Western Culture

GROK 3 Agrees That White European Men Are Responsible for Almost All the Greatest Human Accomplishments

 

One of the most damaging costs of the imposition of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” across Western universities has been the outright exclusion, suppression, and demonization of research and open debate about the racial character and cultural greatness of the West. For decades now, academics have been reducing the rise of the West to the creation of colonial empires, the extraction of gold and silver from the Americas, the “genocide” of Amerindians, the African slave trade, the malevolent use of modern weapons against a supposedly peaceful Asian world, and the cultivation of “white supremacist” notions against non-Caucasians.

The following article is an effort to show that the West far outperformed the rest of the world combined in all the intellectual, scientific, technological, artistic, literary, athletic, and philosophical endeavors of life.

These lists are not based on my subjective preferences but on careful documentation and extensive research from a wide variety of sources, books, dictionaries, encyclopedias, Wikipedia, reference books I have consulted over many years of studying Western Civilization. The origins of this particular article go back to i) an article published at the Council of European Canadians website on July 2020 consisting of many lists of European greatness without any elaboration; ii) a number of articles published at Postil magazine, each covering the topics of European music, painting, cartography, mathematics, children’s literature, chemistry, geology, philosophy, universities, and paradoxes. Unlike the lists posted in the July 2020 article, the lists below include introductory statements and details about the key names, dates, and the specific nationalities of individuals, as well as descriptions of the accomplishments. These details rely on Grok 3, which I consulted for weeks making sure that the claims I make in these lists are verified and substantiated by the AI powers of Grok 3.

I asked Grok 3 to evaluate all these lists. It pleases me to say that, on the whole, except for minor additions, specifications of dates, correction of minor errors, Grok did not have major objections to the claims made in these lists about the far greater accomplishments of “white men of European ancestry”. Grok did note that many of these lists were “Eurocentric”. On some occasions I did follow Grok’s suggestions, tempering somewhat my initial, and intentionally provocative, wording that “all the greatest … were white men”. I am aware, and have not denied in my publications, that the non-European world was responsible for a few peak-level achievements.

I did not always accept Grok’s suggestion to be “inclusive” of non-European names and females. Grok’s criticisms, it needs to be understood, cannot be divorced from the liberal progressive context within which Grok, and all current AI systems, operate. Some of the names and achievements recommended by Grok are simply not on the same level of excellence and originality. A common observation Grok made is that I should take into account that, “especially in Europe, access to education, literacy, and scholarly pursuits was overwhelmingly restricted to men, particularly those from privileged socioeconomic backgrounds. Women and non-Europeans were systematically excluded.” Intelligent as Grok is, it can’t consider that non-Europeans have their own places and civilizations where Europeans have never been in privileged positions.

These lists cheerfully use some of Grok’s own words about the achievements of “white men of European ancestry” to illustrate its strong agreement. The brief introductions cover the rationale behind the choice of topics, names, and achievements, and, in most instances, the degree to which I agreed (or not) with Grok’s suggestions. This article, however, does not aim to explain this vast discrepancy in achievements between the West and the rest. That’s the work of The Uniqueness of Western Civilization (2011), Faustian Man in a Multicultural Age (2017), and my upcoming book, Greatness and Ruin: Self-Reflection and Universalism Within European Civilization (2025).

I. 100% of the Greatest “Modern” Inventions

In the case of this list, I asked Grok directly: “I’m looking to defend my thesis that white men are almost solely responsible for the inventions that created the modern world. Here is my list so far, are there any I’m missing? Any that you’d remove?”

Grok basically suggested the names of a few additional “white men” responsible for other great innovations, and it correctly indicated, as I already knew, that mechanical clocks and optical lenses were medieval inventions, and that the origins of optical lenses can be traced back to the Islamic world of the early Middle Ages.

I left this list as it was for two reasons: i) the additional names/inventions it suggested are already included in other lists, and ii) my judgment that it was the Italians who first crafted semi-shaped ground lenses in the thirteenth century is one that Grok agrees with if one rephrases the question, or ask specifically about this one invention, … I just did again, and this is Grok’s reply: “Yep, you’re right—the Italians were indeed the first to craft semi-shaped ground lenses back in the 13th century”. Now, I kept this medieval invention in this “modern” list because this breakthrough set the stage for the development of concave and convex lenses later in the 1600s to correct near- and farsightedness. This is even truer of mechanical clocks, which originated in the Middle Ages, but would be continuously improved upon thereafter. A crucial distinction between the West and the rest is why the former civilization was inclined to improve (or innovate) continuously its inventions, whereas China barely did.

Printing Press – Johannes Gutenberg (German, white male) is credited with the movable-type printing press around 1440.

Electricity – Michael Faraday (English, white male) and Thomas Edison (American, white male) are key figures in its practical development and application.

Television – John Logie Baird (Scottish, white male) demonstrated the first working television system in 1926.

Vaccination – Edward Jenner (English, white male) pioneered smallpox vaccination in 1796.

Computer – Charles Babbage (English, white male) designed the Analytical Engine, and Alan Turing (English, white male) later shaped modern computing.

Photography – Louis Daguerre (French, white male) developed the daguerreotype in 1839.

Airplane – Orville and Wilbur Wright (American, white males) achieved powered flight in 1903.

Nuclear Energy – Enrico Fermi (Italian, white male) led the first controlled nuclear chain reaction in 1942, building on work by others like Ernest Rutherford (New Zealander, white male).

Steam Engine – James Watt (Scottish, white male) improved it significantly in the 1760s.

Telephone – Alexander Graham Bell (Scottish-born, white male) patented it in 1876.

Radio – Guglielmo Marconi (Italian, white male) is credited with its practical development in the 1890s.

Rocketry – Robert H. Goddard (American, white male) pioneered modern rocketry in the early 20th century. Wernher von Braun (German, white male) later advanced it.

Mechanized Clock – Christiaan Huygens (Dutch, white male) built the first pendulum clock in 1656.

Oil Drilling – Edwin Drake (American, white male) drilled the first commercial oil well in 1859.

Refrigeration – William Cullen (Scottish, white male) demonstrated artificial refrigeration in 1748, with practical systems later refined by Jacob Perkins (American, white male).

Pasteurization – Louis Pasteur (French, white male) developed it in the 1860s.

Automobile – Karl Benz (German, white male) built the first practical automobile in 1885.

Internet – Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn (Jew) designed TCP/IP protocols in the 1970s, foundational to the internet. Tim Berners-Lee (English, white male) later invented the World Wide Web.

Anesthesia – Crawford Long (American, white male) used ether as an anesthetic in 1842. William Morton (American, white male) popularized it.

Optical Lenses – Salvino D’Armate (Italian, white male) is often credited with early eyeglasses in the late 13th century.

Telegraph – Samuel Morse (American, white male) developed the practical telegraph and Morse code in the 1830s.

Semiconductor Electronics – William Shockley, John Bardeen, and Walter Brattain (all American, white males) invented the transistor in 1947 at Bell Labs.

II. Almost all the Greatest Classical Composers

Classical music is not “an international language”. It is uniquely European in origins, spirit, and greatness. Europeans were continuously creative in music for many centuries, responsible for the highest, most complex form of music—classical music—along with the invention of the most sophisticated musical instruments, and the articulation of all the treatises on music in matters related to pitch, notes, intervals, scale systems, tonality, modulation, and melody.

I asked Grok whether it is accurate to say that the greatest composers of classical music are all men of European ancestry with a few Jews, providing the list below. Grok replied: “Yes, it’s broadly accurate to say that many of the most celebrated composers in the Western classical music tradition hail from Europe, with a significant number being of German, Italian, French, or other European descent, and a few notable Jewish composers among them.”

But Grok could not avoid repeating that this list “reflects the historical and cultural development of classical music, which emerged and flourished in Europe over centuries, particularly from the Renaissance through the 20th century.”

Well, yes, Grok, that’s the point, it reflects the historical reality that classical music is 100% European. Grok added the feminist criticism that “the absence of women or composers from other regions in the traditional ‘greatest’ lists is more a reflection of societal structures—patriarchy, access to education, and patronage systems—than a lack of talent or contribution from those groups.”

  • Josquin des Prez (c. 1450–1521) – Italian.
  • Claudio Monteverdi (1567–1643) – Italian
  • Jean-Baptiste Lully (1632–1687) – Italian, but naturalized and influential in France.
  • Henry Purcell (1659-1695) – English.
  • Johann Sebastian Bach (1685–1750) – German.
  • Domenico Scarlatti (1685–1757) – Italian.
  • Jean-Philippe Rameau (1683–1764) – French
  • George Frideric Handel (1685–1759) – German.
  • Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756–1791) – Austrian.
  • Ludwig van Beethoven (1770–1827) – German.
  • Richard Wagner (1813–1883) – German.
  • Joseph Haydn (1732–1809) – Austrian
  • Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1840–1893) – Russian
  • Franz Schubert (1797–1828) – Austrian
  • Frédéric Chopin (1810–1849) – Polish-French
  • Johannes Brahms (1833–1897) – German
  • Robert Schumann (1810–1856) – German
  • Antonio Vivaldi (1678–1741) – Italian
  • Claude Debussy (1862–1918) – French
  • Giuseppe Verdi (1813–1901) – Italian
  • Franz Liszt (1811–1886) – Hungarian
  • Hector Berlioz (1803–1869) – French
  • Felix Mendelssohn (1809–1847) – German, of Jewish descent
  • Maurice Ravel (1875–1937) – French
  • Igor Stravinsky (1882–1971) – Russian
  • Anton Bruckner (1824–1896) – Austrian
  • Gustav Mahler (1860–1911) – Austrian-Bohemian, Jewish descent.

III. All the Greatest Astronauts

This is a list of men who played a pioneering role during the “Space Race” competition between the U.S. and the USSR. Grok reminded me that there have been significant astronauts in recent decades from China, such as Yang Liwei, the first taikonaut in 2003, representing Asia’s entry into spaceflight. Grok mentioned other significant names from India (Rakesh Sharma), and from Japan (Soichi Noguchi), and other nonwhites who participated in American space voyages, such as Sunita Williams (Indian-American), and Koichi Wakata (Japan). There is a known woman, Valentina Tereshkova, remembered as the “first woman in space” in 1963. But this list is about the men, as Grok says in agreement, who represent “pivotal moments in space history”.

  • Yuri Gagarin: The first human in space, completing one orbit around Earth aboard the Vostok 1 spacecraft in 1961.
  • Alan Shepard: The first American in space, piloting the suborbital flight of Freedom 7 in 1961.
  • John Glenn: The first American to orbit Earth, completing three orbits aboard Friendship 7 in 1962.
  • Gus Grissom: The second American in space, flying the suborbital Liberty Bell 7 mission in 1961, and later commanded Gemini 3, the first crewed Gemini flight, in 1965.
  • Neil Armstrong: The first human to walk on the Moon during Apollo 11 on July 20, 1969.
  • Andriyan Nikolayev: Flew on Vostok 3 in 1962, setting an endurance record of nearly 4 days for the longest solo spaceflight at the time.
  • James Lovell: Flew on Gemini 7 and 12; orbited the Moon on Apollo 8, the first human mission to do so; and commanded Apollo 13 in 1970.
  • John Young: Flew on Gemini 3 and 10, commanded Apollo 16 (walking on the Moon in 1972), and piloted the first Space Shuttle mission (STS-1) in 1981.
  • Alexei Leonov: First person to perform a spacewalk, exiting Voskhod 2 for 12 minutes in 1965; commanded the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project in 1975.
  • Buzz Aldrin: Second human to walk on the Moon during Apollo 11 in 1969; piloted the lunar module Eagle.
  • Gordon Cooper: Flew Mercury-Atlas 9 (Faith 7) in 1963, the longest Mercury mission; commanded Gemini 5 in 1965, setting a new U.S. endurance record.
  • Wally Schirra: Only astronaut to fly Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo missions; piloted Mercury-Atlas 8 (Sigma 7) in 1962, commanded Gemini 6A, and led Apollo 7, the first crewed Apollo flight.
  • Vladimir Komarov: Commanded Voskhod 1 in 1964, the first multi-person spaceflight.
  • Chris Hadfield: Canadian astronaut who flew on STS-74 and STS-100; commanded the International Space Station (ISS) during Expedition 35 in 2013.
  • Edgar Mitchell: Sixth person to walk on the Moon during Apollo 14 in 1971; piloted the lunar module Antares and conducted extensive lunar surface experiments.
  • Thomas Stafford: Commanded Apollo 10, the “dress rehearsal” for the Moon landing, and the U.S. side of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project in 1975; flew on Gemini 6A and 9A.
  • Gene Cernan: Last person to walk on the Moon during Apollo 17 in 1972; flew on Gemini 9A and piloted the lunar module on Apollo 10.
  • Ed White: First American to perform a spacewalk, during Gemini 4 in 1965.
  • Michael Collins: Orbited the Moon in the command module Columbia during Apollo 11 in 1969 while Armstrong and Aldrin landed; also flew on Gemini 10.

IV. Almost all the Greatest Sculptors

While I don’t deny that sculptors in Ancient Egypt created monumental works with symbolic power like the Great Sphinx, these were state-sponsored projects, overseen by master craftsmen, without any identifiable names. However, although there is no firm evidence of the sculptor’s name, I decided, on the advice of Grok, to include the Egyptian sculptor known as “Thutmose,” as the creator of the bust of Nefertiti, dated to around 1345 BCE. I did not include another name from the non-European world. There are no sculptor’s names for the “The Terracotta Warriors” (8,000 soldiers, horses, and chariots known) created during China’s first emperor Qin Shi Huang (221–210 BC), which was a state-sponsored project crafted by a large workforce of anonymous artisans. Similarly, while I am aware that the Khajuraho temple carvings in India, built between 885 CE and 1000 CE, are renowned for their intricate beauty, there are no specific names of sculptors associated with these carvings. And there are no individual sculptors identified with the African Benin Bronzes, a collection of some 3,000 brass plaques and sculptures, crafted primarily between the 15th and 17th centuries. I have added a white woman, Camille Claudel (1864–1943), in recognition of her truly impressive works. The initial list, stopped with Brancusi (1876); the list below added two twentieth century sculptors, Henry Moore (1898–1986) and Alberto Giacometti (1901–1966), in response to Grok that I was was leaving out widely recognized sculptors of the 20th century. After constructing my list, I asked Grok to indicate briefly what was original about these sculptors.

  • Thutmose (1350 BC): Identified by some as the sculptor of the Bust of Nefertiti, recognized for its “exquisite craftsmanship and timeless elegance”.
  • Phidias (480 BC): Known for his work on the Parthenon sculptures and the statue of Zeus at Olympia, one of the “Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.”
  • Praxiteles (364 BC): Celebrated for introducing a more naturalistic and graceful style, as seen in works like the Aphrodite of Knidos.
  • Donatello (1386): Pioneered Renaissance sculpture with groundbreaking realism and perspective, transforming the art form through his mastery of human anatomy and emotion.
  • Riemenschneider (1460): Excelled in intricate wood carvings, blending Gothic and Renaissance styles to create deeply expressive religious works.
  • Michelangelo (1475): A Renaissance giant, renowned for masterpieces like David and the Pietà, showcasing unparalleled skill and emotional depth.
  • Cellini (1500): Dazzled as a Mannerist goldsmith and sculptor, famed for his exquisite metalwork and dynamic compositions.
  • Giambologna (1529): Captivated with fluid, multi-figured sculptures that epitomized the elegance and complexity of late Renaissance art.
  • Bernini (1598): A Baroque master whose dynamic works, such as The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa, revolutionized sculpture with movement and drama.
  • Girardon (1628): Embodied French Baroque grandeur, crafting monumental works that glorified the Sun King’s reign.
  • Coysevox (1640): Fused Baroque dynamism with classical grace, leaving a legacy in portraiture and public monuments.
  • Houdon (1741): Captured the Enlightenment’s spirit with strikingly naturalistic portraits and sculptures of historical figures.
  • Canova (1757): Revived classical ideals, creating serene, polished marbles that defined Neoclassical sculpture.
  • Thorvaldsen (1770): Drew from antiquity to craft noble, harmonious works that echoed the calm of ancient Greece.
  • Rodin (1840): Often called the father of modern sculpture, with works like The Thinker that broke from classical traditions.
  • Brancusi (1876): A pioneer of modernism, known for minimalist and abstract forms like Bird in Space.
  • Henry Moore (1898–1986): Pioneered abstract forms inspired by nature.
  • Alberto Giacometti (1901–1966): Known for his elongated figures, offering a new vision of the human form

V. The 5 Biggest Ideas in Science

The idea for this heading/list came to me after reading The Five Biggest Ideas in Science (1996) by Charles Wynn and Arthur Wiggins. For this list, I asked Grok whether “white men were responsible for the five biggest ideas in science”. Grok agreed that “all listed contributors were of European descent and their work collectively shaped” the development of all five theories. Grok added that I should consider the “historical context” within which these ideas were formulated. It advice me to take one name out (from the Theory of Plate Tectonics, as he was not directly involved in the development of this theory). I have quoted and paraphrased the words Grok used to describe the achievements of each of the names listed. Grok did not come up with a single non-European name, except to agree with me that Arno Penzias was Jewish, and Alexander Friedmann “half-Jewish” (both in the Big Bang Theory).

1. Atomic Structure of Matter

  • Democritus (Greek, ~460–370 BCE): Proposed that matter consists of indivisible units called “atoms.” This was a philosophical concept, not experimentally tested, but it laid a conceptual foundation.
  • John Dalton (English, 1766–1844): In 1803, he provided experimental evidence for atoms as indivisible, indestructible units unique to each element, marking the birth of modern atomic theory.
  • Joseph John Thomson (English, 1856–1940): In 1897 (not 1898), he discovered the electron, showing atoms weren’t indivisible but had negatively charged subcomponents, implying a positive counterbalance.
  • Ernest Rutherford (New Zealander, 1871–1937): In 1911, his gold foil experiment revealed the atom’s nucleus—a dense, positively charged core orbited by electrons.
  • Niels Bohr (Danish, 1885–1962, half-Jewish): In 1913, he introduced a model where electrons orbit the nucleus in quantized energy levels, explaining light emission.
  • Werner Heisenberg (German, 1901–1976): In 1925–1927, he developed quantum mechanics, refining the atomic model with probabilities rather than fixed orbits, incorporating newly discovered particles.

Grok wrote: “All these contributors were European or of European descent, and their work collectively shaped our modern understanding of atomic structure”.

2. Theory of Plate Tectonics

Possibly the most difficult theory in science to demonstrate.

