the study itself—indicated that in 1950, the number of white Americans with blue eyes was down to about a third. It was down to just above 15 percent in 2006, as the New York Times (10/18/2006) was delighted to report.

    • De Doc
      De Doc says:

      The Western Hunter-Gatherers (WHG) of Europe preceded the SHGs by thousands of years and are the likely source of light eye colors, found in many European and European descended people of today. The more famous ones include three male specimens, Cheddar Man (found in western England), La Brañya Man (from Spain) and Loschbour Man (from Luxembourg) – all had light to blue colored eyes, though skin and hair color was generally dark. Their Y-haplogroups were, respectively, I2a, C2a, and I2a of which only the I2 subclade exists now amongst modern Euro peoples. The earliest known presence of the blond hair allele was from an ANE related specimen from Cetral Asia dated to around 16-kYP.

  15. George Kocan
    George Kocan says:

    Nordic Europeans and their descendants are not the only ones having a history in cold climates. Mongoloids to also as evidenced by their physiques which conserve body temperature and the epicantal fold protecting the eyes. The Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and others have IQ’s slightly higher than those of Whites, but they are not White or blonde with blue eyes. European men seem even to prefer the looks of such Oriental women.

  16. Bobby
    Bobby says:

    You know Thomas, you just keep getting better and better. Not only is this a great essay, it’s great writing. The last two paragraphs are near perfect. One of your best, thanks.

    I don’t know much about David Lane, but I’ve always liked the other 14 words phrase; “Because the beauty of the white, Aryan woman, shall not perish from the earth.”

  17. Jeff
    Jeff says:

    Take a look at Italy: The more or less White Northern Italy produced the Renaissance, while the more or less semitic, dark Southern Italy produced criminal organisations like the Mafia, the Camorra, the Nhangreta, La Sacra Corona, and now there is even a Mafia Capitale in Roma.
    Down with the EU, the Eurasian Union.

    • De Doc
      De Doc says:

      Southern Europeans are not Semitic in any broad genetic sense, though there are pockets, where it exists, e.g. Ibiza, Spain, where many of the native population show marked genetically similarities to ancient Phoenician specimens, indeed moreso than modern Lebanese. That case has an historical link to a known intrusive Semitic genetic component from the early Iron Age. The Arabs, despite varying periods of occupational presence in parts of Southern Europe, didn’t leave much of a trace on modern populations of those areas. Sicilians, Sardinians, Greeks, and Corsicans have darker features owing to a higher level of the Early Neolithic Farmers, who first migrated into Europe from Anatolia during the late Mesolithic to Early Neolithic times. They were lighter skinned than the Western Hunter-Gatherers peoples of Europe, but still darker than the European average of today. Indeed the modern Sardinians are used as genetic proxies for the ENFs, when genetic studies are conducted to examine the amount of ENF in any given population. Ötzi, the famed ‘Ice Mummy’ discovered in the Alps genetically looks a lot like modern Sardinians, as do some of the earliest farmer settlers to Scandinavia.

    • Anthony Aaron
      Anthony Aaron says:

      My dad’s side is Geneovese (from Genoa and even north of there) … my mother’s side is Sicilian. Shortly after she died, we came across pictures of her and her sister in their childhood — they not only had nearly pitch black hair and green eyes – but also were quite dark-skinned during the summers. I, too, get very dark during the summer – in my younger days, my half-Black woman friend/companion was more fair than me.

      Cursory searching reveals the presence and influence of Moroccan peoples in Sicily starting more than 1,200 years ago … and the influences are still present in Sicily in the architecture and the food and the people. It’s actually a rather attractive mix … 

      Slightly askew … my wife and I spent some time in Australia – saw some rather non-urban (i.e, ‘tribal’ looking?) Aborigines there. I’ve also seen them in several Australian motion pictures. They have a unique appearance … in person they’re not only quite striking, but they have a unique form of ‘beauty’ that, while different from our normal view of it, is still very noticeable — at least to us it was.

  18. James Mueller
    James Mueller says:

    There are some interesting points in this essay, but I disagree as someone of Northern European descent with the tone of some parts. There is no reason for Dr. Dalton to exalt Nordics as superior in just about everything to other European subgroups given the vulnerabilities evident in Northern Europe from a racialist perspective. Arguing about the superiority of a particular group tends to undermine the notion that one is out simply to preserve that group – this leads to assumptions about racial or subracial supremacy, as with the Nordicism of Nazi Germany. Also, I find it somewhat amusing that racial nationalists who are supposedly gung-ho about preserving Nordic traits are so eager to put down Southern and sometimes Eastern Europeans while remaining silent about white-Asian sexual relationships, even among White Nationalists. This silence is telling.