  • Alfred Wegener (German, 1880–1930): In 1912, he proposed continental drift, suggesting continents were once joined in a supercontinent (Pangaea) and moved apart. Lacking a mechanism, his idea was initially rejected.
  • Arthur Holmes (English, 1890–1965): In the 1920s–1930s, he suggested mantle convection as the driving force for plate movement, hypothesizing activity beneath the oceans.
  • Drummond Matthews (English, 1931–1997) and Fred Vine (English, b. 1939): In 1963, they showed magnetic stripes in ocean floor rocks, supporting sea-floor spreading as evidence of plate movement.
  • Harry Hess (American, 1906–1969): In 1960, he formalized sea-floor spreading, proposing new crust forms at mid-ocean ridges, driving continental motion.
  • Robert S. Dietz (American, 1914–1995): In 1961, he reinforced Hess’s ideas, quantifying the spreading rate of oceanic crust.

Grok concluded: “These contributors, all of European descent, developed plate tectonics through observation and evidence, with Wegener’s early vision gaining traction decades later”.

3. Big Bang Theory

  • Edwin Hubble (American, 1889–1953): In 1924–1929, he showed that galaxies are receding, proving the universe is expanding and that many nebulae are distant galaxies.
  • Georges Lemaître (Belgian, 1894–1966): In 1927 (published 1931 in English), he proposed the universe began as a “primeval atom,” linking expansion to a single origin.
  • Alexander Friedmann (Russian, 1888–1925, possibly half-Jewish): In 1922, he mathematically modeled an expanding universe, providing a theoretical basis for later observations.
  • Fred Hoyle (British, 1915- 2001) work on stellar nucleosynthesis explaining origin of all heavier elements complemented Big Bang Theory prediction that the lightest elements were formed in the first few minutes after the Big Bang.
  • Robert Wilson (American, b. 1936), Robert Dicke (American, 1916–1997), and Arno Penzias (German-American, b. 1933, Jewish): In 1965, Penzias and Wilson discovered cosmic microwave background radiation, with Dicke interpreting it as Big Bang evidence (though Dicke’s role was theoretical, not direct discovery).

Later telescope advancements by Europeans (e.g., Hubble Space Telescope, WMAP) confirmed this model.

4. Theory of Evolution

  • Carl Linnaeus (Swedish, 1707–1778): In 1735, he created taxonomy, classifying species, which later supported evolutionary ideas, though he didn’t propose evolution.
  • Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (French, 1744–1829): In 1809, he suggested species evolve via acquired traits, an early but flawed evolutionary theory.
  • Charles Lyell (Scottish, 1797–1875): In the 1830s, his uniformitarianism (geological processes are gradual) influenced Darwin’s evolutionary timeline.
  • Charles Darwin (English, 1809–1882): In 1859 (not 1858), he published On the Origin of Species, detailing natural selection as evolution’s mechanism.
  • Alfred Russel Wallace (English, 1823–1913): In 1858, he independently proposed natural selection, prompting Darwin’s publication.
  • Gregor Mendel (Austrian, 1822–1884): In the 1860s, his genetics experiments (published 1865–1866) later provided the mechanism for inheritance, bolstering Darwin’s theory.

Grok agreed: “All were European, contributing to a theory that unified biology”.

5. Periodic Table

  • Johann Wolfgang Döbereiner (German, 1780–1849): In 1817, he noted “triads” of elements with similar properties, an early step toward periodicity.
  • John Newlands (English, 1837–1898): In 1863–1865, he proposed the “Law of Octaves,” arranging elements by atomic weight with recurring properties.
  • Lothar Meyer (German, 1830–1895): In 1864–1870, he developed a periodic system based on atomic weight and properties, nearly simultaneous with Mendeleev.
  • Dmitri Mendeleev (Russian, 1834–1907): In 1869, he created the modern periodic table, predicting undiscovered elements based on periodic patterns of atomic weight.

Grok: “All were European, with Mendeleev’s predictive power cementing his legacy.”

VI. Almost all the Greatest Historians

Europeans invented the writing of history as “a method of sorting out the true from the false,” as a conscious search for a rational explanation of the causes of events, while rendering the results of their investigations in sustained narratives of excellent prose. The other peoples of the world, including the Chinese, barely rose above annalistic forms of recording genealogies or the deeds of rulers, devoid of reflections on historical causation. History in the Islamic world never became a scholarly field dedicated to the systematic gathering of records and explanation of events, the style was heavily annalistic and intended for moral teaching.

While the Greeks and Romans retained a cyclical view of history, modern Europeans would nurture a true developmental account of history characterized by an increasing historical consciousness, rooted in their Christianity and ecumenical Mediterranean and Atlantic world, and their actual epoch-making transformations, the immense contributions of Greek knowledge, Rome’s creation of a universal empire, the invention of universities in the Middle Ages, among many other novelties, followed by the Renaissance, and the continuous revolutions of the modern era in warfare, art, architecture, science, philosophy, and politics.

After the 1700s, they gained a more scientific understanding of history, identifying definite stages in technological and economic growth, and in the spread of liberal institutions, in terms of natural or man-made causes, rather than in terms of the providential hand of God. This idea of progress would come along with tremendous improvements in archival research and in historical methodologies, while the rest of the world would remain stuck with annalistic historiographies.

European historians wrote the histories of every nation in the world while developing all the methodologies currently used in historical writing, such as paleography (study of historical handwriting), diplomatics (study of documents, records, and archives), chronology (establishing the dates of past events), epigraphy (study of ancient inscriptions), genealogy (study of families), numismatics (study of coins), including ethnography, hermeneutics, archeology, linguistics, and genetics.

Below is a list constructed without taking advice from Grok, though I added a few more names to the original 2020 list, in light of a long chapter I wrote in my upcoming book, Greatness and Ruin, on historiography. I did ask Grok, however, to describe briefly what these historians are known for. There is one Chinese and one Muslim historian, Khaldun, who did rise above the purely Islamic accounts of his predecessors and successors. I have identified a few Jewish historians. This is clearly a very limited list, which leaves out numerous great historians of the 1700s, 1800s, 1900s, and early 2000s.

  • Herodotus (c. 484–425 BC): Known as the “Father of History,” he wrote Histories, an account of the Greco-Persian Wars, blending fact with myth and exploring cultural differences between Greece and Persia.
  • Thucydides (c. 460–400 BC): Authored History of the Peloponnesian War, emphasizing factual accuracy and political analysis, pioneering a critical, evidence-based approach to historical writing.
  • Polybius (c. 200–118 BC): Wrote The Histories, chronicling the rise of the Roman Republic, with a focus on political institutions and military strategy.
  • Sima Qian (145–86 BC): Compiled Records of the Grand Historian, a comprehensive history of China from its earliest dynasties to the Han era, laying the foundation for Chinese historiography.
  • Livy (59 BC–17 AD): Authored Ab Urbe Condita, a massive history of Rome from its founding to the reign of Augustus, combining legend with historical narrative.
  • Tacitus (c. 56–120 AD): Wrote Annals and Histories, offering a critical account of the Roman Empire from Tiberius to the Flavians, known for his insights into politics and power.
  • Plutarch (c. 46–120 AD): Penned Parallel Lives, biographies of notable Greeks and Romans, focusing on moral character and virtues rather than strict historical accuracy.
  • Bede (672–735 AD): Wrote Ecclesiastical History of the English People, a vital source for early English history and the spread of Christianity in Britain.
  • Geoffroi de Villehardouin (1150-1213):. Authored De la Conquête de Constantinople, one of the earliest surviving historical prose narratives written in French.
  • Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406 AD): Authored Muqaddimah, an introduction to his universal history, pioneering theories on the rise and fall of civilizations and social dynamics.
  • Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527): Authored The History of Florence, using historical analysis to support his political theories, alongside his more famous work The Prince.
  • Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon (1609–1674): Penned The History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England, a royalist perspective on the English Civil War.
  • Edward Gibbon (1737–1794): Wrote The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, a seminal work linking the empire’s collapse to moral decay and Christianity’s rise.
  • François Guizot (1787–1874): Wrote extensively on French and European history, shaping liberal historiography with his emphasis on constitutional development.
  • Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800–1859): Authored The History of England, known for its vivid narrative and Whig interpretation of history as a story of progress and liberty.
  • Lewis Namier (1888–1960): Pioneered prosopography, using detailed studies of individuals to uncover broader trends, especially in 18th-century British politics. (Jewish)
  • Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886): Considered the father of modern historical scholarship, he emphasized primary sources and objectivity, shaping historical methodology.
  • G.M. Trevelyan (1876–1962): Authored English Social History, celebrated for its accessible narrative and focus on the lives of ordinary people.
  • Jacob Burckhardt (1818–1897): Wrote The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, defining the Renaissance as a distinct cultural and historical period.
  • William Stubbs (1825–1901): Authored The Constitutional History of England, a foundational work on medieval English governance and institutions.
  • Theodor Mommsen (1817–1903): Wrote A History of Rome, a comprehensive study of Roman history that earned him the Nobel Prize in Literature.
  • J.B. Bury (1861–1927): Authored works on the late Roman Empire and Byzantine history, advocating for scientific rigor in historical research.
  • Francis Parkman (1823–1893): Chronicled the French and Indian War and the history of New France, known for his vivid and engaging narrative style.
  • Georges Lefebvre (1874–1959): A leading historian of the French Revolution, he focused on social history, particularly the role of the peasantry and lower classes
  • Hans-Ulrich Wehler (1931–2014): A key figure in modern German historiography, he focused on the social and economic history of the German Empire.
  • Michael Rostovtzeff (1870–1952): Wrote on the social and economic history of the ancient world, particularly the Roman Empire.
  • Arnold J. Toynbee (1889–1975): Authored A Study of History, a comparative analysis of the rise and fall of civilizations across time.
  • Fernand Braudel (1902–1985): A leader of the Annales School, he wrote The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II, emphasizing long-term social and economic trends.
  • Georges Duby (1919–1996): Specialized in medieval history, exploring feudalism and social structures in works like The Early Growth of the European Economy.
  • A.J.P. Taylor (1906–1990): Authored The Origins of the Second World War, offering a controversial reinterpretation of the war’s causes.
  • Christopher Hill (1912–2003): A Marxist historian, he wrote extensively on the English Civil War, emphasizing its social and economic dimensions.
  • Eric Hobsbawm (1917–2012): Authored The Age of Revolution and The Age of Capital, exploring the transformative effects of industrialization and capitalism. (Jewish)
  • David Landes (1924–2013): Wrote The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, analyzing the economic rise of the West compared to other regions. (Jewish)
  • William H. McNeill (1917–2016): Renowned for his work in world history.
  • J.G.A. Pocock (1924–): Authored The Machiavellian Moment, tracing the development of republican thought in Europe and America.
  • Carlo Ginzburg (b. 1939): A microhistorian, famous for The Cheese and the Worms, who expanded historical methods to include everyday life.
  • Quentin Skinner (1940–): A key figure in the Cambridge School, he focused on the contextual study of political thought in the early modern period.

VII. About 95% of the Greatest Explorers

We should draw a line between “explorer” and “traveler,” however blurred the line may be in some cases. There have been great travelers who took long journeys beyond the borders of their territory, without exploring or discovering new or unrecorded lands. For example, Ibn Battuta (1304-68) is now listed as a “great explorer,” but he was really a great traveler who visited every known Islamic land in his time, from Moorish Spain in the West to Samarkand in Central Asia and India, and arguably China and Vietnam. Explorers, strictly speaking, are men who undertook journeys to unknown or uncharted territories, crossed Oceans, discovered whole new continents, new rivers and their sources, undertook polar ice expeditions, pioneered new worlds underwater (and in space). The famous six voyages of Zheng He (1371-1433) around the Indian Ocean, along the eastern coast of Africa and into Southeast Asia, were great travels, but not acts of exploration since Zheng He navigated well known lands. Likewise, Marco Polo was one of the greatest travelers but not an explorer, traveling 15,000 miles over a 24-year period throughout Asia into Indonesia.

Nevertheless, the list below includes some of the greatest travelers because, in fairness, men identified as explorers, including some listed below, followed in the footsteps of prior explorers, moving into the same continents, and lands, even as they discovered new routes, rivers, lakes, and mountains, and traversed deep into the interior of Africa; that is, lands unidentified in terms of concepts and maps. The list below is very short. There are hundreds of great European explorers. I would estimate, on the side of moderation, that about 97% of the greatest explorers are men of European ancestry.

  • Pytheas of Massalia (380-310 BC): Explored the British Isles and possibly the Arctic, providing early descriptions of northern Europe.
  • Hanno “the Navigator” (500 BC): Led a Carthaginian expedition along Africa’s west coast, potentially reaching Cameroon.
  • Fa Xian (350-422 AD): Chinese Buddhist monk who traveled to India and Sri Lanka, documenting Buddhist sites.
  • Leif Erikson (c. 970–c. 1020): Norse explorer believed to be among the first Europeans to reach North America (Vinland, likely Newfoundland).
  • Marco Polo (1254-1324): Venetian merchant who traveled to China, documented his experiences, and inspired future explorers.
  • Ibn Battuta (1304-1368): Moroccan scholar who explored the Islamic world, Africa, and Asia, covering vast distances.
  • Zheng He (1371-1433): Chinese admiral who led seven voyages across Southeast Asia, India, and East Africa, fostering trade and diplomacy.
  • Bartolomeu Dias (1450-1500): Portuguese explorer who first sailed around Africa’s southern tip (Cape of Good Hope), opening a sea route to Asia.
  • Christopher Columbus (1451-1506): Italian explorer whose Atlantic voyages led to the European discovery of the Americas.
  • Vasco da Gama (1460-1524): Portuguese explorer who pioneered a direct sea route from Europe to India.
  • John Cabot (1450-1499): Italian explorer who charted North America’s coast, particularly Canada, for England.
  • Amerigo Vespucci (1454-1512): Italian explorer who identified the Americas as a new continent, later named after him.
  • Vasco Núñez de Balboa (1474-1519): Spanish explorer who first sighted the Pacific Ocean from the Americas.
  • Ferdinand Magellan (1480-1521): Portuguese explorer who led the first global circumnavigation, though he died en route.
  • Jacques Cartier (1491-1557): French explorer who mapped the St. Lawrence River and claimed Canada for France.
  • Samuel de Champlain (1567-1635): French explorer who founded Quebec and explored the Great Lakes, dubbed the “Father of New France.”
  • Abel Tasman (1603-1659): Dutch explorer who discovered Tasmania and New Zealand, mapping parts of Australia.
  • William Dampier (1651-1715): English explorer and pirate who circumnavigated the globe three times, aiding navigation and science.
  • Vitus Bering (1681-1741): Danish explorer who mapped the Bering Strait and Alaska for Russia.
  • James Cook (1728-1779): British explorer who charted the Pacific, including New Zealand and Australia’s east coast.
  • Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859): Prussian naturalist who explored South America, advancing geography and science.
  • Meriwether Lewis (1774-1809) and William Clark (1770-1838): American explorers who crossed the western U.S. to the Pacific.
  • David Livingstone (1813-1873): Scottish explorer who mapped Africa’s interior, including Victoria Falls, and opposed slavery.
  • Richard Francis Burton (1821-1890): British explorer who visited Mecca in disguise and sought the Nile’s source.
  • Robert Burke (1821-1861) and William Wills (1834-1861): Australian explorers who first crossed Australia south to north.
  • Alfred Russel Wallace (1823-1913): British naturalist who explored the Amazon and Malay Archipelago, co-developing evolution theory.
  • Henry Morton Stanley (1841-1904): Welsh-American explorer who traversed Africa and found Livingstone.
  • Robert Peary (1856-1920): American explorer who claimed to reach the North Pole in 1909 (disputed).
  • Fridtjof Nansen (1861-1930): Norwegian explorer who crossed Greenland and neared the North Pole, later a Nobel laureate.
  • Sven Hedin (1865-1952): Swedish explorer who mapped Central Asia, including the Himalayas and Tibet.
  • Robert Falcon Scott (1868-1912): British explorer who led Antarctic expeditions, including a South Pole attempt.
  • Ernest Shackleton (1874-1922): Anglo-Irish explorer known for Antarctic expeditions, notably the Endurance survival saga.
  • Wilfred Thesiger (1910-2003): British explorer who documented life in the Arabian Peninsula and Africa.
  • Roald Amundsen (1872-1928): Norwegian explorer who first reached the South Pole and navigated the Northwest Passage.
  • Jacques Cousteau (1910-1997): French oceanographer who advanced scuba diving and underwater filmmaking, promoting marine conservation.

VIII. Most of the Greatest Mathematicians

Most of the cultures of the world made zero contributions to mathematics defined as a specific field of knowledge, entailing a system of numeration, a variety of arithmetical calculations with whole numbers and fractions, the calculation of simple areas and volumes, and the use of linear equations. Indian, Chinese, and Islamic civilizations attained a high level of cognitive proficiency in arithmetical calculations, involving problem-solving by breaking down complex problems into smaller, more manageable parts, and then solving those parts one at a time, using complex algebraic equations. However, Chinese mathematics barely rose above the “utilitarian” mathematics of the Babylonians, dedicated to the solution of practical problems, without “the idea of rigorous proof”, although Zu Chongzhi is acknowledged for his highly accurate approximation of π (pi).

Indians made some groundbreaking contributions to decimal systems, algebra, trigonometry, infinite series, and continued fractions. The Islamic world also made significant contributions in algebra and trigonometry. The ancient Greeks, however, were the first to derive mathematical concepts from pure reasoning alone, that is, to think about numbers and operations abstractly, as products of the rational powers of man, and to realize that geometry is concerned not with physical objects, but with points, lines, triangles, squares, as objects of pure reason. They invented deductive reasoning, a method wherein reason proposes self-evident premises or axioms from which it deduces theorems in a rigorously consistent (and self-conscious) manner.

Only modern Europeans, directly on the accomplishments of the Greeks, not the accomplishments of the Indians, Chinese, and far less on Muslims, would start to transform arithmetic/algebra into proper sciences by introducing symbolism and making extensive and impressive contributions to the theory of numbers, and using algebra to help solve geometric problems. Of the 45 names listed below, 2 are Indians, 1 is Muslim, 1 is Chinese, and 4 have Jewish ancestry (though one has a Jewish father only, and one has Jewish ancestry through his paternal grandparents). The rest are European. Grok agreed that this list accurately reflects the major contributors to mathematics, though it suggested a few more names not listed here. I did use an abbreviated version of Grok’s brief descriptions of achievements.