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      James, you are wrong about “Nazi” Germany. While it claimed that Nordic was the most valuable type in the German race (that was the terminology used), it also acknowledged each type was spread throughout the German people and mixed with other types in various measures. It saw in the Nordic type the strongest “leadership ability” and the National Socialists thought leadership highly valuable for German recovery.

      The National Socialists valued every German citizen and discouraged racially-based snobbery, such as the aristocrats had done with their family names and wealth, dismissing the poor altogether. The SS was especially expected to treat all Germans, and all people, with full respect.

      • charles frey
        charles frey says:

        A former SA uncle told me, that SS rank was determined by merit instead of family lineage.

        Contemporaneous film clips exist, featuring German soldiers without head gear, the better to observe their differences. One after another, they mention what far-flung parts they come from. Though they are one.

        In 93 I managed the renovation of the destination restaurant ” Strandcafe ” in Luebben in the Spreewald, ca 100 kms SE of Berlin. [ Website ]. I hired several locals, who later identified as Sorbs: a Slavic minority that originated in Eastern Germany and neighboring Poland and Czechoslovakia.

        Superb workers and individuals who invited me for dinner and after. They told me, that under Hitler their difference was meticulously honored and they were excluded from Wehrmacht service against their own.

        Previously I had only been remotely aware of them, since we had been evacuated from Berlin in 43 to the Lausitz, their traditional home, and our initial contact with the emissaries of that Jewish swine Ehrenburg.

        Still later, I read, that some of them had emigrated to NW Texas, where they founded a university.

        Since that is your bailiwick, could you enrich me/us with a few words on said topic ?

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          “Since that is your bailiwick, could you enrich me/us with a few words on said topic ?”

          It must be Concordia University, founded in 1926, in northwest Austin (Texas), not NW Texas. Austin is considered south-central Texas.
          I’ve never been there but you can read about it and see pictures here:
          “Concordia was founded by members of Texas’s Wendish immigrant community. The original main building, Kilian Hall, is named for John Kilian, founder of the first Texas Lutheran church associated with the LCMS and leader of a large group of Wends (also called SORBS) who settled in the Serbin area. Today, between 10 and 15 percent of Concordia’s faculty, staff and students are of Wendish heritage.

          “The school opened with 26 students on its original site along East Avenue (now Interstate 35) on the then northern outskirts of Austin, Texas. In 1929, a two-story classroom building, later called the Music Building, and still later known as College Central, was built.”

          On campus is a Wendish bell that looks very attractive in the picture.

          • Emicho
            Emicho says:

            Hi Carolyn, you once said to me you didn’t like David Irving, I didn’t understand this as surely he has done more than anyone to fight against the ridiculous pantomime villain characteristic giving to Hitler and the Nazis?
            You know your stuff in this regard, so I’d value your opinion.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            Hi Emicho. I don’t “dislike” David Irving. I’m more aware of his flaws than most rabid David Irving fans are willing to see or mention. One is a failure to be scrupulously honest as a historian — quite a common failure, it’s true. But in Irving it stands out bc he’s supposed to be, or is billed as, the great truth teller about Adolf Hitler. Even here, he can be more interested in telling a good story, to bolster his own reputation.

            Another big disappointment is his back-tracking on the “holocaust” as well as on being a “revisionist.” When it didn’t pay off as he had expected, he joined the Jewish Lobby in moving the center of the “holocaust” from Auschwitz to the farthest eastern transit only camps — mainly Sorbibor, Belzec and Treblinka, that he claims (agrees) murdered “up to 2.5 million Jews.” He completely destroyed himself as a “holocaust” revisionist – hoping the Jews would let him sell his books again. (They didn’t, which shows DI is not too smart either.) David Irving as a successful historian was his #1 concern, over truth. Many people think that’s just fine; he has a right to protect himself. I just don’t happen to be one of them.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            “Not exactly a Voelkerwanderung …”

            Ha ha ha. So true Charles. You sometimes overestimate me (and have at times underestimated me, too). But I believe we are friends. I’m very grateful you are here to impart your vast knowledge gained through life experience and your very sharp mind. Don’t stop.

  19. Frozy
    Frozy says:

    “Cold is good for brains” is an old idea. However, Inuits do not have a particular high IQ, 91 according to Lynn. So maybe it is more complicated than that.