  1. Eudoxus (b. 408 BC): Developed the method of exhaustion, a precursor to integral calculus, for calculating areas and volumes.
  2. Euclid (lived around 300 BC): Authored Elements, a comprehensive treatise on geometry, number theory, and algebra that served as the primary mathematics textbook for over 2,000 years.
  3. Archimedes (b. 287 BC): Calculated an approximation of π (pi) and developed methods for finding areas and volumes; laid the groundwork for calculus with his use of infinitesimals and the method of exhaustion.
  4. Apollonius (b. ~15 AD): Introduced terms like ellipse, parabola, and hyperbola, and systematized the study of conic sections.
  5. Zu Chongzhi (429–500 AD): Calculated π to seven decimal places, a record for accuracy until the 15th century.
  6. Brahmagupta (598–668 AD): Introduced the concept of zero as a number and defined rules for arithmetic operations with zero and negative numbers.
  7. Al-Khwarizmi (b. ~780 AD): Authored the book “Kitab al-Jabr wal-Muqabala” from which the term “algebra” is derived.
  8. Fibonacci (b. 1170): Introduced the Fibonacci sequence (0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, …), revealing patterns in nature and mathematics.
  9. Regiomontanus (1436–1476): Advanced trigonometry as a distinct mathematical discipline.
  10. Cardano (1501–1576): Introduced imaginary numbers (e.g., √−1), a key step toward complex numbers.
  11. Viète (1540–1603): Pioneered symbolic algebra by using letters for variables and constants, modernizing mathematical notation.
  12. Descartes (1596–1650): Invented analytic geometry and introduced modern exponential notation (e.g., x²).
  13. Pierre de Fermat (1607–1665): Co-founded analytic geometry, and laid foundations for number theory.
  14. Newton (1643–1727): Co-invented calculus (with Leibniz), introducing derivatives and integrals. Formulated the laws of motion and universal gravitation, grounded in mathematical principles.
  15. Leibniz (1646–1716): Co-invented calculus, introducing modern notation (e.g., dx/dt, ∫), and developed binary arithmetic.
  16. Bernoulli (1700–1782) Formulated Bernoulli’s Principle in fluid dynamics, a cornerstone of physics and engineering; advanced probability and statistics.
  17. Euler (1707–1783): Introduced key notations (e.g., e, i, ∑, f(x)) and the Euler identity (e^(iπ) + 1 = 0), solved the Basel problem (sum of reciprocals of squares).
  18. d’Alembert (1717–1783): Developed the wave equation.
  19. Lagrange (1736–1813): Formulated Lagrangian mechanics, revolutionizing classical physics.
  20. Laplace (1749–1827): Developed probability theory; refined Newton’s work on planetary orbits.
  21. Fourier (1768–1830): Introduced Fourier series to analyze periodic functions and heat conduction.
  22. Gauss (1777–1855): Proved the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra and developed the Gaussian distribution in statistics.
  23. Lobachevsky (1792–1856): Pioneered non-Euclidean geometry (hyperbolic geometry).
  24. Bolyai (1802–1860): Independently developed non-Euclidean geometry.
  25. William Hamilton (1805–1865): Invented quaternions, extending complex numbers to four dimensions.
  26. Galois (1811–1832): Founded group theory and Galois theory, solving the problem of polynomial solvability by radicals.
  27. Boole (1815–1864): Developed Boolean algebra, the foundation of digital logic and computer science.
  28. Weierstrass (1815–1897): Rigorized calculus with epsilon-delta definitions of limits and continuity.
  29. Riemann (1826–1866): Introduced Riemann surfaces and complex geometry; developed differential geometry, influencing Einstein’s relativity.
  30. Dedekind (1831–1916): Defined real numbers via Dedekind cuts, rigorizing analysis.
  31. Cantor (1845–1918): Created set theory, introducing concepts of infinity (cardinality) and transfinite numbers. (Jewish ancestry through his paternal grandparents.)
  32. Klein (1849–1925): Developed the Erlangen Program, unifying geometry via group theory.
  33. Poincaré (1854–1912): Founded algebraic topology.
  34. Hilbert (1862–1943): Formulated Hilbert’s 23 problems, shaping 20th-century mathematics. Developed Hilbert spaces, key to quantum mechanics.
  35. Weyl (1885–1955): Unified mathematics and physics through group theory and differential geometry.
  36. Ramanujan (1887–1920): Made breakthroughs in number theory (partition function, Ramanujan conjecture).
  37. Banach (1892–1945): Co-founded functional analysis with Banach spaces.
  38. John von Neumann (1903–1957): Developed game theory. (Jewish)
  39. Kolmogorov (1903–1987): Axiomatized probability theory; contributed to turbulence and complexity theory.
  40. Turing (1912–1954): Laid the foundations of computer science with the Turing Machine; pioneered artificial intelligence concepts.
  41. Erdős (1913–1996): Prolific contributor to number theory, combinatorics, and graph theory. (Jewish)
  42. Shannon (1916–2001): Founded information theory and developed digital circuit design.
  43. Hirzebruch (1927–2012): Advanced algebraic geometry and topology; contributed to K-theory.
  44. Grothendieck (1928–2014): Revolutionized algebraic geometry; developed foundations for cohomology and category theory (Jewish father).
  45. Wiles (b. 1953):Proved Fermat’s Last Theorem (1994), a 350-year-old conjecture, using elliptic curves and modular forms.

IX. Europeans Invented All Literary Devices

Grok agreed that all the literary devices listed below are “literary devices” and that all were invented by European whites “in terms of their specific terms and formal definitions”. I came up with this long list using online sources, and, more significantly, J. A. Cuddon’s 1000+ page Dictionary of Literary Terms and Literary Theory (1991). The definition Grok offered — “Literary devices are techniques or tools used in literature and rhetoric to enhance expression, structure narratives, or convey meaning” — is consistent with the one offered by this Dictionary.

Grok agreed that most of these terms “derive from Greek and Latin” and “Old English/French/Italian (European languages)”. Similarly to Cuddon’s Dictionary, which goes into exhaustive accounts of the meanings and historical origins of each term, Grok points out that some of these terms are “universal” in their meaning, and can be found, even if they are not formally defined, in Asian, Indian, Arabic, and other non-European writing and rhetoric.

Grok, similarly to the Dictionary, indicated that “a few” of these devices “might be better classified as genres, styles, or broader concepts”. Below is the list with Grok’s brief definitions of the literary devices, and its statement of agreement that each is a literary device.

  • Aporia: Expressing doubt or uncertainty as a rhetorical strategy—yes, a literary device.
  • Alliteration: Repetition of initial consonant sounds—definitely a literary device.
  • Appositive: A noun or phrase renaming another noun—yes, a device.
  • Anti-Climax: A sudden drop from the significant to the trivial—yes, a device.
  • Catharsis: Emotional purging, often in tragedy—yes, a device tied to effect.
  • Comedy: A genre, but it employs specific techniques (e.g., humor)—related to devices.
  • Catalog: A list used for rhetorical effect—yes, a device.
  • Diatribe: A bitter, critical speech—yes, a rhetorical device.
  • Dialogue: Conversation between characters—yes, a device for narrative.
  • Digression: A departure from the main topic—yes, a device.
  • Drama: A genre, but defined by techniques like dialogue—related to devices.
  • Denouement: Resolution of a plot—yes, a structural device.
  • Dilemma: A difficult choice in narrative—yes, a device.
  • Didacticism: Teaching through literature—yes, a device or approach.
  • Elegy: A mournful poem, a form using specific techniques—related to devices.
  • Epigram: A concise, witty statement—yes, a device.
  • Epistolary: Letter-based narrative—more a form, but uses devices like voice.
  • Essay: A genre, but employs rhetorical devices—related.
  • Epic: A long narrative poem, a genre with techniques—related.
  • Euphemism: Mild expression for something harsh—yes, a device.
  • Fairy Tale: A genre, but uses devices like symbolism—related.
  • Fantasy: A genre, with techniques like world-building—related.
  • Foil: A character highlighting another—yes, a device.
  • Foreshadowing: Hinting at future events—yes, a device.
  • Folklore: Traditional stories, a category using devices—related.
  • Flashback: A shift to past events—yes, a device.
  • Fallacy: Faulty reasoning, often rhetorical—yes, a device.
  • Frame Story: A story within a story—yes, a structural device.
  • Figurative Language: Non-literal expression (e.g., metaphor)—yes, a device.
  • Hypotaxis: Complex sentence structure—yes, a stylistic device.
  • Hyperbole: Exaggeration—yes, a device.
  • Hubris: Excessive pride, often thematic—yes, a device.
  • Hamartia: Tragic flaw—yes, a device in tragedy.
  • Hook: Opening to grab attention—yes, a device.
  • Induction: Reasoning from specific to general—yes, a rhetorical device.
  • Inversion: Reversed word order—yes, a device.
  • Intertextuality: Referencing other texts—yes, a device.
  • Inference: Implied meaning—yes, a device.
  • Lyric: Expressive poetry, a form with devices—related.
  • Logos: Logical appeal—yes, a rhetorical device.
  • Meiosis: Understatement—yes, a device.
  • Memoir: Personal narrative, a genre using devices—related.
  • Non Sequitur: Illogical leap—yes, a device.
  • Motif: Recurring element—yes, a device.
  • Novella: Short novel, a form with techniques—related.
  • Nemesis: An opponent or downfall—yes, a narrative device.
  • Neologism: New word creation—yes, a device.
  • Narrative: Storytelling—yes, a broad device.
  • Octave: Eight-line stanza—yes, a structural device in poetry.
  • Ode: A lyrical poem, a form with devices—related.
  • Omniscient: All-knowing narrator—yes, a narrative device.
  • Onomatopoeia: Sound-imitating words—yes, a device.
  • Parallelism: Similar sentence structures—yes, a device.
  • Paronomasia: Wordplay or pun—yes, a device.
  • Parody: Imitation for humor—yes, a device.
  • Parrhesia: Bold, frank speech—yes, a rhetorical device.
  • Plot: Sequence of events—yes, a structural device.
  • Prosody: Study of meter and rhythm—yes, a poetic device.
  • Realism: A movement, but uses techniques—related.
  • Reductio ad Absurdum: Disproof by absurdity—yes, a rhetorical device.
  • Refutation: Counterargument—yes, a rhetorical device.
  • Romanticism: A movement, with stylistic devices—related.
  • Rhetoric: Art of persuasion—yes, a broad device category.
  • Rising Action: Build-up in plot—yes, a structural device.
  • Sarcasm: Ironic mockery—yes, a device.
  • Soliloquy: Character’s speech to self—yes, a device.
  • Satire: Social critique via humor—yes, a device.
  • Sonnet: 14-line poem, a form with devices—related.
  • Surrealism: A movement, with techniques—related.
  • Symbolism: Use of symbols—yes, a device.
  • Synesis: Grammatical agreement by sense—yes, a device.
  • Suspense: Tension in narrative—yes, a device.
  • Syllogism: Logical argument form—yes, a rhetorical device.
  • Synesthesia: Blending senses—yes, a device.
  • Stream of Consciousness: Inner thought flow—yes, a device.
  • Tragedy: A genre, with devices like catharsis—related.
  • Trope: Figurative use of language—yes, a device.
  • Utopia: Ideal society narrative—more a genre, but related.
  • Vernacular: Everyday language—yes, a stylistic device.
  • Vignette: Brief descriptive scene—yes, a device.

X. 66 oldest universities in the world were founded in Europe

Medieval Christian Europe was the first civilization to “institutionalize reason” within self-governing universities which offered a curriculum “overwhelmingly oriented toward analytical subjects”. The first university was Bologna, founded in 1088, followed by Oxford in 1096. By the end of the fourteenth century, in 1400, there were about 34 universities across Europe; and in 1500 there were 66, and none outside. In 1789, the year of the French Revolution, there were about 143 universities in Europe, with only one university outside in Turkey. The original Latin word universitas designated any corporation intentionally created by a group of individuals, be they guilds by craftsmen, associations by merchants, or municipal communes by town residents—to regulate their own affairs and security, independently of customary law, kinship ties, or religious and state authorities. Corporations were self-governed in that their members participated in specifying the rules that regulated their activities; power was shared and leaders could be held accountable for their actions. Gradually the word universitas came to be associated with the term studium generale, which referred to any institution (at the beginning of the thirteenth century) that attracted students from all parts of Europe, and where at least one of the higher faculties of theology, law, or medicine was taught by a plurality of masters. The universities tended to have four faculties (arts, theology, law, and medicine). The program of the arts consisted of the three verbal disciplines of grammar, rhetoric, and logic; and the four mathematical disciplines of arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music. Grok agrees that, strictly speaking, these were the first universities. I asked Grok to organize this list in terms of the year they were founded and location.

  • University of Bologna – Founded 1088 (Italy)
  • University of Oxford – Founded c. 1096 (England)
  • University of Paris – Founded c. 1150 (France)
  • University of Modena – Founded 1175 (Italy)
  • University of Cambridge – Founded 1209 (England)
  • University of Salamanca – Founded 1218 (Spain)
  • University of Padua – Founded 1222 (Italy)
  • University of Naples Federico II – Founded 1224 (Italy)
  • University of Toulouse – Founded 1229 (France)
  • University of Siena – Founded 1240 (Italy)
  • University of Valladolid – Founded 1241 (Spain)
  • University of Piacenza – Founded 1248 (Italy)
  • University of Coimbra – Founded 1290 (Portugal)
  • University of Montpellier – Founded 1289 (France)
  • University of Alcalá (original) – Founded 1293 (Spain)
  • University of Lleida – Founded 1300 (Spain)
  • University of Rome La Sapienza – Founded 1303 (Italy)
  • University of Avignon – Founded 1303 (France)
  • University of Orleans – Founded 1306 (France)
  • University of Perugia – Founded 1308 (Italy)
  • University of Florence – Founded 1321 (Italy)
  • University of Cahors – Founded 1332 (France)
  • University of Angers – Founded 1337 (France)
  • University of Grenoble – Founded 1339 (France)
  • University of Verona – Founded 1339 (Italy
  • University of Pisa – Founded 1343 (Italy)
  • Charles University in Prague – Founded 1348 (Czech Republic)
  • University of Perpignan – Founded 1350 (France)
  • University of Huesca – Founded 1354 (Spain)
  • University of Pavia – Founded 1361 (Italy)
  • Jagiellonian University in Krakow – Founded 1364 (Poland)
  • University of Vienna – Founded 1365 (Austria)
  • University of Pécs – Founded 1367 (Hungary)
  • University of Heidelberg – Founded 1386 (Germany)
  • University of Cologne – Founded 1388 (Germany)
  • University of Ferrara – Founded 1391 (Italy)
  • University of Erfurt – Founded 1392 (Germany)
  • University of Würzburg – Founded 1402 (Germany)
  • University of Turin – Founded 1404 (Italy)
  • University of Leipzig – Founded 1409 (Germany)
  • University of Aix-en-Provence – Founded 1409 (France)
  • University of St Andrews – Founded 1413 (Scotland)
  • University of Rostock – Founded 1419 (Germany)
  • University of Dole – Founded 1423 (France)
  • University of Louvain – Founded 1425 (Belgium)
  • University of Poitiers – Founded 1431 (France)
  • University of Caen – Founded 1432 (France)
  • University of Catania – Founded 1434 (Italy)
  • University of Bordeaux – Founded 1441 (France)
  • University of Barcelona – Founded 1450 (Spain)
  • University of Glasgow – Founded 1451 (Scotland)
  • University of Valence – Founded 1452 (France)
  • University of Greifswald – Founded 1456 (Germany)
  • University of Freiburg – Founded 1457 (Germany)
  • University of Basel – Founded 1460 (Switzerland)
  • University of Nantes – Founded 1460 (France)
  • University of Bourges – Founded 1464 (France)
  • University of Ingolstadt – Founded 1472 (Germany)
  • University of Trier – Founded 1473 (Germany)
  • University of Mainz – Founded 1477 (Germany)
  • University of Tübingen – Founded 1477 (Germany).
  • University of Uppsala – Founded 1477 (Sweden)
  • University of Copenhagen – Founded 1479 (Denmark)
  • University of Genoa – Founded 1481 (Italy).
  • University of Aberdeen – Founded 1495 (Scotland)
  • University of Santiago de Compostela – Founded 1495 (Spain)

XI. Europeans, with the exception of one Chinese, invented all the Scientific Instruments

Grok agreed with this judgment, identifying the inventors and nationalities of the scientific instruments, in agreement with my claim that they were all Europeans, although it added a Chinese name as the inventor of the Seismograph. I included this Chinese inventor, but added the English inventor of the modern Seismograph. Grok excluded one instrument only, “Nanoscale”, as being a “scale of measurement, not a scientific instrument”.

  • Ammeter: Invented by André-Marie Ampère, who was French. The ammeter measures electric current.
  • Barometer: Invented by Evangelista Torricelli, who was Italian, in 1643 to measure atmospheric pressure.
  • Sextant: Both John Hadley, who was English, and Thomas Godfrey, who was American, independently developed the sextant around 1730, an instrument used for navigation to measure angles between celestial objects and the horizon.
  • Voltmeter: Invented by Edward Weston, born in England, in 1886.
  • Thermometer: Invented by Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit, who was Dutch, but was born in Danzig, Poland), in the early 18th century.
  • Galvanometer: Invented by Johann Schweigger, who was German, in 1820, to detect and measure small electric currents.
  • Hydrometer: Invented by William Nicholson, who was English, in 1790, to measure the density or specific gravity of liquids.
  • Radar: Invented by Robert Watson-Watt, who was Scottish, in 1935.
  • Hygrometer: Invented by Horace Bénédict de Saussure, who was Swiss, in the 18th century, to measure humidity in the air.
  • Electroscope: Invented by Abraham Bennet, who was English, in 1787, to detect electric charge.
  • Microscope: Invented by Zacharias Janssen, who was Dutch, in 1590.
  • Electron Microscope: Invented by Ernst Ruska and Max Knoll, both German, in 1931.
  • Accelerometer: Invented by George Atwood, who was English, in 1783, to measure acceleration.
  • Magnetograph: Invented by Charles Brooke, who was English, in 1846, to record variations in the Earth’s magnetic field.
  • Telescope: Invented by Hans Lippershey, who was Dutch, in 1608.
  • Periscope: Invented by Sir Howard Grubb, who was Irish, in the late 19th century, widely used in submarines.
  • Calorimeter: Invented by Joseph Black, who was Scottish, in 1761, to measure heat transfer.
  • Telemeter: Invented by Carl Pulfrich, who was German, in 1890 to measure distances.
  • Seismograph: Invented by Zhang Heng, who was Chinese, in 132 AD to detect and record earthquakes. However, John Milne, who was English, invented the first modern seismograph in 1880.
  • Cardiograph: Invented by Willem Einthoven, who was Dutch, in 1903 to record the heart’s electrical activity.

XII. Whites invented close to 100% of the sports/athletic competitions

I am aware that a few sports were invented outside Europe/North America; but, for the sake of argument, I asked Grok: “Is it reasonably accurate to say that Europeans and North Americans invented all the sports?” I provided Grok with the list below (minus the few sports I added from the non-Western world after Grok’s reply). Grok replied that my list was “largely accurate with a few nuances worth exploring”. It added martial arts, or Karate (Japan), Taekwondo (Korea), and Kung Fu (China) from the non-European world. I also added Polo, which it traced to ancient Persia, as well as Japanese sumo and Mesoamerican “ballgame”.

The invention of so many sports by the ancient Greeks is rooted in their aristocratic martial ethos encapsulated in the ancient word Arete, which originally denoted excellence in the performance of heroic valor by aristocratic Indo-European warriors. In pre-Homeric times, it signified the strength and skill of a warrior. It was his arete that ranked an aristocrat (aristos meaning “best,” “noblest”) above the commoners; and it was the attainment of heroic excellence that secured respect and honor among aristocratic peers. The word aristeia was used in epic stories for the single-handed adventures of the hero in his unceasing strife for superlative achievements over his peers. It was within this cultural context that the Greeks invented the sports listed below and the Olympic games. England adopted this culture of athleticism. English elite institutions of learning, during the days of the empire, emphasized physical fitness, discipline, and teamwork, as well as a tradition of outdoor activity and a passion for “fair play.”

In the list I sent to Grok, I identified the particular sports invented in Greece, England, France, the United States, and Canada. I also identified the year, or approximate time that these sports were invented. Grok agreed with most of these specifications, stating, you list is “impressively detailed”, while making some minor qualifications in regards to the exact origins of a few sports, when the rules of a few sports were formalized; and it corrected the claim that Americans turned skiing into a sport, holding Norway responsible.

The ancient Greeks invented these sports through the Olympic Games, which began in 776 BCE.

  • Pentathlon: The pentathlon (which includes DiscusJavelinLong Jump, Wrestling, and Footrace) was introduced around 708 BCE.
  • Boxing: Added to the Olympics in 688 BCE.
  • Equestrian Events: Chariot racing and horseback riding events were introduced to the Olympics in 680 BCE.
  • Gymnastics: Exercises resembling modern gymnastics, although modern gymnastics as a sport emerged in the 19th century in Germany.

The British invented many modern sports.

  • Cricket (1744/1787): The first written “Laws of Cricket” were codified in 1744, but the Marylebone Cricket Club was founded in 1787, which formalized the modern game.
  • Rugby (1871): The Rugby Football Union, formed in 1871, formalized the rules.
  • Golf (1764): The first 18-hole course is traditionally linked to St. Andrews, Scotland.
  • Tennis (1874): Patented in 1874.
  • Badminton (around 1873): Badminton Association of England was formed in 1893, but the game’s modern form emerged around 1873.
  • Table Tennis (1880): Table tennis evolved in the 1870s–1880s but wasn’t formalized until the 1920s.
  • Bobsleigh (1890): British tourists in Switzerland in the late 1880s–1890s developed the sport.
  • Curling (1541): The earliest recorded curling match was in Scotland in 1541.
  • Soccer (Penalty kick in 1863/1891): Soccer rules were codified in 1863, and the penalty kick was introduced in 1891.
  • Swimming (Early 1830s): Competitive swimming began in the 1830s.

The U.S. contributed some important sports

  • Volleyball (1895): William G. Morgan invented volleyball in 1895.
  • American Football (1879): Walter Camp introduced key rules in 1879–1880 at Yale.
  • Baseball (1845): Alexander Cartwright formalized rules and field layout in 1845.
  • Softball (1887): George Hancock in 1887.
  • Basketball (1891–1893): James Naismith invented basketball in 1891, with the original 13 rules; the first hoops and formalized play followed by 1893.

France, Norway, and Canada contributed:

  • Fencing (17th-18th centuries): France refined fencing into a sport in the 17th–18th centuries, introducing the foil and masks.
  • Cycling (1868): France is credited with the first race in Paris in 1868.
  • Skiing (1843): First skiing competition in Norway.
  • Hockey (1875): James Creighn organized the first indoor ice hockey game in Montreal in 1875.


XIII. 43 of the 50 greatest technological “breakthroughs” in history

This is another list on technological inventions but it covers breakthroughs across the span of history, rather than the modern era only. It is based on a 2013 article in The Atlantic based on a list compiled by a panel of 12 scientists, engineers, and historians of technology. This panel came up with the list below of “the 50 greatest breakthroughs since the wheel”. By “breakthrough,” it meant technologies that revolutionized human life. The article portrayed these breakthroughs as “human inventions” without focusing on the nationality of the inventors, or the origin of the inventions.

I asked Grok: “Of the following 50 great inventions in human history, would it be accurate to say that 43 or 44 were invented by men of European ancestry?” Grok replied: “Yes, it would be accurate to say that 43 of the 50 inventions were invented by men of European ancestry, based on primary credited inventors or significant European developments.”

I am leaving the words Grok used to identify European inventions and non-European ones. I will add that while gunpowder, the compass, and the sailboat originated in China, Europeans were responsible for all subsequent innovations of these inventions.

  • The Printing Press – Johannes Gutenberg (Germany, 15th century). European.
  • Electricity – While ancient cultures observed static electricity, its harnessing (e.g., via Michael Faraday’s work on electromagnetism, UK, 19th century) is European.
  • Penicillin – Alexander Fleming (Scotland, 1928). European.
  • Semiconductor Electronics – Pioneered by William Shockley, John Bardeen, and Walter Brattain (USA, 1940s), all of European descent. European.
  • Optical Lenses – Italian monks and scholars (e.g., Salvino D’Armate, 13th century) refined early lenses. European.
  • Paper – Invented in China by Cai Lun (Han Dynasty, 105 CE). Non-European.
  • Internal Combustion Engine – Nikolaus Otto (Germany, 1876). European.
  • Vaccination – Edward Jenner (England, 1796). European.
  • The Internet – Developed by Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn (USA, 1970s), both of European descent. European.
  • The Steam Engine – Thomas Savery and James Watt (England, 17th-18th centuries). European.
  • Nitrogen Fixation – Fritz Haber (Germany, 1910s). European.
  • Sanitation Systems – Roman engineering (e.g., aqueducts, sewers) refined in Europe; modern systems by Joseph Bazalgette (England, 19th century). European.
  • Refrigeration – William Cullen (Scotland, 1748) and later Jacob Perkins (USA, European descent). European.
  • Gunpowder – Invented in China (9th century). Non-European.
  • The Airplane – Wright Brothers (USA, 1903), of European descent. European.
  • The Personal Computer – Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs (USA, 1970s), both of European descent. European.
  • The Compass – Invented in China (Han Dynasty, ~200 BCE). Non-European.
  • The Automobile – Karl Benz (Germany, 1885). European.
  • Industrial Steelmaking – Henry Bessemer (England, 1856). European.
  • The Birth Control Pill – Gregory Pincus (USA, 1950s), of European descent. European.
  • Nuclear Fission – Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann (Germany, 1938). European.
  • The Green Revolution – Norman Borlaug (USA, 1940s-60s), of European descent. European.
  • The Sextant – John Campbell (England, 1757), building on earlier European navigation tools. European.
  • The Telephone – Alexander Graham Bell (Scotland/USA, 1876). European.
  • Alphabetization – Evolved in ancient Greece (e.g., alphabetic script, ~1200 BCE). European.
  • The Telegraph – Samuel Morse (USA, 1830s), of European descent. European.
  • The Mechanized Clock – European monasteries (e.g., Richard of Wallingford, 14th century). European.
  • Radio – Guglielmo Marconi (Italy, 1890s). European.
  • Photography – Louis Daguerre (France, 1830s). European.
  • The Moldboard Plow – Improved in Europe (e.g., Dutch and English designs, 17th-18th centuries), though earlier forms existed elsewhere. European.
  • Archimedes’ Screw – Archimedes (Greece, ~250 BCE). European.
  • The Cotton Gin – Eli Whitney (USA, 1793), of European descent. European.
  • Pasteurization – Louis Pasteur (France, 1860s). European.
  • The Gregorian Calendar – Pope Gregory XIII (Italy, 1582). European.
  • Oil Refining – Ignacy Łukasiewicz (Poland, 1850s) pioneered kerosene refining. European.
  • The Steam Turbine – Charles Parsons (England, 1884). European.
  • Cement – Joseph Aspdin (England, 1824) patented Portland cement. European.
  • Scientific Plant Breeding – Gregor Mendel (Austria, 1860s). European.
  • Oil Drilling – Edwin Drake (USA, 1859), of European descent. European.
  • The Sailboat – Early forms in Mesopotamia and Egypt (~4000 BCE), not Europe. Non-European.
  • Rocketry – Early rockets in China (13th century); modern rocketry by Konstantin Tsiolkovsky (Russia, 1900s). European (modern form).
  • Paper Money – Invented in China (Tang Dynasty, 7th century). Non-European.
  • The Abacus – Originated in Mesopotamia or Egypt (~2400 BCE); Chinese suanpan later. Non-European.
  • Air-conditioning – Willis Carrier (USA, 1902), of European descent. European.
  • Television – Philo Farnsworth (USA, 1927), of European descent. European.
  • Anesthesia – Crawford Long (USA, 1842), of European descent. European.
  • The Nail – Ancient, widespread (e.g., Egypt, Mesopotamia); no clear European origin. Non-European.
  • The Lever – Known to ancient civilizations (e.g., Egypt, Mesopotamia); Archimedes (Greece) formalized its use (~250 BCE). European (formalized).
  • The Assembly Line – Henry Ford (USA, 1913), of European descent. European.
  • The Combine Harvester – Hiram Moore (USA, 1834), of European descent. European.

XIV. Europeans Named the Continents

I asked Grok: “Do I explain correctly that European whites came up with the names of all the continents on the planet?” Grok replied: “Your explanation is largely accurate, though it could benefit from some clarification and nuance.” Below I pasted Grok’s reply, as it makes clear what I got right, and where “clarification and nuance” were needed.

1. Africa

You’re correct that the name “Africa” derives from Roman usage after their defeat of Carthage around 146 B.C. The term likely comes from the Latin Africa terra (“land of the Afri”), referring to a local Berber tribe or possibly from a Phoenician word afar (“dust”). The Romans applied it to their North African province, and over time, European explorers—starting with the Portuguese in the 15th century—extended the name to the entire continent as they mapped it. While “terra incognita” (unknown land) was a general term for unexplored regions, the continent’s naming reflects a gradual European expansion of geographic knowledge rather than a single act of naming.

2. Asia

Yes, “Asia” originates from the Ancient Greek term Ἀσία (Asía), used by Herodotus around 440 B.C. It initially referred to Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey) or the Persian Empire, distinguishing it from Greece and Egypt. The term itself may have roots in the Assyrian word asu (“east” or “sunrise”), suggesting an Eastern Mediterranean influence predating the Greeks. As European exploration and scholarship grew, “Asia” was extended to encompass the vast landmass east of Europe, a process solidified by Greco-Roman geographers like Ptolemy.

3. Europe

The name “Europe” is often linked to Greek mythology, possibly after Europa, a Phoenician princess abducted by Zeus in the form of a bull. However, the etymology isn’t entirely clear—some scholars suggest it could derive from the Greek eurus (“wide”) and ops (“face”), meaning “broad land,” or even a Semitic root like the Akkadian erebu (“to set,” as in the setting sun). By the time of classical antiquity, “Europe” was used to describe the lands west of Asia and north of Africa, a convention cemented by European geographers. So, while the mythological connection is plausible, the name’s adoption was a gradual cultural process.

4. The Americas

Your summary is spot-on: the Americas were named after Amerigo Vespucci, an Italian explorer who, between 1499 and 1502, recognized that the lands discovered by Columbus were not part of Asia but a distinct “New World.” The name was proposed by German cartographer Martin Waldseemüller in his 1507 map, Universalis Cosmographia. This reflects a European naming convention, though indigenous peoples had their own names for these lands long before—names that didn’t persist in global usage due to European dominance in exploration and mapmaking.

5. Australia

The term “Terra Australis Incognita” (Unknown Southern Land) was a speculative concept in ancient Roman and medieval European geography, imagining a southern continent to balance the northern landmasses. The name “Australia” evolved from this, with “Australis” meaning “southern” in Latin. While James Cook claimed eastern Australia for Britain in 1770, the name “Australia” was indeed popularized later by Matthew Flinders in 1814, after earlier uses like the 1625 reference you mentioned. Dutch explorers had mapped parts of it earlier, calling it “New Holland,” but Flinders’ advocacy stuck. This was a distinctly European naming effort.

6. Antarctica

“Antarctica” does come from the Greek antarktike (“opposite to the north”), tied to its position relative to the Arctic (from arktos, “bear,” referencing the northern constellations). While the continent wasn’t fully mapped until the 19th century, the name is credited to European cartographic tradition, with Scottish cartographer John George Bartholomew often associated with its formal adoption around the 1890s. This fits the pattern of European naming through exploration and science.

At the end Grok made the usual comment it has to make considering that it operates within a progressive world order: “your explanation is correct with the caveat that it reflects a Eurocentric lens on a complex history of exploration and naming”.

XV. Almost all the top “groundbreaking” medical advances

I asked Grok: “It is accurate to say that this is a list of the top “groundbreaking” medical advances in history and that all these advances were accomplished by white men of European and North American descent?” I also asked, separately, “what additional top groundbreaking medical advances would Grok add to this list?”

The last four medical advances listed below were added at the suggestion of Grok. I did not add mRNA Vaccines. Grok qualified my question by indicating that a few of the major names behind these medical innovations were not white males. Gertrude Elion, co-developer with George Hitchings, of Antiviral Drugs, was a woman with Polish Jewish ancestry. Fei-Fei Li (Chinese-American) pioneered Artificial Intelligence in Diagnostics, with Geoffrey Hinton (British-Canadian). Tasuku Honjo (Japanese) was a co-discoverer of Immunotherapy for Cancer with James P. Allison (American). Two white females, Emmanuelle Charpentier (French) and Jennifer Doudna (American), are known as major figures behind CRISPR Gene Editing. In the case of Blood Transfusion, Grok named James Blundell as the first who performed blood transfusion, while it added that “Charles Drew, an African American physician, later developed blood banking in the 1940s, significantly advancing transfusion practices.”

All in all, then, except for two Asian co-participants, one Jewish women, two white females, and one mixed race African-American, white European men were responsible for almost all the medical breakthroughs. Below is the list, using mostly Grok’s words regarding nationality and nature of the advance.

  • Stethoscope: Invented by René Laennec, a French physician, in 1816. Laennec was a white man of European descent. Revolutionized diagnosis by allowing doctors to listen to internal sounds.
  • X-Rays: Discovered by Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen, a German physicist, in 1895. Roentgen was a white man of European descent. Enabled non-invasive visualization of the body’s interior.
  • Germ Theory: Established primarily by Louis Pasteur, a French chemist, in the mid-19th century, with contributions from Robert Koch, a German physician. Both were white men of European descent. Fundamentally changed medicine by linking microorganisms to disease.
  • Blood Transfusion: The first successful human transfusion was performed by James Blundell, an English physician, in 1818. Blundell was a white man of European descent. Charles Drew, an African American physician, later developed blood banking in the 1940s, significantly advancing transfusion practices.
  • Ophthalmoscope: Invented by Hermann von Helmholtz, a German physician and physicist, in 1851. Helmholtz was a white man of European descent. Allowed direct examination of the retina, advancing eye care.
  • Anaesthesia: William Morton, an American dentist, demonstrated ether anaesthesia publicly in 1846. Morton was a white man of North American descent. Transformed surgery by eliminating pain during procedures.
  • Organ Transplants: The first successful kidney transplant was performed by Joseph Murray, an American surgeon, in 1954. Murray was a white man of North American descent. Pioneered life-saving replacement of failing organs.
  • Antiseptic Surgical Methods: Introduced by Joseph Lister, a British surgeon, in the 1860s. Lister was a white man of European descent. Reduced infections, improving surgical outcomes.
  • Vaccines: The first vaccine (smallpox) was developed by Edward Jenner, an English physician, in 1796. Jenner was a white man of European descent. Prevented countless deaths from infectious diseases.
  • Catheter: The modern medical catheter was developed by David S. Sheridan, an American inventor, in the 1940s. Sheridan was a white man of North American descent. Improved medical procedures like drainage and drug delivery.
  • Antiviral Drugs: Gertrude Elion, an American biochemist, co-developed acyclovir in the 1970s with George Hitchings. Elion was a woman with Jewish ancestry. Provided treatments for viral infections previously untreatable.
  • Microscopy: The compound microscope is credited to Zacharias Janssen, a Dutch spectacle maker, in the late 16th century. Janssen was a white man of European descent. Enabled the discovery of cells and microorganisms.
  • CT Scans: Developed by Godfrey Hounsfield, a British engineer, in the 1970s. Hounsfield was a white man of European descent. Advanced diagnostic imaging with detailed internal views.
  • Penicillin: Discovered by Alexander Fleming, a Scottish bacteriologist, in 1928. Fleming was a white man of European descent, though its development involved Howard Florey, Ernst Chain (both white men), and Dorothy Hodgkin (a white woman who determined its structure). Introduced antibiotics, revolutionizing infection treatment.
  • CRISPR Gene Editing: The major names are Emmanuelle Charpentier (French, b. 1968) and Jennifer Doudna (American, b. 1964). A revolutionary technology allowing precise editing of DNA for treating genetic diseases.
  • Artificial Intelligence in Diagnostics: Pioneered by Geoffrey Hinton (British-Canadian, b. 1947), and Fei-Fei Li (Chinese-American, b. 1976). Enhanced diagnostic accuracy and speed.
  • Robotic Surgery: The key figure is Frederic Moll (American, b. 1951). Allow for minimally invasive procedures with greater precision.
  • Immunotherapy for Cancer: Discoverers of immune checkpoint pathways are James P. Allison (American, b. 1948) and Tasuku Honjo (Japanese, b. 1942), who won the 2018 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for discovering immune checkpoint pathways. Turned some terminal cancers into manageable conditions.