  20. charles frey
    charles frey says:

    This essay is a tad too narcissistic for my liking and our reputation; granting a scintilla of truth to our sworn enemies’ diatribes, that we are supremacists.

    It requires nothing past elementary Biology 101, including a couple of sessions on DNA, to understand the difference in survival in American Samoa and northern Michigan. In Samoa the fish voluntarily jump from the lagoon into your frying pan, leaving you the remaining 23 hours to pick your nose: in rural Michigan you had better spend the majority of the day to provide for the long winter nights; both with fuel and food. Laplanders would feel strange in Madrid, taking siestas and enjoying supper at 10:00, atop the roof-garden restaurant at the Palace Hotel; admiring the sunset among an abundance of strange conviviality.

    Boooring !

    Also, while the Wright Brothers, et al, developed their flying machine, the Chinese invented gun powder much earlier. Then it was our superior Western intelligence, initiated by Churchill, to combine these two inventions, by bombing some unknown unruly Kurdish tribe in 1913. Of course this was as nothing compared to our superior action on Dresden, where the Anglo-Saxons incinerated over 100,000 original Saxons in three days around St Valentines Day; after the War was effectively over. Oh, what a blessing, this our superior White intelligence, whose development is so pedantically explained here !

    While Martin Luther was a most impressive personality, have a gander at his still surviving family ! Obviously things change. It didn’t require a Sociology course in Social Mobility to notice, that at 5/11, I was well above average height when I accompanied my room mate’s family to Presbyterian Sunday Service, but had to crane my neck to see the preacher when accompanying my girl-friend to Episcopalian Service.

    Beauty, at least for me, isn’t determined by the color of one’s hair or the degree of whiteness, nor class. I well remember being struck by the beauty of a white, obviously working-class woman at a grocery discount store.

    Her face spoke to me of leading a hard life. Her eyes betrayed a sternness, but also a great capacity for kindness, helpfulness and understanding. All superimposed on a finely shaped cranium and neck. She happened to be dark blond and white, but those characteristics did not define her.

    There are stunningly beautiful and intelligent young performers on something as unexpected as Colombia has Talent. Ciena Pusan, from Cluj [ Klausenburg ] Romania, put a spell on the judges at age 10, of China has Talent, speaking in fluent Mandarin, as well as the entire, very good looking Chinese audience, including toddlers – totally opposite to our preconceptions.

    I recall Boris Johnson, as Mayor of London, at the end of the Peking Olympics, walking past a long lineup of 6ft. + Chinese, lanky, beautiful girls. His blazer flapping in the wind, unbuttoned, gut protruding and both hands in his pockets. Had I been a third of my age, I would have married any one of them, had they deigned to accept me: the ” professional itinerant “, as a Frankfurt girl friend put it.

    How wonderful when we finally win this bout. How disappointing, if, in the process, we too turn into narrow-minded country bumkins without even having voted for the woke !

    • Emicho
      Emicho says:

      On good looking ‘whites’ the new British tennis star Emma Raducanu isn’t really white but a Romanian-Chinese mix, educated with great privilege at one of our few remaining grammar schools, which are usually much better than your average private school. Thus giving her a gorgeous upper class English accent that just adds to all her other virtues.
      So she has talent, beauty and brains, you’d imagine she’d have a high moral character, but no.
      Just recently she wrecked the life of an Amazon delivery driver who’d, due to the media, become infatuated with her, and harmlessly approached her house a couple of times, leaving love letters, decorating her garden tree, and I think stealing an old trainer as a momento.
      Anyone with a heart would see this as the sorry case it is, and ask the police to tell him to stay away at most.
      Not Raducanu. Perhaps it was the feminazi indoctrination at school, but she ensured this poor soul was crucified for stalking, giving absurd statements to the court about how she is now scared to leave the house, is always looking over her shoulder, etc. All the pathetic woe-is-me garbage these types always come away with.
      She of course was in Melbourne at time competing in the Aussi Open, that’s how traumatised she was, so couldn’t give this testomy in person.
      The total callousness of this girl, given every material and family advantage imaginable, against this lost soul was vomit-inducing.
      So much for moral qualities mirroring physical attractiveness. The guy she refrained from asking for mercy for, was himself married, so she happily attacked his wife as well, showing what kind of feminist she is. He was also an immigrant, nkt the horrible black, Pakistan or Arab types, but some sort of gentle East Asian, probably not used to being bombarded with flirty, sexual images of an almost perfect 19 year old in the media.
      In cases like this you see how when the media do these things, they really are attacking males, they know fine well a few innocent males will crack and do something odd like appear at the ladies door offering love.
      So they attack men, and attack the 99.999% of women who cannot live up to such images of female perfection.
      The whole thing is sick. And Jewish.
      No-one involved is Jewish, but sexy women in mass circulation papers is Jewish, sportswomen having to promote themselves as set kittens is Jewish, the dumb feminism Raducencu imbibed at school is Jewish, the courts now dominated by women and female neuroticisms is Jewish, and the complete lack of any mercy at all is Jewish.