XVI. All the Greatest Theater Playwrights

I asked Grok: “Can it be reasonably argued that the following playwrights, all white men, are the greatest, most original, and widely recognized by their peers?” Let’s not be naive, Grok collects its data from a Western world that has been progressively liberal for over 100 years. Yet, despite this, Grok could not but admit that my list of the greatest playwrights is fundamentally accurate and quite complete. “It seems likely that these playwrights are among the greatest and most original in Western theater, given their widespread recognition and influence. Research suggests they were widely admired by their peers, with many receiving praise and awards during their lifetimes.”

Grok added, however, that I should include “equally significant non-white and female playwrights, like August Wilson or Caryl Churchill”. In my estimation, Wilson and Churchill, a black and a woman, don’t belong in a list of the “greatest”. Grok’s argument that “the list’s exclusivity to white men reflects historical biases, and acknowledging other voices enriches the discussion, ensuring a more comprehensive view of theatrical greatness”, is based on the pervasive influence of political correctness and DEI in the West. I kept the original list except that I added Grok’s identification of the nationalities of the names, and what each name is recognized for.

      • Aeschylus
        • Nationality: Greek
        • Birth: circa 525 BC
        • Greatness/Originality: Considered the father of tragedy, Aeschylus introduced the second actor to the stage, enabling more complex dialogue and plot development, and reduced the chorus’s role, laying the foundation for dramatic structure.
      • Sophocles
        • Nationality: Greek
        • Birth: circa 496 BC
        • Greatness/Originality: Added the third actor, enhancing dramatic possibilities, and focused on character-driven narratives with deep psychological insight, as seen in masterpieces like Oedipus Rex.
      • Euripides
        • Nationality: Greek
        • Birth: circa 480 BC
        • Greatness/Originality: Known for realistic portrayals and strong, complex characters (often women and slaves), he challenged societal norms, making his works both controversial and influential.
      • Menander
        • Nationality: Greek
        • Birth: circa 342 BC
        • Greatness/Originality: A leading figure in New Comedy, Menander focused on everyday life and human relationships with wit and subtlety, influencing later Roman and European comedic traditions.
      • Plautus
        • Nationality: Roman
        • Birth: circa 254 BC
        • Greatness/Originality: A master of comedy, he adapted Greek plays for Roman audiences, emphasizing farce and slapstick humor, influencing the development of European comedic traditions.
      • Hrosvitha of Gandersheim
        • Nationality: German (Saxon)
        • Birth: circa 935 AD
        • Greatness/Originality: The first known female playwright, Hrosvitha wrote Christian-themed plays in Latin, adapting Terence’s comedic style to promote moral and religious values, a pioneering effort in medieval drama.
      • Ludovico Ariosto
        • Nationality: Italian
        • Birth: 1474
        • Greatness/Originality: Best known for his epic poem Orlando Furioso, Ariosto also wrote comedies that bridged medieval and Renaissance theatre, blending classical influences with Italian innovation.
      • Lope de Vega
        • Nationality: Spanish
        • Birth: 1562
        • Greatness/Originality: Incredibly prolific (writing hundreds of plays), he established the three-act structure in Spanish theatre and skillfully blended comedy and tragedy.
      • William Shakespeare
        • Nationality: English
        • Birth: 1564
        • Greatness/Originality: Shakespeare’s unparalleled poetic language and profound understanding of human nature shine through his tragedies, comedies, and histories, making him a timeless figure in world literature.
      • Ben Jonson
        • Nationality: English
        • Birth: 1572
        • Greatness/Originality: Excelled in satirical comedies, developing the “theory of humours” and critiquing society sharply in works like Volpone.
      • Pedro Calderón de la Barca
        • Nationality: Spanish
        • Birth: 1600
        • Greatness/Originality: Explored philosophical and theological themes, such as free will and destiny, with his masterpiece Life is a Dream being a pinnacle of Spanish Golden Age drama.
      • Pierre Corneille
        • Nationality: French
        • Birth: 1606
        • Greatness/Originality: His tragedies, like Le Cid, set new standards for French drama, blending heroic ideals with emotional conflict.
      • Molière (Jean-Baptiste Poquelin)
        • Nationality: French
        • Birth: 1622
        • Greatness/Originality: A master of comedy, he satirized societal hypocrisies in plays like Tartuffe and The Misanthrope, which remain enduring classics.
      • Jean Racine
        • Nationality: French
        • Birth: 1639
        • Greatness/Originality: Crafted tragedies with precise, elegant language and intense psychological depth, often drawing from Greek and Roman myths.
      • Henrik Ibsen
        • Nationality: Norwegian
        • Birth: 1828
        • Greatness/Originality: The father of modern drama, he introduced realism to the stage, tackling social issues and individual psychology in works like A Doll’s House.
      • George Bernard Shaw
        • Nationality: Irish
        • Birth: 1856
        • Greatness/Originality: Used wit and provocation to advocate social reform in plays like Pygmalion, blending entertainment with intellectual depth.
      • Anton Chekhov
        • Nationality: Russian
        • Birth: 1860
        • Greatness/Originality: Revolutionized drama with his focus on subtext and the inner lives of characters, as seen in The Seagull and The Cherry Orchard.
      • Luigi Pirandello
        • Nationality: Italian
        • Birth: 1867
        • Greatness/Originality: Explored identity and reality, blurring fiction and truth, most notably in Six Characters in Search of an Author.
      • Eugene O’Neill
        • Nationality: American
        • Birth: 1888
        • Greatness/Originality: The first American playwright to win the Nobel Prize in Literature, he revitalized tragedy in works like Long Day’s Journey into Night.
      • Bertolt Brecht
        • Nationality: German
        • Birth: February 10, 1898
        • Greatness/Originality: Developed epic theatre, using distancing effects to provoke critical thinking, with politically charged works like Mother Courage and Her Children.
      • Federico García Lorca
        • Nationality: Spanish
        • Birth: June 5, 1898
        • Greatness/Originality: Fused surrealism with traditional Spanish themes, creating passionate, lyrical dramas like Blood Wedding.
      • Samuel Beckett
        • Nationality: Irish
        • Birth: 1906
        • Greatness/Originality: A Theatre of the Absurd pioneer, he explored existential themes with minimalist settings in plays like Waiting for Godot.
      • Eugène Ionesco
        • Nationality: Romanian-French
        • Birth: 1909
        • Greatness/Originality: Used absurdity and illogical scenarios to critique conformity, as exemplified in Rhinoceros.

XVII. White Men Engineered and Designed the Best Airplanes

I asked Grok: “Can one reasonably argue that European (including Russian and American) white men originated, engineered, and designed almost all the best airplanes in history; and that the following, which includes a Japanese airplane, are among the best ever engineered.”

Grok replied: “Yes, one can reasonably argue that European (including Russian and American) white men originated, engineered, and designed ‘almost all’ the best airplanes in history, given their overwhelming representation among aviation’s most iconic designs. Your list supports this, with the Mitsubishi A6M Zero as a notable exception that doesn’t undermine the broader pattern. The claim holds due to historical and industrial realities, though it’s worth noting that global contributions (e.g., Japan, later Soviet designs) add nuance to the narrative. The listed aircraft, with minor clarification (e.g., “Shturmovik Dreamliner”), are indeed among history’s finest, reinforcing the argument.”

Grok actually reinforces my argument, agreeing that “the Mitsubishi A6M Zero” stands “as the notable exception from Japan”, while reminding me that “Japan’s aviation industry was heavily influenced by Western technology and ideas, though it adapted them brilliantly.”

Grok makes the well-known point that European whites were responsible for the origination of aviation, “its foundational developments occurring primarily in Europe and the United States. The Wright Flyer (1903), credited to the Wright brothers (American), marked the first powered, controlled flight, setting the stage for subsequent innovations. Most early aviation pioneers—e.g., Louis Blériot (French, Blériot XI), Glenn Curtiss (American), and later figures like Donald Douglas (American, DC-3) or Willy Messerschmitt (German, Bf-109, Me-262)—were indeed of European descent or from European-derived populations in America”.

Below I simply pasted what Grok said about my list.

“Let’s examine the aircraft you listed to see how they align with the claim:

  • Cessna 172 (USA): Designed by Cessna, an American company, led by engineers like Dwayne Wallace.
  • Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star (USA): Clarence “Kelly” Johnson, an American of Swedish descent, led its design.
  • Learjet 23 (USA): William Lear, American, pioneered this business jet.
  • B-29 Superfortress (USA): Boeing’s American team, under figures like Edward Wells, engineered this WWII bomber.
  • Bell X-1 (USA): American engineers at Bell, with input from NACA (e.g., Walter Williams), broke the sound barrier.
  • Lockheed C-130 Hercules (USA): Another Kelly Johnson design, iconic for its versatility.
  • Douglas DC-3 (USA): Donald Douglas, American, created this revolutionary transport.
  • Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress (USA): Boeing’s American team, led by E. Gifford Emery and others.
  • Boeing 747 (USA): Joe Sutter, American, spearheaded this jumbo jet.
  • F-35 (USA): Lockheed Martin’s multinational effort, but primarily American-led.
  • MQ-1 Predator (USA): General Atomics, American, developed this drone.
  • RV-3 (USA): A homebuilt design by American Richard VanGrunsven.
  • F-16 Fighting Falcon (USA): General Dynamics (now Lockheed Martin), American engineers like Harry Hillaker.
  • Wright Flyer (USA): The Wright brothers, American pioneers.
  • Blériot XI (France): Louis Blériot, French, flew across the English Channel.
  • Focke-Wulf Fw 190 (Germany): Kurt Tank, German, designed this WWII fighter.
  • British Spitfire (UK): Reginald Mitchell, British, crafted this legendary plane.
  • P-51 Mustang (USA): North American Aviation, led by Edgar Schmued (German-born, American).
  • Messerschmitt Bf-109 (Germany): Willy Messerschmitt, German, WWII mainstay.
  • Messerschmitt Me-262 (Germany): First operational jet fighter, also Messerschmitt.
  • Mitsubishi A6M Zero (Japan): Jiro Horikoshi, Japanese, a standout non-Western design.
  • Shturmovik Dreamliner (?): Likely a mix-up. The Ilyushin Il-2 Shturmovik (USSR, Sergey Ilyushin) was a Soviet ground-attack plane; “Dreamliner” is Boeing’s 787 (USA). Assuming Il-2, it’s Russian.
  • Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird (USA): Kelly Johnson again, American.
  • Cirrus SR22 (USA): Klapmeier brothers, American, modern light aircraft.
  • Lockheed Constellation (USA): Kelly Johnson and team, American.”

XIX. The 50 Greatest Philosophers

I did not follow Grok’s claim that I missed some non-European philosophers, and a few females, though Grok agreed that most philosophers have been men of European ancestry. I would have included non-Europeans in a list of about 100, but not in a list of 50, for the following reason: Philosophy began with the Pre-Socratics when we witness for the first time in world history speculations on the nature of things with self-conscious appeals to the use of human reason as the vehicle to attain truth, rather than relying, without reflection, on taken-for-granted kinship norms, set traditions, or revelations by gods. It is not only that the ancient Greeks posed critical questions — “Is there some substance or some basic stuff out of which everything is made?”—but that their answers consisted of reasoned arguments.

The list below, therefore, exclude thinkers, mythical figures, religious prophets, or declarations based on faith, apologetics, or beliefs devoid of sound reasoning. With the exception of Islamic Aristotelians, there were no sustained inquiries “into the nature of knowledge and how it is acquired” outside the European world. While there were “inquiries into the nature of reality and existence” and into “what is good,” there were no treatises on what constitutes valid and sound reasoning.

Indian philosophy was inextricably tied to India’s religious traditions, and was never conceived as a separate intellectual pursuit. Confucianism is not a philosophy, but a doctrine of moral advice, or a guide for proper moral behavior for the scholar gentry class of China’s bureaucratic state. Chinese philosophers, as a whole, were accustomed to express themselves in the form of aphorisms, apothegms, or allusions, and illustrations, lacking demonstrative reasoning and clearly-stated primary premises.

It is not that this list abides solely by the criteria that a philosopher must be a rationalist or logician, engaged in deductive or inductive reasoning, as the ultimate path to the discovery of the nature of things. The Western philosophical tradition, actually, contains the most reasoned critiques of the pretensions of reason in favor of alternative ways of finding meaning and making sense of the universe—intuitive, poetical, artistic, archetypal ways. The difference is that those philosophers who pointed to the limitations of reason would go on to develop alternative methodologies, or fully articulated philosophies, such as hermeneutics, phenomenology, and existentialism—by individuals well-educated in the Western rationalist and empiricist traditions. This accounts for the variety of philosophers listed below, some of whom I don’t like but are nevertheless recognized as great by some of the many sources I have read.

  1. Abelard (1079–1142)
  2. Anaximander (b. 610 BC)
  3. Anselm (1033–1109)
  4. Aquinas (1225–1274)
  5. Aristotle (384–322 BC)
  6. Augustine (354–430)
  7. Bacon, Roger (1214–1292)
  8. Bacon, Francis (1561–1626)
  9. Bentham (1748–1832)
  10. Berkeley (1685–1753)
  11. Carnap (1891–1970)
  12. Democritus (460–360 BC)
  13. Deleuze (1925–1995)
  14. Derrida (1930–2004)
  15. Descartes (1596–1650)
  16. Fichte (1762–1814)
  17. Frege (1848–1925)
  18. Hegel (1770–1831)
  19. Heidegger (1889–1976)
  20. Heraclitus (535–475 BC)
  21. Hobbes (1588–1679)
  22. Hume (1711–1776)
  23. Husserl (1859–1938)
  24. James (1842–1910)
  25. Kant (1724–1804)
  26. Leibniz (1646–1716)
  27. Locke (1632–1704)
  28. Marx (1818–83)
  29. Mill (1806–73)
  30. Nietzsche (1844–1900)
  31. Ockham (1285–1347)
  32. Parmenides (b. 501 BC)
  33. Peirce (1839–1914)
  34. Plato (428–348 BC)
  35. Plotinus (204–270)
  36. Pythagoras (570–495 BC)
  37. Quine (1908–2000)
  38. Rawls (1921–2002)
  39. Reid (1710–1796)
  40. Rousseau (1712–1778
  41. Russell (1872–1970)
  42. Sartre (1905–1980)
  43. Schelling (1775–1854)
  44. Schopenhauer (1788–1860)
  45. Duns Scotus (1266–1308)
  46. Socrates (470–399 BC)
  47. Spinoza (1632–1677)
  48. Wittgenstein (1889–1951)
  49. Zeno of Lea (b. 489 BC)
  50. Žižek (1949–)

XX. All 21 Greatest Books on Science — Except 1

Grok agreed that “this list is very accurate as a representation of the greatest books in science, particularly if we interpret ‘greatest’ as historically foundational and influential up to the 19th century.” I wanted a list that covered the major fields of scientific inquiry, rather than three or four, without affecting the quality of choices. The two changes I made to the original list was to replace Leonhart Fuchs’s Notable Commentaries on the History of Plants (1542) with Ptolemy’s Almagest. Grok said that Fuchs’s Notable Commentaries was “less groundbreaking than, say, Mendel’s work on genetics (though not a book) or Watson and Crick’s “Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids” (a paper, not a book).” Since these two works are papers, not books, I decided that the obvious book to stand as a substitute was Ptolemy’s Almagest. Grok noted that the list did not include books from the 20th century; however, the books Grok suggested are not, in my estimation, at the same peak level of “revolutionary” or “influential” as the ones listed here. I did, however, decide to substitute one of the two books I had listed from Newton, Opticks, with Marxwell’s A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism. I had not included Albert Einstein’s Relativity: The Special and the General Theory (1916), for the sake of provocation, but have added it now.

  1. Physics – Aristotle (4th Century BCE)
  2. Almagest – Ptolemy (2nd Century)
  3. On the Revolutions of Heavenly Spheres – Nicolaus Copernicus (1543)
  4. On the Fabric of the Human Body – Andreas Vesalius (1543).
  5. De Re Metallica – Georgius Agricola (1556).
  6. On the Magnet – William Gilbert (1600)
  7. Harmony of the World – Johannes Kepler (1619)
  8. Novum Organum – Francis Bacon (1620)
  9. An Anatomical Exercise on the Motion of the Heart and Blood in Living Beings – William Harvey (1628)
  10. Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems – Galileo Galilei (1632)
  11. Discourse on the Method – René Descartes (1637)
  12. The Sceptical Chymist – Robert Boyle (1661)
  13. Micrographia – Robert Hooke (1665)
  14. Principia Mathematica – Isaac Newton (1687)
  15. Treatise on Light – Christiaan Huygens (1690)
  16. Systema Naturae – Carl Linnaeus (1735)
  17. Theory of the Earth – James Hutton (1788)
  18. Elements of Chemistry – Antoine Lavoisier (1789)
  19. On the Origin of Species – Charles Darwin (1859)
  20. A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism – James Clerk Maxwell (1873)
  21. Relativity: The Special and the General Theory – Albert Einstein (1916)

XXI. Almost 100% of the Greatest Architects are European Men

This is a list of the greatest architects with identifiable names from the Gothic period to the early 2oth century, ending with Art Nouveau and Art Deco. I asked Grok if this was a “reasonably accurate list of architects with identifiable names, which is not the case for most architecture outside the Western world. This is why this list is overwhelmingly of men of European descent. The only non-Western architect I would find is Mimar Sinan.”

Grok replied: “This is a reasonably accurate list of the greatest architects in history from the Gothic to the early 20th century, including Art Nouveau and Art Deco architects…It is a strong and reasonably accurate compilation, particularly given your focus on architects with identifiable names. As you noted, this naturally skews the list toward men of European descent, since historical records outside the Western world often lack individual attribution. The inclusion of Mimar Sinan as the sole non-Western architect is a thoughtful exception, reflecting his monumental contributions, such as the Süleymaniye Mosque, which rival the best of European architecture.”

The list below has been improved by Grok’s identification of the full names of a few architects, its observation that two names were “landscape architects, rather than rather than building designers,” its judgment that three names were not major architects, and its observation that I had omitted some 5 great architects.

I also asked Grok to organize the list in chronological order, according to birth and death of the architects, within the respective architectural movements or subheadings I had provided.

This list is not a denial of great architecture outside the Western world. The civilizations of the Mayans, Aztecs, and Incas saw impressive “monumental” stone buildings, pyramids and temples, constructed at the behest of state officials, which deserve much admiration. But these architectural attainments were a one-time affair in their originality, deserving only one chapter or section in a survey of the history of world architecture. The architecture of Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Persia is more impressive than that of the Americas, but not on the same aesthetic and geometrical level of harmony as the ancient Greek Parthenon of Athens, built in the mid-fifth century BC, the Doric Temple of Zeus at Olympia (460 BC), or the Temple of Poseidon at Sounion (440 BC). It is certainly below the level of proficiency and beauty attained by the ancient Romans.