  21. Richard McCulloch
    Richard McCulloch says:

    Another source on this topic, from the anti-White academic perspective, is:
    Russell-Cole, Kathy; Wilson, Midge; Hall, Ronald E. (2013) [1992], The Color Complex: The Politics of Skin Color in a New Millennium, New York City: Anchor Books, A Division of Random House, Inc., ISBN 978-0-307-74423-4
    This quote from pp 51-52 is especially pertinent:
    “To this day , many White Americans, especially women, still strive to achieve a western European look, specifically one that is northern European, or Nordic. Even at a time in history when the criteria for defining beauty have been expanding, it would seem the pinnacle of ideal feminine beauty remains that of a White woman with pale skin, blond hair, and blue eyes. Other than perhaps the rarity of such features in the human gene pool, it is hard to pinpoint exactly why this particular combination of physical attributes, out of all possible others, became the gold standard of femininity. Whatever the reason, white women are “dyeing” to be blond. One survey found that among White college females who chemically alter their natural hair color, 48 percent self-reported that they dyed it blond or blonder, 8 percent said that they dyed their hair to make it darker, and the rest said they did so for reasons of maintenance. The high number of “suicide blondes” remains steady, but the percentage of natural blondes in the American population has been dropping in recent decades. In 1980, the figure was 25 percent, but in 2003, it was only 16 percent, with one study putting the percentage of natural adult blondes in the American population as low as 4 percent.”

    The single study with the 4 percent figure would seem to be a rather extreme outlier. The other figures would seem to roughly correspond with the figures I cited for the proportions of blond hair in the native populations of northern Europe if one considers that in 1980 the American population was about 75% White, which would include esentially all of the blonds, and about 65% northern European, which would include over 95% of the blonds. If 25% of all the 1980 adults were blond this would mean that 33% of all the White adults were blond and about 37% of the northern European adults were blond. By 2003 the population was about 65% White and 55% northern European. If 16% of all the 2003 adults were blond this would mean that 24.6% of all the White adults and about 29% of the northern European adults were blond. This is about a 25% reduction in the proportion of blonds within the White population in less than a generation (23 years), which is difficult to explain other than by extensive mixture of northern Europeans with other Whites (blondness being a recessive trait) or by a major and sudden drop in the blond rate of reproduction, i.e., some new type of social-cultural selection against blond reproductive fitness.

    • Richard McCulloch
      Richard McCulloch says:

      There are other possible explanations for the 25% drop found in the blond proportion in White adults from 1980-2003, referred to in my previous post, which I consider more likely. First, I simply don’t believe this finding or assertion is correct. That such a large change could occur in just 23 years without being widely noticed and commented on, and without a very obvious cause, defies belief. Unfortunately, we live in an age where we need to suspect an ulterior anti-White motive when we encounter anomalies like this. Second, it is possible that the studies for 1980 and 2003 used different methodologies, particularly a different standard for the blond categorization, with the 1980 study perhaps using the standard A-O range on the Fischer-Saller scale while the 2003 study used a narrower range, enough to reduce the blond proportion by circa 25%. This would be understandable as the 2003 study could have been conducted by people unfamiliar with the scale (after all, is was a product of Nazi Germany) as by the standards of the average person people in the M-O hair color range are often not regarded as blond, and they could well account for 25% of the blonds.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        “(after all, it was a product of Nazi Germany)…”

        What’s with the Nazi term? Is it too much to write National Socialist? There was no Nazi Germany until the war and after the war – except in Jewish media. Well, don’t take me literally on that, but there wasn’t much. It’s a propaganda term.