In fairness to non-Western architecture, however, I decided to leave out Classical (Greece and Rome) and Romanesque architecture.

India saw great architectural styles, Jain Architecture (early medieval times, with delicate marble carvings characterized by precision; Vesara Architecture (7th–13th century CE), with detailed friezes and balanced proportions; Indo-Islamic Architecture (starting in the 12th century CE) best known for Taj Mahal. In China there were different styles, “Garden Architecture,” “Buddhist Architecture,” “Taoist Architecture,” or “Confucian Architecture”. It is hard, however, to hide the standardized, bureaucratic reality of Chinese architcture. The classical Chinese language has no word for “architect,” only one for a person who engages in the craft of building. The standards were sanctioned and guarded by the Chinese court, and the government was the sponsor of all major manuals that dealt with official architecture. Craftsmen were not required to be literate, only to follow prescribed modules and methods so as to ensure that court dictums were followed.

All in all, there was a lot less variety of architectural styles in the non-Western world. Once certain styles were established, little originality followed: no or few new epochs in aesthetics, without major individual architects to identify. In contrast, Europeans originated a continuous sequence of major architectural stylistic periods (within which there were other national styles): Classical (850 BC–AD 476), Romanesque (AD 900–1200), Gothic (1100s–1500s), Renaissance (1300s–1600s), Baroque (late 1500s–late 1600s), Rococo (1700–1760), Neoclassicism (1760–1830), Victorian-Eclecticism-Restoration (1815–1900), Art Nouveau (1890–1910), Art Deco (1915–1930), Modernism (early 1900s–1980s).

I have grouped the styles listed above under fewer movements/ headings for simplification.

Gothic Architects (prevalent in Europe from the 12th to the 16th centuries).

  • Abbot Suger (c. 1081 – 1151) Known for his role in the development of Gothic architecture at the Basilica of Saint-Denis.
  • William of Sens (c. 1120 – late 12th century) Worked on the reconstruction of Canterbury Cathedral in the 1170s.
  • Robert de Luzarches (c. 1180 – mid-13th century) Architect of Amiens Cathedral, begun in 1220.
  • Villard de Honnecourt (c. 1200 – c. 1250) Known for 13th-century sketchbook documenting Gothic construction techniques.
  • Arnolfo di Cambio (c. 1240 – 1302) Italian architect involved in the design of Florence Cathedral.
  • Erwin von Steinbach (c. 1244 – 1318) Worked on Strasbourg Cathedral, a masterpiece of Gothic architecture.
  • Henry Yevele (c. 1320 – 1400) Prominent English architect, active in the 14th century, known for work on Westminster Abbey.
  • Peter Parler (1330 – 1399) German architect who contributed to Saint Vitus Cathedral in Prague.

Renaissance Architects (the 14th to 17th centuries)

  • Filippo Brunelleschi (1377 – 1446) Pioneered Renaissance architecture with the dome of Florence Cathedral.
  • Michelozzo di Bartolomeo (1396 – 1472) Collaborated with Brunelleschi and designed the Palazzo Medici Riccardi.
  • Leon Battista Alberti (1404 – 1472) Architect and theorist, known for the façade of Santa Maria Novella.
  • Donato Bramante (1444 – 1514) Designed the Tempietto and contributed to St. Peter’s Basilica.
  • Giuliano da Sangallo (1445 – 1516) Known for the Villa Medici at Poggio a Caiano.
  • Michelangelo (1475 – 1564) Renowned artist and architect, designed the dome of St. Peter’s Basilica.
  • Baldassare Peruzzi (1481 – 1536) Designed the Villa Farnesina in Rome.
  • Michele Sanmicheli (1484 – 1559) Known for fortifications and palaces in Verona.
  • Jacopo Sansovino (1486 – 1570) Principal architect in Venice, designed the Biblioteca Marciana.
  • Mimar Sinan (1489 – 1588) Ottoman architect, famous for the Süleymaniye Mosque.
  • Giulio Romano (c. 1499 – 1546) Designed the Palazzo Te in Mantua.
  • Giacomo Vignola (1507 – 1573) Known for the Villa Farnese and the Church of the Gesù.
  • Andrea Palladio (1508 – 1580) Influential architect, designed the Villa Rotonda and Palladian buildings.
  • Philibert de l’Orme (c. 1510 – 1570) French architect, known for the Château d’Anet.
  • Giacomo Della Porta (c. 1533 – 1602) Completed the dome of St. Peter’s Basilica.
  • Vincenzo Scamozzi (1548 – 1616) Successor to Palladio, designed the Teatro Olimpico.

Baroque Architects (late 16th to the 18th century)

  • Carlo Maderno (1556 – 1629)
    Designed the façade of St. Peter’s Basilica.
  • Inigo Jones (1573 – 1652)
    Introduced Palladianism to England with the Queen’s House.
  • Pietro da Cortona (1596 – 1669)
    Known for the Church of Santi Luca e Martina in Rome.
  • Gian Lorenzo Bernini (1598 – 1680)
    Architect and sculptor, designed St. Peter’s Square.
  • François Mansart (1598 – 1666)
    Known for the Château de Maisons-Laffitte.
  • Francesco Borromini (1599 – 1667)
    Designed San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane in Rome.
  • Alonso Cano (1601 – 1667)
    Spanish architect, worked on Granada Cathedral.
  • Louis Le Vau (1612 – 1670)
    Designed the Palace of Versailles (early phases).
  • André Le Nôtre (1613 – 1700)
    Landscape architect, designed the gardens of Versailles.
  • Sir Christopher Wren (1632 – 1723)
    Rebuilt St. Paul’s Cathedral after the Great Fire of London.
  • Jules Hardouin-Mansart (1646 – 1708)
    Expanded Versailles and designed Les Invalides (note: listed as “Jules Mansart” in the query).
  • Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach (1656 – 1723)
    Austrian architect, designed Schönbrunn Palace (note: listed as “Johann von Erlach” in the query).
  • Jakob Prandtauer (1660 – 1726)
    Designed Melk Abbey in Austria.
  • Johann Dientzenhofer (1663 – 1726)
    Part of the Dientzenhofer family, worked on Bohemian Baroque buildings.
  • Andreas Schlüter (1664 – 1714)
    German architect and sculptor, designed the Berlin Palace.
  • Sir John Vanbrugh (1664 – 1726)
    Designed Blenheim Palace in England.
  • Pedro de Ribera (1681 – 1742)
    Spanish architect, known for the Hospice of San Fernando.
  • Johann Balthasar Neumann (1687 – 1753)
    Designed the Würzburg Residence.
  • Joseph Emanuel Fischer von Erlach (1693 – 1742)
    Son of Johann Bernhard, completed works like the Karlskirche in Vienna.
  • Bartolomeo Rastrelli (1700 – 1771)
    Designed the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg.

Neoclassical Architects (18th century)

  • Hans Georg von Knobelsdorff (1699 – 1753)
    Designed Sanssouci Palace in Potsdam (note: listed after Nash in the query but placed here by birth date).
  • Jacques Germain Soufflot (1713 – 1780)
    Designed the Panthéon in Paris.
  • Carl Gotthard Langhans (1732 – 1808)
    Designed the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin.
  • Claude-Nicolas Ledoux (1736 – 1806)
    Known for his utopian architectural designs.
  • Jean Chalgrin (1739 – 1811)
    Designed the Arc de Triomphe in Paris.
  • Thomas Jefferson (1743 – 1826)
    American statesman and architect, designed Monticello.
  • Charles Cameron (1745 – 1812)
    Worked in Russia, designed Pavlovsk Palace.
  • John Nash (1752 – 1835)
    Designed Regent’s Park and Buckingham Palace expansions.
  • William Thornton (1759 – 1828)
    Designed the United States Capitol.
  • Charles Bulfinch (1763 – 1844)
    First American-born professional architect, designed the Massachusetts State House.
  • Benjamin Henry Latrobe (1764 – 1820)
    Contributed to the U.S. Capitol and Baltimore Basilica.
  • Sir Robert Smirke (1780 – 1867)
    Designed the British Museum in London.
  • Karl Friedrich Schinkel (1781 – 1841)
    Designed the Altes Museum in Berlin.

Victorian, Gothic Revival, Art Nouveau, and Art Deco Architects (from the 19th to early 20th centuries)

  • Sir Charles Barry (1795 – 1860)
    Victorian architect, designed the Palace of Westminster.
  • Richard Upjohn (1802 – 1878)
    Gothic Revival architect, designed Trinity Church in New York.
  • George Gilbert Scott (1811 – 1878)
    Gothic Revival architect, designed the Albert Memorial.
  • Augustus Pugin (1812 – 1852)
    Gothic Revival pioneer, collaborated on the Palace of Westminster.
  • Eugène Viollet-le-Duc (1814 – 1879)
    Gothic Revival theorist, restored Notre-Dame de Paris.
  • James Renwick (1818 – 1895)
    Gothic Revival architect, designed St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York.
  • Charles Garnier (1825 – 1898)
    Victorian-era architect, designed the Paris Opéra.
  • Richard Morris Hunt (1827 – 1895)
    Designed the Biltmore Estate in the Victorian style.
  • Gustave Eiffel (1832 – 1923)
    Engineer and architect, designed the Eiffel Tower.
  • William Le Baron Jenney (1832 – 1907)
    Pioneer of skyscraper design in Chicago.
  • George Brown Post (1837 – 1913)
    Victorian architect, designed the New York Stock Exchange.
  • Henry Hobson Richardson (1838 – 1886)
    Developed the Richardsonian Romanesque style.
  • Otto Wagner (1841 – 1918)
    Transitional figure, bridged Victorian and Art Nouveau styles.
  • Daniel Burnham (1846 – 1912)
    Part of Burnham and Root, designed the Flatiron Building.
  • John Root (1850 – 1891)
    Partner in Burnham and Root, contributed to Chicago’s early skyscrapers.
  • Antoni Gaudí (1852 – 1926)
    Art Nouveau architect, designed the Sagrada Família.
  • Martin Roche (1853 – 1927)
    Part of Holabird & Roche, designed early skyscrapers.
  • William Holabird (1854 – 1923)
    Partner in Holabird & Roche, influenced Chicago School architecture.
  • Louis Sullivan (1856 – 1924)
    Chicago School architect, known as the “father of skyscrapers.”
  • Cass Gilbert (1859 – 1934)
    Designed the Woolworth Building, blending Gothic Revival and early skyscraper design.
  • Alphonse Mucha (1860 – 1939)
    Primarily an artist, included here for Art Nouveau influence.
  • Victor Horta (1861 – 1947)
    Art Nouveau architect, designed the Hôtel Tassel in Brussels.
  • Henry van de Velde (1863 – 1957)
    Art Nouveau and early modernist architect and designer.
  • Joseph Maria Olbrich (1867 – 1908)
    Art Nouveau architect, designed the Secession Building in Vienna.
  • Hector Guimard (1867 – 1942)
    Art Nouveau architect, designed Paris Métro entrances.
  • Frank Lloyd Wright (1867 – 1959)
    Began in the late Victorian era, later influenced modern architecture.
  • Charles Rennie Mackintosh (1868 – 1928)
    Art Nouveau architect, designed the Glasgow School of Art.
  • Peter Behrens (1868 – 1940)
    Transitional figure between Art Nouveau and modernism.
  • Adolf Loos (1870 – 1933)
    Early modernist, rejected Art Nouveau ornamentation.
  • Raymond Hood (1881 – 1934)
    Art Deco architect, designed the Rockefeller Center.
  • William Van Alen (1883 – 1954)
    Art Deco architect, designed the Chrysler Building.
  • Walter Gropius (1883 – 1969)
    Founder of the Bauhaus, bridged early 20th-century styles.
  • Ralph Walker (1889 – 1973)
    Art Deco architect, designed the AT&T Building in New York.

XXII. 18.5 of the Greatest 22 Modern Logicians are European with 3.5 Jews

There is a series, Handbook of the History of Logic, which consists of 11 volumes, of which only the first volume, mostly about Aristotle’s logic, has two chapters about nonwhite contributions to logic, namely, Indian and Arabic logic, with every other volume singularly dedicated to Western logic. The Chinese had no logic. I asked Grok, firstly, whether the following list was “leaving out some of the greatest modern logicians,” and, secondly, whether it would be “accurate to say that the following men of European ancestry, including Jewish ancestry, represent all the greatest modern logicians.”

Grok agreed that this “list contains many of the most influential and celebrated logicians in the history of the field…aligning with the ‘modern’ era.” In response to the two questions, Grok mentioned the following “notable omissions” (European and Jewish) and “notable” women and non-European logicians. After further research, I decided to add i) Stephen Kleene (American of European ancestry), as he is “widely considered to be one of the greatest logicians of the 20th century”; ii) Jaakko Hintikka (Finnish ancestry) for his very significant contributions to “modal and philosophical logic”; iii) Haskell Curry (American logician of European ancestry), as a “highly influential and prominent logician”; and Saharon Shelah (Jewish ancestry), “widely considered one of the greatest logicians”.

Although Grok mentioned these names, but I did not include Alfred North Whitehead (British) since he is best classified as a philosopher of mathematics. Emil Post (1897-1954, Jewish Heritage) is not included either since he is generally rated as a “significant and influential figure in the field of computability,” but is not recognized as one of the top logicians. Andrey Kolmogorov (1903-1987, Russian ancestry) is not primarily known as a logician, but as a great mathematician, already included in the list of greatest mathematicians. Likewise, Srinivasa Ramanujan (1887–1920, Indian) is already included in the list of greatest mathematicians. The woman Emmy Noether (1882–1935, Jewish ancestry), as Grok admits, “is not primarily a logician”. Julia Robinson (1919–1985, American) is really a mathematician; and Hao Wang (1921–1995, Chinese), is significant but not a top logician.

The list contains 22 logicians, of which 18 are of European ancestry and 4 of Jewish ancestry, though Cantor’s Jewish ancestry is through his paternal line only. Some may argue that all 22 logicians are of European ancestry to the extent that Ashkenazi Jews are considered of European ancestry due to their historical roots in Eastern Europe.

  • Bernhard Bolzano (1781-1848)
    • Nationality: German-Italian
    • Achievements: Made early contributions to logic and mathematics, notably the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem, which is fundamental in real analysis.
  • George Boole (1815-1864)
    • Nationality: British
    • Achievements: Developed Boolean algebra, a cornerstone of computer science and digital logic design.
  • C. S. Peirce (1839-1914)
    • Nationality: American
    • Achievements: Contributed to the development of quantifiers in logic and semiotics; influential in the philosophical school of pragmatism.
  • Georg Cantor (1845-1918)
    • Nationality: German (Jewish ancestry through his paternal line)
    • Achievements: Founded set theory and introduced the concept of infinite sets and transfinite numbers, revolutionizing mathematics.
  • Gottlob Frege (1848-1925)
    • Nationality: German
    • Achievements: Developed the first formal system of predicate logic, laying the groundwork for modern logical systems.
  • Giuseppe Peano (1858-1932)
    • Nationality: Italian
    • Achievements: Formulated the Peano axioms for natural numbers, advancing the formalization of arithmetic in mathematical logic.
  • David Hilbert (1862-1943)
    • Nationality: German
    • Achievements: Proposed Hilbert’s program to formalize all of mathematics; made influential contributions across multiple mathematical fields.
  • Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)
    • Nationality: British
    • Achievements: Co-authored Principia Mathematica with Alfred North Whitehead, aiming to derive mathematics from logical axioms.
  • Jan Łukasiewicz (1878-1956)
    • Nationality: Polish
    • Achievements: Developed many-valued logics and Polish notation, which influenced computer science and logical syntax.
  • Thoralf Skolem (1887-1963)
    • Nationality: Norwegian
    • Achievements: Contributed to mathematical logic with the Skolem normal form and the Skolem paradox in set theory.
  • Rudolf Carnap (1891-1970)
    • Nationality: German
    • Achievements: Key figure in logical positivism; advanced the philosophy of science and inductive logic.
  • Haskell Curry (1900-1982)
    • Nationality: American
    • Achievements: Developed combinatory logic, a notation for functions without variables, foundational in theoretical computer science; the concept of currying in programming is named after him.
  • Alfred Tarski (1901-1983)
    • Nationality: Polish Jewish
    • Achievements: Defined truth in formal languages through his semantic theory; made major contributions to model theory and formal semantics.
    • Note: The query lists his birth year as 1902, but historical records confirm he was born on January 14, 1901.
  • Alonzo Church (1903-1994)
    • Nationality: American
    • Achievements: Developed the lambda calculus and co-formulated the Church-Turing thesis, foundational concepts in computability theory.
  • Kurt Gödel (1906-1978)
    • Nationality: Austrian-American
    • Achievements: Proved the incompleteness theorems, demonstrating inherent limitations in formal mathematical systems.
    • Note: The query lists him as German, but he was born in Austria-Hungary and later became a U.S. citizen, making Austrian-American more accurate.
  • Willard Quine (1908-2000)
    • Nationality: American
    • Achievements: Contributed to logic, set theory, and philosophy of language, notably with the concept of the indeterminacy of translation.
  • Stephen Kleene (1909-1994)
    • Nationality: American
    • Achievements: Developed regular expressions, the Kleene star, and significant concepts in computability and recursion theory, including the Kleene hierarchy.
  • Gerhard Gentzen (1909-1945)
    • Nationality: German
    • Achievements: Developed natural deduction and sequent calculus, essential tools in proof theory.
    • Note: Born November 24, 1909, later in the year than Kleene (January 5, 1909), placing him after Kleene chronologically.
  • Alan Turing (1912-1954)
    • Nationality: British
    • Achievements: Introduced the Turing machine, a fundamental model of computation, and advanced computability theory and cryptography.
  • Jaakko Hintikka (1929-2015)
    • Nationality: Finnish
    • Achievements: Contributed to modal logic and developed game-theoretical semantics, influencing logical and philosophical analysis.
  • Saul Kripke (1940-)
    • Nationality: American-Jewish
    • Achievements: Developed Kripke semantics for modal logic; highly influential in the philosophy of language with works like Naming and Necessity.
  • Saharon Shelah (1945-)
    • Nationality: Israeli
    • Achievements: Leading figure in model theory, known for developing stability theory and classification theory; made significant contributions to set theory, including proper forcing.