        • Emicho
          Emicho says:

          You are right, even although that bought traitor to Britain Churchill was growling about Hitler and his ‘Narzis’ pre-war, the British people before, during & after considered their enemy Germany, not Nazis, and certainly not fascists, never mind fascism.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            It was a propaganda war, even more so than WWI before it, and even though there was plenty of death & destruction with high-impact weaponry taking place. Propaganda is absolutely essential and primary today; that is what we must see through, plough through, to get to the poor, little mistreated “truth” buried underneath it all.

            That doesn’t mean complex conspiracy theories! Truth has more to do with COMMON SENSE than anything else. The constant barrage of news is meant to prevent common sense from being applied, including much on the Internet. On the Internet, people are not accountable (like you, calling yourself Emicho). We all accept that as “necessary” but still you can say anything you want w/o accountability, except for the opinion of others reading you. That is something, at least.

            As to the word Nazi, I’ve just been seeing it in the early warnings of the Jewish opposition to Hitler in 1933. As soon as he became Chancellor in Germany, the Jewish opposition was screaming, howling about “Nazis.” Once again, to claim, as Ron Unz does, that “Nazi” was an acceptable, widely used term within the NSDAP for one another, is false. And he uses false evidence found in books written by Jews to support that false belief.

    • James Mueller
      James Mueller says:

      You’re an older guy, so your concerns about subracial mixture may be applicable from the standpoint of someone who graduated in the 1960s (though perhaps exaggerated given that Southern Europeans statistically are a small fraction of white Americans), but just as culture changes, so does racial composition. Currently white-Asian pairings are common, especially in parts of the country where Asians are numerous, and hardly any of your followers even raise this as a potential threat to the survival of Nordic traits. In fact, numerous White Nationalists have boasted of dating Asian women, and one associated with the movement even wrote an Asian sex tourism book. Yet nobody even raises this as a problem in the movement.

      The question is this: Why the silence over Nordic-Asian pairings that are just so stereotypically common and in the media constantly, and instead on a fixation with interbreeding with other *indigenous* Europeans?

      I’m all for the preservation of Nordic traits. I even want Nordic separation. But this is absurd.

  22. anonym
    anonym says:

    Most of the pre abrahamic gods were described a “light haired” and with “light” or “shining” eyes, whether it be in the Middle East, India, the South Pacific or South America. There seems to be an era of history missing in our record. The era of the sea faring light haired, white skinned, blue eyed, tall, bearded men, who founded the civilizations in the Middle East, South America, Easter Island, and even in the South Pacific (in Polynesia white missionaries were said to come from “the land of the Gods”, and their gods are often white.) They are sometimes called “the Shining Ones” (as with the Annunaki in Sumeria), like the greeks called themselves “hellenes” (greek. “hellen” means “bright”.)

    Same with the Flavian family in Rome, (Vespasian, Titus etc.) who’s name flavius means “blonde”, or “yellow haired”. The second version of the “flavians”, around 400 AD, seems to stem from the Jews Titus brought to Rome. Among them Flavius Josephus. I.e, the emperor who established Christianity in Rome, Flavius Constantine, was likely a Jew, posing as a European.

    Even Jehova might have begun as a Sumerian white demi god. The cuneiform tablets of Hammurabi describe a god called “Ia” or “Iave” who seems to be the origin of Jehova. (See Friedrich Delitzsch “Babel and the Bible”).

    When whites arrived and created civilizations, thousands of years ago, they became viewed as gods. They used artificial irrigation, could foresee solar eclipses, cure diseases, build in stone etc. Jehova is likely based on one of those legends, about a white man thousands of years ago, who brought civilization to the semites. I.e. judaism is a “cargo cult”, based on comical imitation and plagiarism of white culture. (And Jesus is a fictitious Jewish “hero”, aping the indo european concept of the devine man, the Hero.)

    Due to abrahamic “religions”, mainly Islam, everything between India and Turkey is a sterile desert, physically, intellectually and spiritually. Hence the “strange” similarities between greek mysticism (Pythagoras especially) and the Eastern philosophies. Everything between them has been destroyed by abrahamism.

  23. Robert Penman
    Robert Penman says:

    A fascinating subject, for sure.

    There are so many threats to the subject that it can become difficult to decide what part of it to address.

    I see two different things going on here at the same time. Firstly, darker skinned people can be forgiven for promoting themselves as beautiful, they have no choice in the skin colour they were born with and thus will try to bring out the best features in themselves for their own self pride. The Jews on the other hand are a completely different group in this regard, as their motives are sinister and have a very specific goal that will change the face of the world forever.