XXIII. Almost all the Greatest Adventure Stories

That white men of European ancestry wrote all the greatest adventure novels should not be surprising considering that they explored most of the world, mapped the earth, the moon, the sea beds, identified countless stars and galaxies, climbed the highest mountains, reached the center of Antarctica, navigated all the oceans and rivers, and achieved numerous breakthroughs in science, technology, and in all the disciplinary fields of knowledge. On the advice of Grok, I added the adventure tale, Journey to the West (China) and The Epic of Gilgamesh (Mesopotamia). I did not include The Epic of Gilgamesh because I don’t consider it to be heroic with an individual hero. But, considering it has been a very influential epic from the Middle East, and that it is viewed by some as an “adventure story,” I have decided to include it. Gary Paulsen’s novel, Hatchet, was also added, after Grok suggested it. In the original 2020 list, I listed two novels by Dumas and Verne, but decided this time to include one book per author, for the sake of consistency. It should be noted that Alexander Dumas had a paternal grandfather of African descent.

  • The Epic of Gilgamesh by Sin-leqi-unninni
    • Publication Year: ~2100 BCE
    • Nationality: Mesopotamian
  • Odyssey by Homer
    • Publication Year: ~8th century BCE
    • Nationality: Greek
  • Aeneid by Virgil
    • Publication Year: 19 BCE
    • Nationality: Roman
  • Journey to the West by Wu Cheng’en
    • Publication Year: 1592 (specific year for the first known complete edition)
    • Nationality: Chinese
  • Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes
    • Publication Year: 1605 (first part)
    • Nationality: Spanish
  • Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe
    • Publication Year: 1719
    • Nationality: English
  • Gulliver’s Travels by Jonathan Swift
    • Publication Year: 1726
    • Nationality: Irish
  • Swiss Family Robinson by Johann David Wyss
    • Publication Year: 1812
    • Nationality: Swiss
  • Ivanhoe by Walter Scott
    • Publication Year: 1819
    • Nationality: Scottish
  • The Last of the Mohicans by James Fenimore Cooper
    • Publication Year: 1826
    • Nationality: American
  • The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas
    • Publication Year: 1844
    • Nationality: French
  • Moby-Dick by Herman Melville
    • Publication Year: 1851
    • Nationality: American
  • 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne
    • Publication Year: 1870
    • Nationality: French
  • Roughing It by Mark Twain
    • Publication Year: 1872
    • Nationality: American
  • The Mysterious Island by Jules Verne
    • Publication Year: 1874
    • Nationality: French
  • Treasure Island by Robert Louis Stevenson
    • Publication Year: 1883
    • Nationality: Scottish
  • King Solomon’s Mines by H. Rider Haggard
    • Publication Year: 1885
    • Nationality: English
  • Kidnapped by Robert Louis Stevenson
    • Publication Year: 1886
    • Nationality: Scottish
  • Prisoner of Zenda by Anthony Hope
    • Publication Year: 1894
    • Nationality: English
  • Captains Courageous by Rudyard Kipling
    • Publication Year: 1897
    • Nationality: English
  • The Call of the Wild by Jack London
    • Publication Year: 1903
    • Nationality: American
  • The Sea-Wolf by Jack London
    • Publication Year: 1904
    • Nationality: American
  • Tarzan of the Apes by Edgar Rice Burroughs
    • Publication Year: 1912
    • Nationality: American
  • The Lost World by Arthur Conan Doyle
    • Publication Year: 1912
    • Nationality: Scottish
  • The Thirty-Nine Steps by John Buchan
    • Publication Year: 1915
    • Nationality: Scottish
  • Captain Blood by Rafael Sabatini
    • Publication Year: 1922
    • Nationality: Italian
  • The Worst Journey in the World by Apsley Cherry-Garrard
    • Publication Year: 1922
    • Nationality: English
  • Beau Geste by P. C. Wren
    • Publication Year: 1924
    • Nationality: English
  • The Long Ships by Frans G. Bengtsson
    • Publication Year: 1941
    • Nationality: Swedish
  • The Cruel Sea by Nicholas Monsarrat
    • Publication Year: 1951
    • Nationality: English
  • Lord of the Flies by William Golding
    • Publication Year: 1954
    • Nationality: English
  • Master and Commander by Patrick O’Brian
    • Publication Year: 1969
    • Nationality: English
  • Hatchet by Gary Paulsen
    • Publication Year: 1987
    • Nationality: American
  • The Beach by Alex Garland
    • Publication Year: 1996
    • Nationality: English
  • The Road by Cormac McCarthy
    • Publication Year: 2006
    • Nationality: American

XXIV. 100% of the Greatest Physicists of the 19th century

The 1800s were ground breaking in physics, establishing the unification of electricity and magnetism into a single framework, the laws of thermodynamics, the wave theory of light, the idea of conservation of energy, or the principle that energy is neither created nor destroyed, but only transformed. These revolutionary insights were carried out by a cast of European men only, as the rest of the world remained stuck in a pre-Newtonian mental state. The names below follow closely my initial list, except that I have taken Grok’s advice, adding two very important names, Clausius and Ohm; while excluding Euler as he belonged in 1700s, even if his impact spilled over into the early 1800s. Thomas Young (1773–1829) and Robert Brown (1773–1858) were removed from the original list as less impactful . Grok agreed that all of these men are European in ancestry.

  • Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1736–1813)
    • Achievement/Originality: Developed Lagrangian mechanics, a reformulation of classical mechanics that became foundational for later physics, though much of his work was in the 18th century, influencing 19th-century developments.
    • Nationality: Italian (born in the Kingdom of Sardinia, later worked in France).
  • Augustin-Jean Fresnel (1788–1827)
    • Achievement/Originality: Pioneered wave optics, developed the theory of diffraction, and invented the Fresnel lens, revolutionizing the understanding of light as a wave.
    • Nationality: French.
  • Georg Ohm (1789–1854)
    • Achievement/Originality: Formulated Ohm’s Law, establishing the fundamental relationship between voltage, current, and resistance in electrical circuits, crucial to electromagnetism.
    • Nationality: German.
  • Michael Faraday (1791–1867)
    • Achievement/Originality: Laid the foundation for electromagnetism with discoveries like electromagnetic induction and pioneered electrochemistry with his laws of electrolysis.
    • Nationality: British (English).
  • Sadi Carnot (1796–1832)
    • Achievement/Originality: Established the groundwork for thermodynamics through his work on heat engines, introducing the concept of the Carnot cycle.
    • Nationality: French.
  • Julius Robert Mayer (1814–1878)
    • Achievement/Originality: Formulated the principle of conservation of energy (first law of thermodynamics), independently recognizing energy’s fundamental role in physical processes.
    • Nationality: German.
  • James Joule (1818–1889)
    • Achievement/Originality: Conducted experiments establishing the mechanical equivalent of heat, solidifying the conservation of energy and advancing thermodynamics.
    • Nationality: British (English).
  • Hermann von Helmholtz (1821–1894)
    • Achievement/Originality: Made immense contributions to thermodynamics (conservation of energy), optics (theory of vision), and electrodynamics, bridging multiple fields of physics.
    • Nationality: German.
  • Rudolf Clausius (1822–1888)
    • Achievement/Originality: Formulated the second law of thermodynamics and introduced the concept of entropy, shaping modern thermodynamics.
    • Nationality: German.
  • Lord Kelvin (William Thomson, 1824–1907)
    • Achievement/Originality: Advanced thermodynamics with the Kelvin temperature scale and contributed to electromagnetism, including work on transatlantic telegraphy.
    • Nationality: British (Scottish-Irish).
  • James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879)
    • Achievement/Originality: Developed Maxwell’s equations, unifying electricity and magnetism into electromagnetism, a cornerstone of classical physics.
    • Nationality: British (Scottish).
  • Ludwig Boltzmann (1844–1906)
    • Achievement/Originality: Revolutionized statistical mechanics with his work on entropy and the Boltzmann equation, explaining the microscopic basis of thermodynamics.
    • Nationality: Austrian.
  • Albert A. Michelson (1852–1931)
    • Achievement/Originality: Conducted the Michelson-Morley experiment (1887), disproving the existence of the luminiferous ether and paving the way for Einstein’s relativity.
    • Nationality: American (born in Prussia, now Poland, immigrated to the U.S.).

XXV. Whites invented all the home appliances

The key figures associated with the development of many of the home appliances everyone in the world loves are all of European ancestry, and they are men except for two female exceptions, Melitta Bentz, inventor of the coffee filter, though not the electric coffee maker, and Josephine Cochrane, inventor of the dishwasher. Worth remembering that many of these inventions were improved over time, and that subsequent innovators brought important changes and refinements. I am using some of Grok’s own words to describe the nature of the inventions, the contribution of each inventor, and their particular nationality.

  • Refrigerator: The concept of artificial refrigeration dates back to William Cullen, who demonstrated it in 1748, but the first practical home refrigerator was invented by Fred J. Wolf in 1913.
  • Stereo: The modern stereo system, delivering two-channel sound, was pioneered by Alan Blumlein in the 1930s.
  • Stove: The first practical cast-iron stove for home use was invented by Benjamin Franklin in 1742, known as the Franklin stove. For electric stoves, Thomas Ahearn patented an electric oven in 1892, which evolved into the modern electric stove.
  • Washing Machine: The first patented washing machine was by Nathaniel Briggs in 1797, a hand-powered device. However, the electric washing machine was developed by Alva J. Fisher in 1908.
  • Toaster: The first electric toaster was invented by Alan MacMasters in 1893 in Scotland. Charles Strite perfected the pop-up toaster in 1919.
  • MicrowavePercy Spencer invented the microwave oven in 1945 after noticing a melting chocolate bar near a magnetron.
  • Coffee Maker: The drip coffee maker was invented by Melitta Bentz in 1908, using a paper filter. For electric percolation, Gottlob Widmann patented an electric coffee maker in 1954.
  • Food ProcessorPierre Verdun created the first food processor in 1960, marketed as the “Robot-Coupe” in France. Carl Sontheimer later adapted it for the U.S. market in 1971, popularizing the Cuisinart brand.
  • BlenderJohn Oster and Fred Waring; Oster developed a blender in 1937, but Waring financed and marketed the “Waring Blendor” in 1938, based on a design by inventor Frederick J. Osius.
  • Air ConditioningWillis Carrier invented the first modern air conditioner in 1902, originally for industrial use.
  • Water Heater: The first practical water heater was invented by Edwin Ruud in 1889.
  • Vacuum CleanerHubert Cecil Booth invented the first powered vacuum cleaner in 1901; and James Murray Spangler created the first portable electric vacuum in 1907.
  • DishwasherJosephine Cochrane invented the first practical dishwasher in 1886. Her hand-powered design was later electrified.

XXVI. Almost all the greatest Political Theorists

European men wrote most of the major treatises on politics, formulated most of the concepts, and almost all the ideologies or isms we know about. The following concepts and ideologies were originated and fully explained in countless treatises: Democracy, Justice, Natural Law, Sovereignty, Social Contract, General Will, Separation of Powers, Rights of Man, Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, Utilitarianism, Dictatorship of the Proletariat, Liberalism, Conservatism, Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, Limited Government, Constitutionalism, Natural Rights, Feminism, Civil Rights, Environmentalism, Pluralism, Globalization, Multiculturalism, Justice as Fairness, Fascism, Traditionalism, and more.

I asked Grok whether “it can be accurately argued that this list includes the greatest political thinkers in the world. Did I leave out any truly major political philosopher?”. Before I sent the list to Grok, I made sure there were enough Chinese names, and one Indian name, adding Han Feizi and Kautilya, so as to avoid statements from Grok about “Eurocentrism”.

Grok replied: “No, you did not leave out any truly major political philosopher. The list includes the greatest political thinkers in the world, and while other significant figures could be added, those present are sufficient to represent the field comprehensively.”

Of the additional names Grok suggested as great figures that could be added to the list, namely, Mary Wollstonecraft, Immanuel Kant, Friedrich Nietzsche, Michel Foucault, and Hannah Arendt. I only added Foucault, who has obviously played a huge role in recent decades, the most widely read author in academia, whom I had meant to add. I added Simone de Beauvoir to stand as the foremost feminist, author of The Second Sex in 1949, a text widely seen as a cornerstone of feminist philosophy. I replaced Russell Kirk with Eric Voegelin. This list includes 27 European, 3 Chinese, 2 Jews, 1 Indian, and 1 Tunisian, Khaldun, who is already listed as a historian.

  • Confucius (551–479 BCE) – Chinese
  • Mozi (c. 470–391 BCE) – Chinese
  • Plato (c. 428–348 BCE) – European
  • Aristotle (384–322 BCE) – European
  • Kautilya (c. 350–283 BCE) – Indian
  • Han Feizi (c. 280–233 BCE) – Chinese
  • Polybius (c. 200–118 BCE) – European
  • Cicero (106–43 BCE) – European
  • Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406) – Tunisian
  • Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527) – European
  • Jean Bodin (1530–1596) – European
  • Hugo Grotius (1583–1645) – European
  • Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) – European
  • John Locke (1632–1704) – European
  • Montesquieu (1689–1755) – European
  • Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) – European
  • Edmund Burke (1729–1797) – European
  • Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) – European
  • Joseph de Maistre (1753–1821) – European
  • Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831) – European
  • Alexis de Tocqueville (1805–1859) – European
  • John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) – European
  • Karl Marx (1818–1883) – Jewish
  • Giovanni Gentile (1875–1944) – European
  • Carl Schmitt (1888–1985) – European
  • Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937) – European
  • Leo Strauss (1899–1973) – Jewish
  • Eric Voegelin (1901–1985) – European
  • Michael Oakeshott (1901–1990) – European
  • Simone de Beauvoir (1908 1986) – European
  • Russell Kirk (1918–1994) – European
  • John Rawls (1921–2002) – European
  • Michel Foucault (1926–1984) – European
  • Jürgen Habermas (1929–present) – European

XXVII. Most Decisive and Tactical Battles in History

I asked Grok to evaluate the accuracy and completeness of this list. “Do you agree that this list is reasonably accurate in identifying the most decisive as well as tactically significant battles in history? I calculate that Europeans fought in 35 out of the following 39 battles (the ones with an asterisk * are the battles fought between non-Europeans.) Which crucial ones I left out, and which ones should not be included in this list?”

The list I compiled referred to Europeans but not Americans. Grok listed 7 “omissions that could arguably belong on a list of decisive or tactically significant battles”, namely, “Plataea, Manzikert, Sekigahara, Trafalgar, or Kursk for broader scope”). It listed 5 battles “that might not belong” in this list, namely, “Thermopylae (less decisive), Barbarossa (too broad), or Cambrai/Omdurman (less globally pivotal)”. Grok also observed that “Yarmouk involved Byzantine (European) forces, contradicting its asterisk.”

It said that the list “is an impressive and well-considered compilation of some of history’s most decisive and tactically significant battles, spanning ancient times to the modern era. It includes battles that shaped empires, altered the course of civilizations, or showcased brilliant (or disastrous) military tactics”.

I accepted Grok’s evaluation except its view about the Battle of Sekigahara (1600), which “decided the unification of Japan under Tokugawa Ieyasu, ending the Sengoku period and ushering in centuries of stability.” If this battle were to be included, we would have to include many battles that “decided the unification” of major European countries.

After I compiled the 42 battles listed below, I asked Grok to i) identify with an asterisk * the non-Europeans, ii) to indicate which side won in these battles, and to italicized the battles (they amount to only 4) in which both sides fighting were non-Europeans.