    One thing I have noticed, and this is anecdotal, is that White women with blond hair are much more likely to be arrogant and with a strong sense of entertainment, this despite all the media pressure against Whites. Again, I must say this is just my observations, so I could well be wrong. However, if this is a general rule it would certainly play into the hands of the Jews, and of course it would annoy other races of people.

    Another thing of interest, is the huge amount of South American women who win Miss World, or Miss Univers or whatever they call those things, back when such contest were mainly chosen on beauty.

    Also, with regards to intelligence Jews go by far the best on IQ test, just look how they have swindled and controlled White nations, though this might be more about their lack of moral behaviour.

    Regarding intelligence among the different groups of Europeans, I saw a breakdown that put Italians at the top, so who knows.

    I myself, have found that light skinned women with dark hair more often to my personal taste, but not always.

    The main point is this, White people, and blond-haired people have a right to exist and not to be presented as something needing to be replaced.

  24. Heartland Separatist.
    Heartland Separatist. says:

    I think I like the term Aryana better. It has a more mythic feel. Can we transform the word Aryan into Aryana as it implies a collective.

  25. Autisticus Spasticus
    Autisticus Spasticus says:

    Regarding pigmentation, the most attractive combination in women is light eyes, dark hair and pale skin, simply because this combination achieves maximum contrast.

    I am currently writing a book (The Historical Absence of Feminine Facial Morphology in European Art and Culture) wherein I make the case that authentic female beauty did not exist, not in the arts and likely not in reality either, until the mid-20th century. It is about 27,000 words at the moment. Perhaps you might find my thesis interesting. As I explain in great detail, even a cursory glance at Greco-Roman statuary reveals an astonishing lack of femininity. Large noses, large chins and small lips are the quintessential features. This morphology does not possess positive valence from a rational perspective, nor is it endocrinologically feminine. People continue to be awed by it, which is inexplicable to me, though perhaps this is feigned. But I am most surprised that white nationalists, of all people, are oblivious to the brutishness of the Greco-Roman canon, which dominated European culture until the early 20th century, despite being biologically impoverished.

    Anyone who wishes to know more, including Dalton, may request to contact me.

    • Robert Penman
      Robert Penman says:

      Rubbish! The National Socialist (or “Nazis” as you call them) did not wish to exterminate Slavic people.

      • kris
        kris says:

        ‘Fraid so for the Hitler fan club out here. The Leader was pretty open about his plans for Russia and Poland in his turgid magnum opus, written almost two decades prior to unleashing his wars in The East. The Hitler fan club brigade within American White Nationalism is as pathetically comical as Nordicist fetishism.

        • charles frey
          charles frey says:

          Your level of knowledge regarding Operation Barbarossa and particularly its last-minute timing is also pathetic.

          • kris
            kris says:

            American neo-naziscwho continue to defend their hero, who killed more white European people than any liberal ever did, is quite pathetic. It is why most white people want nothing to do with white nationalists.

          • charles frey
            charles frey says:


            01 I reply on the condition you copy the truth to your hasbara paymasters.

            02 The League of Nations shunned post WW1 Germany and the SU alike.

            03 Both came together through the Treaty of Rapallo, allowing Germany to circumvent many of its Versailles re-armament restrictions.

            04 The SU supplied Germany with natural resources, right up to Barbarossa. [ Extant film clips ].

            05 Pursuant to THEIR own writings, Marxists called on the world’s laborers to unite and backed it up with para-military actions throughout Germany and indeed Jew financed international wars and revolutions. [ 1905 and Russo-Japanese War; just as examples ].

            06 Before having gotten their own house in order, in 1923 they infiltrated ca. 2,000, plain clothed Red Army soldiers, headed by a full General into Weimar Germany to back up their primarily Jewish [evidenced revolutionaries. Abundant, extant film clips !

            07 Ever helpful, in 1929-30, Rothschild’s Viennese Commerzbank brought 1929 US to Europe to lubricate the revolution a little.

            08 In January 33, Hitler took power and in March Judea Declared War on Germany.

            09 Nevertheless Hitler agreed to the very generous Haavara Agreement, which blocked Jewish money, but allowed its withdrawal for their purchase of German industrial output, required to open up Palestine. Without forgetting German and Austrian schools to train Jews in agriculture for their famous kibbutzim, which, in the sixties and seventies, I noticed, were exclusively maintained by Palestinians, supervised from pool side deck chairs.

            10 As you probably don’t know, East Prussia was separated from the Reich by Poland; often disregarding the euphonious Wilsonian public referenda.

            11 Poland charged an outrageous 50,000 Reichsmarks for the passage of each train through the Polish Corridor, to keep East Prussia and its beautiful capital, Koenigsberg, economically and familially viable.

            12 It was the primarily Jewish NKVD, not the Gestapo, who committed the mass murder at Katyn, before Barbarossa.

            13 It required Churchill’s agreeing nod to assassinate Sikorsky, the London-based leader of The Polish Government in Exile, by Philby at Gibraltar.

            14 To date, many peace offers by Hitler to London, are kept secret, in this purportedly democratic and open country.

            15 In the same vein, Hess flew to Britain to explore peace, but ended up in the Tower and later in Spandau, only to die in an ambulance, manned by the British, en route to a hospital.

            As divulged, with much more, by his son during a lecture in Toronto.

            16 Read Suvarov, who was found sufficiently credible to lecture at Annapolis.

            17 He speaks of Stalin, lecturing his Staff and Military Academies, that while war is immoral and a concomitant of imperialism/ capitalism, the coming war would be deeply moral and essential.

            18 According to Suvarov, who was rapidly promoted due to his intelligence, and pursuant to now open, cited documentation after Gorbeshev, Stalin set May 15, as the date for the Soviet invasion: evidenced by enormous buildup of offensive, rather than defensive forces and formations. Backed up by the Wehrmacht’s Fremde Heere Ost, its intelligence component.

            19 Hess flew to England causing Stalin to wait for a possible British/German peace, which caused him to postpone his planned May 15 attack until the middle of July.

            20 Why in hell would anyone expect us to apologize, for kicking in their door three weeks prematurely ?

            21 Though many millions paid with their lives, it saved as many in the future, throughout Europe.

            22 Stalin butchered ca. 30 millions, the Communists worldwide and thereafter ca. 110 millions.

            23 I feel deeply sorry for all combatants, who will be missed by their families and loved ones, seeing their farm fields turn fallow.

            24 America is yet awaiting its test, brought on by the very same elements.

            25 Before you offer up additional crap, do some elementary reading !

            Over and OUT, for good.

          • Kris
            Kris says:

            Charles Frey: You lost me at, ‘Copy to your Hasbara Paymasters.’ Who uses terms like that? Yes, Hitler and NS were an abject disaster for European Peoples and their interests.

        • Pádraig
          Pádraig says:

          Thanks for bringing awareness of the word turgid! Apologies though, could you please clarify your point for me? I’m not exactly ‘up to date’ with much of this. It seems like you possibly detest Hitler, why is this?

          • Kris
            Kris says:

            Because he was a Germanic Chauvinist idiot who pursued a reckless foreign policy which destroyed his people, nation, and traditional European civilization, leading to our lovely contemporary society today.

      • Al Ross
        Al Ross says:

        Herr Hitler wished to exterminate Russia and Poland’s Communist Jewish leadership .

        The Communist Jewish leadership of Russia wished to exterminate Germans.

        When the German crackdown on local Communist cells was initiated , low and behold, 78 % of the leaders were Jews.

        • Greg
          Greg says:

          Not true.
          If Hitler had won, there woudn’t be a KGB despot like Putin to cause trouble.
          RU ist such a joke that’s its GDP is about the same as small Florida!!

  26. Pádraig
    Pádraig says:

    Forgive me if I have overlooked the answer I am seeking, however the essay states that only 5% of Whites have blue eyes. The essay also purports that humans with black skin migrated north, and due to the colder climate, the skin, hair, and eyes “likely” lightened over time. Why only 5% of Whites with blue eyes then? It seems there was a lot of time to ‘lighten’, yet only 5% of Whites have blue eyes? Is it safe to say that more than 5% of Whites have lived in or are descended from the cold climates?

    Also, is the ‘out-of-Africa’ theory accepted as true universally? I am unaware. I’ve not been convinced of the confirmed truth of this theory. Has this been proven as fact? Has it been overwhelmingly proven that black skinned people migrated from Africa and became lighter in features due to climate?

    Much of this does not seem acceptable to me. Some clarification would be appreciated if you wouldn’t mind. Thank you.

    • De Doc
      De Doc says:

      These are very general statements that need much clarification. The humans moving northwards from Africa lightened up to varying degrees. Most Paleolithic Hunter Gatherers, based on current genetic data, were rather dark featured (eyes, hair, skin) initially to include those groups that hunted large game animals, such as the Wooly Mammoth, in northern Eurasia. Europe records the earliest light eyed people with the Western Hunter-Gatherers, who had varying shades of non-dark brown eye color, but still with dark skin and hair. Why these people and not others? We don’t really know. A rare mutation, perhaps, that took off due to sexual selection is a possibility. By the time of the Mesolithic Era these WHGs, based on the ancient DNA finds, were almost all with light eye colors as judged by the genetics. It’s almost certain that this population bequeathed light eye colors to the world. The skin lightening occurred much later, as a selective sweep (again, driven largely by sexual selection?) during the Mesolithic-Neolithic Eras. The WHGs contribute only a limited fraction of most modern European genomes – the other parts are from Early Neolithic Farmers originating from Anatolia and the Western Steppe Herders (WSH) out of the most eastern areas of Europe. Both of those groups had genes for light skin, so they genetically swamped the WHGs. Apparently the light eye colors were the traits preserved from the hunter-gatherers in those interactions. A lot to digest, yes, but that is the short story on how and why White Europeans possess light hue features. I’m certainly part of that story with my pale, freckled skin, blue eyes and blond hair.

      On the Out of Africa theory the genetics strongly support it, but don’t buy the simpleton models portrayed by the scientifically illiterate types. By the time modern human groups left that continent there were already several population splits that occurred over 200+ thousand years. The Out of Africa population likely did not look like typical West Africans of today, but we’re undoubtedly dark featured.

    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      Also, is the ‘out-of-Africa’ theory accepted as true universally? I am unaware. I’ve not been convinced of the confirmed truth of this theory.

      Please stay just as you are!

      Someone who thinks of the literature of paleoanthropology as being cousin-german to the espionage thriller, the fantasy novel, the romance tale, or the Old West yarn—in other words, as just another genre of literary fiction—will be a lot closer to the truth than someone who listens earnestly to these pseudoscientific fairy tales and the pretentious fabulists who concoct them.

      There is more honor, wisdom, and truth to be found among those who wager on the behavior of three-year-old quadrupeds than among paleoanthropologists, and the former make for far more sociable drinking companions, too.

  27. Anonymous
    Anonymous says:

    Can anyone here answer this? In the 3rd Reich, how did the Nuremberg Laws define a “Jew”? That is, what was the minimum ethnic ancestry that one had to possess to be considered Jewish? I had always thought it was 1/32; ie, if one of your great-great-great-grandparents was a Jew, the Nazis defined you as a Jew, but you were not so designated if merely one of your great-great-great-great-grandparents was Jewish. I have recently been challenged on this.

  28. John Hopkins III
    John Hopkins III says:

    Mozart was NOT blonde.

    But did have green / blue eyes.

    I do not mind blondes one bit. Plenty of blondes in my family tree.

    Regardless I would say people with brown or dark hair aswell as green eyes are no less smart or genious than blondes. Shakespeare, and Dostojevsky, not blonde. Neither the inventor of the aeroplane and so on.

    I guess many smart people are blonde sure but to try to make them out to be smarter than people with brown hair is just not factual.

    The lower IQ in countries with higher percentage other colours of hair and eyes is probably more due to racial mixture, but who knows.

    Mr. Kevin MacDonald, not blonde.

    And yes it can be atractive indeed, if one is into that.

  29. Armoric
    Armoric says:

    It’s legitimate to ask what race is the most beautiful. Beauty is not only subjective, it can be explained by universal biological considerations. On the other hand, it’s not legitimate to ask which girl is the most beautiful in a multiracial beauty contest organized by Jews whose main objective is to encourage miscegenation.

    I don’t see anything beautiful in the Black “immigrants” I see in the streets of my hometown. They look out of place. But it’s very different when I make an image search on the internet with the key words: black people Omo valley. Those people look much better in their ancestral environment. In that African context, I would agree they are beautiful. But from my perspective as a White man, they are beautiful in the same way as the landscape, the giraffes and the elephants.

    Of course, you do not evaluate the beauty of a young White woman in the same way you would evaluate the beauty of an elephant, a Black person, a car or a bicycle. This is because you are never going to marry an elephant, a Black woman, or a bicycle. That’s why the idea of multiracial beauty contests is absurd. When you see a beautiful young White woman, even if there is no chance of her marrying you or a member of your family, there is still the idea of racial compatibility. Unless you are some kind of ideological activist, you can not separate the two things: beauty and racial similarity. That’s how you avoid miscegenation and get beautiful White children.

Comments are closed.