  • Battle of Marathon, 490 BC
    • Sides: Greeks (Athens and Plataea) vs. Persians*
    • Outcome: Greek victory
    • Note: Persians were a non-European empire from Asia (* on Persians).
  • Salamis, 480 BC
    • Sides: Greeks (Greek city-states) vs. Persians*
    • Outcome: Greek victory
    • Note: Persians were non-European (* on Persians).
  • Battle of Plataea, 479 BC
    • Sides: Greeks (Greek city-states) vs. Persians*
    • Outcome: Greek victory
    • Note: Persians were non-European (* on Persians).
  • Maling, 342 BC
    • Sides: Chinese (State of Qi) vs. Chinese (State of Wei)
    • Outcome: Qi victory
    • Note: Both sides were non-European (Chinese states during the Warring States period, * on both).
  • Battle of Issus, 333 BC
    • Sides: Macedonians (Alexander the Great) vs. Persians*
    • Outcome: Macedonian victory
    • Note: Persians were non-European (* on Persians).
  • Gaugamela, 331 BC
    • Sides: Macedonians (Alexander the Great) vs. Persians*
    • Outcome: Macedonian victory
    • Note: Persians were non-European (* on Persians).
  • Lake Trasimene, 217 BC
    • Sides: Romans (Roman Republic) vs. Carthaginians*
    • Outcome: Carthaginian victory
    • Note: Carthaginians were from North Africa (* on Carthaginians).
  • Cannae, 216 BC
    • Sides: Romans (Roman Republic) vs. Carthaginians*
    • Outcome: Carthaginian victory
    • Note: Carthaginians were non-European (* on Carthaginians).
  • Battle of Metaurus, 207 BC
    • Sides: Romans (Roman Republic) vs. Carthaginians*
    • Outcome: Roman victory
    • Note: Carthaginians were non-European (* on Carthaginians).
  • Ilipa, 206 BC
    • Sides: Romans (Roman Republic) vs. Carthaginians*
    • Outcome: Roman victory
    • Note: Carthaginians were non-European (* on Carthaginians).
  • Battle of Zama, 202 BC
    • Sides: Romans (Roman Republic) vs. Carthaginians*
    • Outcome: Roman victory
    • Note: Carthaginians were non-European (* on Carthaginians).
  • Pydna, 168 BC
    • Sides: Romans (Roman Republic) vs. Macedonians
    • Outcome: Roman victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Carrhae, 53 BC
    • Sides: Romans (Roman Republic) vs. Parthians*
    • Outcome: Parthian victory
    • Note: Parthians were a non-European empire from Asia (* on Parthians).
  • Pharsalus, 48 BC
    • Sides: Romans (Caesar’s faction) vs. Romans (Pompey’s faction)
    • Outcome: Caesar’s victory
    • Note: Both sides were European (Roman civil war).
  • Teutoburg Forest, 9 AD
    • Sides: Romans (Roman Empire) vs. Germanic tribes
    • Outcome: Germanic victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Chalons, 451 AD
    • Sides: Romans (Western Roman Empire) and Visigoths vs. Huns* and allies
    • Outcome: Roman-Visigoth victory
    • Note: Huns were a non-European nomadic group from Asia (* on Huns).
  • Walaja, 633 AD
    • Sides: Arabs* (Rashidun Caliphate) vs. Persians* (Sassanid Empire)
    • Outcome: Arab victory
    • Note: Both sides were non-European (* on both).
  • Yarmouk, 636 AD (assumed from context, as “Yarmouk” alone is incomplete)
    • Sides: Arabs* (Rashidun Caliphate) vs. Byzantines
    • Outcome: Arab victory
    • Note: Arabs were non-European (* on Arabs).
  • Tours, 732 AD
    • Sides: Franks (Frankish Kingdom) vs. Arabs* (Umayyad Caliphate)
    • Outcome: Frankish victory
    • Note: Arabs were non-European (* on Arabs).
  • Hastings, 1066 AD
    • Sides: Normans (Norman French) vs. Anglo-Saxons (England)
    • Outcome: Norman victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Battle of Manzikert, 1071 AD
    • Sides: Byzantines vs. Seljuk Turks*
    • Outcome: Seljuk victory
    • Note: Seljuk Turks were non-European (* on Seljuks).
  • Crécy, 1346 AD
    • Sides: English vs. French
    • Outcome: English victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Battle of Agincourt, 1415 AD
    • Sides: English vs. French
    • Outcome: English victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Panipat, 1526 AD
    • Sides: Mughals* (Babur) vs. Delhi Sultanate* (Ibrahim Lodi)
    • Outcome: Mughal victory
    • Note: Both sides were non-European (Indian subcontinent, * on both).
  • Cajamarca, 1532 AD
    • Sides: Spaniards vs. Incas*
    • Outcome: Spanish victory
    • Note: Incas were non-European (South American, * on Incas).
  • Leipzig, 1631 AD (assumed First Battle of Breitenfeld, as “Leipzig 1631” is ambiguous)
    • Sides: Swedes and German Protestants vs. Holy Roman Empire (Catholic League)
    • Outcome: Swedish-Protestant victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Rocroi, 1643 AD
    • Sides: French vs. Spaniards
    • Outcome: French victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Vienna, 1683 AD
    • Sides: Holy Roman Empire and allies vs. Ottoman Turks*
    • Outcome: Holy Roman victory
    • Note: Ottomans were non-European (* on Ottomans).
  • Poltava, 1709 AD
    • Sides: Russians vs. Swedes
    • Outcome: Russian victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Rossbach, 1757 AD
    • Sides: Prussians vs. French and Holy Roman Empire
    • Outcome: Prussian victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Valmy, 1792 AD
    • Sides: French (Revolutionary forces) vs. Prussians and Austrians
    • Outcome: French victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Ulm, 1805 AD
    • Sides: French (Napoleon) vs. Austrians
    • Outcome: French victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Battle of Trafalgar, 1805 AD
    • Sides: British vs. French and Spanish
    • Outcome: British victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Leipzig, 1813 AD (Battle of the Nations)
    • Sides: Coalition (Russia, Prussia, Austria, etc.) vs. French (Napoleon)
    • Outcome: Coalition victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Waterloo, 1815 AD
    • Sides: Coalition (Britain, Prussia, etc.) vs. French (Napoleon)
    • Outcome: Coalition victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Gettysburg, 1863 AD
    • Sides: United States (Union) vs. Confederate States
    • Outcome: Union victory
    • Note: Both sides were European-descended (North American context).
  • Battle of Sedan, 1870 AD
    • Sides: Prussians and German states vs. French
    • Outcome: Prussian victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Omdurman, 1898 AD
    • Sides: British-Egyptian forces vs. Mahdists* (Sudanese)
    • Outcome: British-Egyptian victory
    • Note: Mahdists were non-European (* on Mahdists).
  • First Battle of Kiev, 1941 AD
    • Sides: Germans (Nazi Germany) vs. Soviets (Soviet Union)
    • Outcome: German victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Midway Island, 1942 AD
    • Sides: United States vs. Japanese*
    • Outcome: American victory
    • Note: Japanese were non-European (* on Japan).
  • Stalingrad, 1942–1943 AD
    • Sides: Germans (Nazi Germany) vs. Soviets (Soviet Union)
    • Outcome: Soviet victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.
  • Battle of Kursk, 1943 AD
    • Sides: Germans (Nazi Germany) vs. Soviets (Soviet Union)
    • Outcome: Soviet victory
    • Note: Both sides were European.

XXVIII. 100% of Inventions between mid-1700s and 1860s

Grok agreed with this list, replying: “Yes, it is accurate to say that White men of European ancestry were responsible for 100% of the listed inventions between the mid-1700s and 1860s, based on historical attribution. This reflects the socio-economic and technological context of the period, centered in Europe and its offshoots.”

  1. Flying Shuttle – Invented by John Kay (English, 1733). European, White male.
  2. Spinning Jenny – Invented by James Hargreaves (English, 1764). European, White male.
  3. Steam Engine – Improved significantly by James Watt (Scottish, 1760s-1770s), building on earlier work by Thomas Newcomen (English). European, White males.
  4. Cotton Gin – Invented by Eli Whitney (American of European descent, 1793). White male.
  5. Telegraph – Developed by Samuel Morse (American of European descent, 1830s-1840s), with contributions from others like William Cooke and Charles Wheatstone (English). All European or of European ancestry, White males.
  6. Portland Cement – Patented by Joseph Aspdin (English, 1824). European, White male.
  7. Bessemer Process – Developed by Henry Bessemer (English, 1856). European, White male.
  8. Battery – Invented by Alessandro Volta (Italian, 1800). European, White male.
  9. Locomotives – Pioneered by George Stephenson (English, 1814-1820s). European, White male.
  10. Power Loom – Invented by Edmund Cartwright (English, 1785). European, White male.
  11. Arkwright’s Water Frame – Invented by Richard Arkwright (English, 1769). European, White male.
  12. Spinning Mule – Invented by Samuel Crompton (English, 1779). European, White male.
  13. Henry Cort’s Puddling – Developed by Henry Cort (English, 1780s). European, White male.
  14. Gaslighting Arc Lamp – Early gas lighting by William Murdoch (Scottish, 1790s); arc lamp by Humphry Davy (English, 1802). Both European, White males.
  15. Tin Can – Patented by Peter Durand (English, 1810). European, White male.
  16. Spectrometer – Developed by Joseph von Fraunhofer (German, 1810s). European, White male.
  17. Camera Obscura – Known since antiquity, but modern photographic use advanced by Louis Daguerre (French, 1830s) and others. European, White male.
  18. Electromagnet – Invented by William Sturgeon (English, 1825). European, White male.
  19. Mackintosh Raincoat – Invented by Charles Macintosh (Scottish, 1823). European, White male.
  20. Matches – Friction matches by John Walker (English, 1826). European, White male.
  21. Typewriter – Early version by Henry Mill (English, 1714), but practical typewriter by Christopher Latham Sholes (American of European descent, 1860s). White males.
  22. Blueprints – Cyanotype process by John Herschel (English, 1842). European, White male.
  23. Hydrogen Fuel Cell – Discovered by William Grove (Welsh, 1839). European, White male.

XXIX. Almost all the Greatest Painters

Going by the amount of space allocated to the greatest artists in reference works, encyclopedias, and dictionaries, as decided upon by generations of men with the requisite knowledge and taste for great art, Murray estimated that the absolute number of great visual artists in the West is far higher than the combined number of the other civilizations: 479 for the West as compared to 192 for China and Japan combined (with no significant figures listed for India or the Arab World).

A crucially missing factor in Murray’s statistical assessment, however, is that it leaves out a most peculiar characteristic of Western art: its exhibition of a continuous proliferation of highly original artists with new artistic styles, new ways of projecting images on a flat surface, new conceptions of light, new standards of excellence, and new conceptions about nature and man—in contrast to the non-Western world, where aesthetic norms barely changed, or where artists were invariably inclined to follow an established convention without breaking new aesthetic paths. Paintings in both China and Japan occurred within a cultural matrix that encouraged standardization and regularity, rather than unpredictability and freshness. New trends consisted in breaking from the regimented traditions of one’s age by reviving and putting new life into early traditions.

This time I decided to make the list as comprehensive as possible before asking Grok any questions. I included two of the greatest Chinese painters as well as two Japanese painters, focusing on the early Chinese painters, as the most original, but adding a Japanese from a later period in reflection of his prominence outside Japan. I asked Grok: “Is this list an accurate representation of the greatest painters in history?” I also asked Grok to describe briefly why these names are considered among the greatest and most original painters.

Grok acknowledged that the “list includes many of the most celebrated painters across different cultures and eras” but mentioned some “notable absences”, in abstract painting and female painters, namely, Jackson Pollock, Frida Kahlo, Mary Cassatt, and Wassily Kandinsky. It said that the list suggested “a possible bias toward Western male painters or pre-20th-century figures”, omitting “key figures from other regions (e.g., no Indian, African, or pre-Columbian American artists) and underrepresented groups.”

I believe this list did not need any changes; it is already a very strong representation of the greatest painters; adding painters from “underrepresented groups” would lower its quality.

  • Gu Kaizhi (c. 344–406)
    Why Great: A foundational figure in Chinese painting, Gu Kaizhi pioneered expressive figure painting and narrative scrolls. His delicate brushwork and focus on capturing the spirit (rather than just the form) of his subjects set a standard for East Asian art.
  • Wu Daozi (c. 680–760)
    Why Great: Known as the “Sage of Painting” in Tang Dynasty China, Wu Daozi revolutionized Chinese art with dynamic, flowing brushstrokes and a sense of movement that brought figures to life, influencing centuries of ink painting.
  • Giotto (c. 1267–1337)
    Why Great: Giotto broke from medieval flatness, introducing naturalism, emotion, and three-dimensionality to Western art. His frescoes, like those in the Scrovegni Chapel, laid the groundwork for the Renaissance.
  • Jan van Eyck (c. 1390–1441)
    Why Great: A master of oil painting, Van Eyck’s meticulous detail and use of light (e.g., Arnolfini Portrait) transformed Northern European art, making him a key figure in the Early Renaissance.
  • Masaccio (1401–1428)
    Why Great: Known as the “father of Renaissance painting,” Masaccio introduced linear perspective and realistic human anatomy (e.g., The Tribute Money), pushing art toward greater naturalism.
  • Sesshū Tōyō (1420–1506)
    Why Great: A Japanese Zen monk and ink painter, Sesshū blended Chinese influences with a minimalist, expressive style. His landscapes (e.g., Winter Landscape) are revered for their spiritual depth.
  • Sandro Botticelli (c. 1445–1510)
    Why Great: Botticelli’s lyrical style and mythological themes (e.g., The Birth of Venus) epitomized Florentine Renaissance ideals, blending grace with emotional resonance.
  • Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519)
    Why Great: A polymath, Leonardo’s mastery of sfumato, anatomical precision, and innovative compositions (e.g., Mona LisaThe Last Supper) made him a quintessential Renaissance genius.
  • Albrecht Dürer (1471–1528)
    Why Great: Dürer brought Renaissance techniques to Northern Europe, excelling in engravings and woodcuts (e.g., Melencolia I) with unmatched detail and intellectual depth.
  • Raphael (1483–1520)
    Why Great: Raphael’s harmonious compositions and idealized beauty (e.g., School of Athens) defined High Renaissance perfection, balancing grace and clarity.
  • Michelangelo (1475–1564)
    Why Great: A titan of the Renaissance, Michelangelo’s monumental frescoes (e.g., Sistine Chapel ceiling) and sculptures showcase his unparalleled ability to convey power and emotion.
  • Titian (c. 1488–1576)
    Why Great: The Venetian master’s use of color, loose brushwork, and emotional depth (e.g., Bacchus and Ariadne) shaped the course of Western painting.
  • Correggio (1489–1534)
    Why Great: Known for his illusionistic frescoes (e.g., Assumption of the Virgin) and soft, sensual figures, Correggio influenced Baroque and Rococo art.
  • Hieronymus Bosch (c. 1450–1516)
    Why Great: Bosch’s surreal, fantastical visions (e.g., The Garden of Earthly Delights) offered a unique, moralistic take on human folly, unmatched in imagination.
  • Matthias Grünewald (c. 1470–1528)
    Why Great: His visceral, emotional works (e.g., Isenheim Altarpiece) convey intense spirituality and suffering, distinct from Renaissance idealism.
  • Hans Holbein the Younger (c. 1497–1543)
    Why Great: A master of portraiture (e.g., The Ambassadors), Holbein’s precision and psychological insight made him a standout in Northern Renaissance art.
  • Tintoretto (1518–1594)
    Why Great: Known as “Il Furioso,” Tintoretto’s dramatic compositions and bold use of perspective (e.g., The Last Supper) bridged Renaissance and Baroque styles.
  • El Greco (1541–1614)
    Why Great: His elongated figures and vivid colors (e.g., The Burial of the Count of Orgaz) fused Byzantine and Western traditions, prefiguring Expressionism.
  • Pieter Brueghel the Elder (c. 1525–1569)
    Why Great: Brueghel’s detailed scenes of peasant life and allegorical landscapes (e.g., The Hunters in the Snow) offered a unique, earthy perspective.
  • Caravaggio (1571–1610)
    Why Great: Caravaggio’s dramatic chiaroscuro and raw realism (e.g., The Calling of St. Matthew) revolutionized Baroque art with emotional intensity.
  • Frans Hals (c. 1582–1666)
    Why Great: Hals’ lively brushwork and vivid portraits (e.g., The Laughing Cavalier) captured personality with a spontaneity rare for his time.
  • Benvenuto Cellini (1500–1571) (Note: Primarily a sculptor, not a painter)
    Why Great: Though best known for sculpture (e.g., Perseus with the Head of Medusa), his artistic versatility and Renaissance flair are notable.
  • Peter Paul Rubens (1577–1640)
    Why Great: Rubens’ dynamic, fleshy figures and vibrant colors (e.g., The Descent from the Cross) defined Baroque exuberance.
  • Claude Lorrain (c. 1600–1682)
    Why Great: A pioneer of ideal landscapes (e.g., Seaport with the Embarkation of the Queen of Sheba), Claude’s atmospheric light influenced later painters like Turner.
  • Diego Velázquez (1599–1660)
    Why Great: Velázquez’s masterful realism and complex compositions (e.g., Las Meninas) made him a giant of the Spanish Golden Age.
  • Rembrandt van Rijn (1606–1669)
    Why Great: Rembrandt’s mastery of light, shadow, and human emotion (e.g., The Night Watch) set a benchmark for psychological depth in art.
  • Johannes Vermeer (1632–1675)
    Why Great: Vermeer’s luminous interiors and subtle detail (e.g., Girl with a Pearl Earring) showcase an unmatched mastery of light and texture.
  • Jean-Baptiste-Siméon Chardin (1699–1779)
    Why Great: Chardin’s quiet still lifes and genre scenes (e.g., The Ray) elevated the everyday with exquisite simplicity and realism.
  • Joshua Reynolds (1723–1792)
    Why Great: A leading portraitist of 18th-century Britain (e.g., Sarah Siddons as the Tragic Muse), Reynolds blended elegance with intellectual depth.
  • J.M.W. Turner (1775–1851)
    Why Great: Turner’s revolutionary use of light and color (e.g., The Fighting Temeraire) anticipated Impressionism and modern abstraction.
  • John Constable (1776–1837)
    Why Great: Constable’s naturalistic landscapes (e.g., The Hay Wain) captured the beauty of the English countryside with emotional sincerity.
  • Francisco Goya (1746–1828)
    Why Great: Goya’s dark, satirical works (e.g., The Third of May 1808) bridged Romanticism and modernity, exploring human suffering and power.
  • Katsushika Hokusai (1760–1849)
    Why Great: Hokusai’s woodblock prints (e.g., The Great Wave off Kanagawa) brought Japanese ukiyo-e to global prominence with dynamic composition.
  • Eugène Delacroix (1798–1863)
    Why Great: A Romantic leader, Delacroix’s vivid color and movement (e.g., Liberty Leading the People) inspired later generations.
  • Jean-François Millet (1814–1875)
    Why Great: Millet’s dignified depictions of peasant life (e.g., The Gleaners) brought social realism to French art.
  • Gustave Courbet (1819–1877)
    Why Great: Courbet’s bold realism (e.g., The Stone Breakers) rejected idealism, paving the way for modern art.
  • Édouard Manet (1832–1883)
    Why Great: Manet’s provocative works (e.g., Olympia) bridged Realism and Impressionism, challenging artistic conventions.
  • Claude Monet (1840–1926)
    Why Great: The founder of Impressionism, Monet’s focus on light and atmosphere (e.g., Impression, Sunrise) redefined painting.
  • Pierre-Auguste Renoir (1841–1919)
    Why Great: Renoir’s vibrant, joyful scenes (e.g., Luncheon of the Boating Party) epitomized Impressionist sensuality.
  • Georges Seurat (1859–1891)
    Why Great: Seurat’s pointillist technique (e.g., A Sunday Afternoon on La Grande Jatte) introduced a scientific approach to color and form.
  • Vincent van Gogh (1853–1890)
    Why Great: Van Gogh’s emotive brushstrokes and bold colors (e.g., The Starry Night) made him a pioneer of Expressionism.
  • Paul Cézanne (1839–1906)
    Why Great: Cézanne’s structural approach to form and color (e.g., Mont Sainte-Victoire) laid the groundwork for Cubism.
  • Gustav Klimt (1862–1918)
    Why Great: Klimt’s ornate, symbolic works (e.g., The Kiss) blended Art Nouveau with psychological depth.
  • Edvard Munch (1863–1944)
    Why Great: Munch’s haunting explorations of anxiety (e.g., The Scream) defined Expressionism’s emotional power.
  • Henri Matisse (1869–1954)
    Why Great: Matisse’s bold use of color and form (e.g., The Dance) spearheaded Fauvism and modern art.
  • Pablo Picasso (1881–1973)
    Why Great: Picasso’s invention of Cubism (e.g., Les Demoiselles d’Avignon) and relentless innovation reshaped 20th-century art.
  • Max Ernst (1891–1976)
    Why Great: A Surrealist pioneer, Ernst’s dreamlike collages and paintings (e.g., The Elephant Celebes) expanded artistic boundaries.
  • René Magritte (1898–1967)
    Why Great: Magritte’s witty, surreal images (e.g., The Treachery of Images) challenged perceptions of reality.
  • Salvador Dalí (1904–1989)
    Why Great: Dalí’s eccentric, hyper-realistic Surrealism (e.g., The Persistence of Memory) made him an icon of modern art.

XXX. Designed all the Most Beautiful Cars

I simply said to Grok, “Car afficionados believe that white men designed all the most beautiful cars in history, many of which are listed below.”

While Grok agreed that “it’s an impressive list of cars, no doubt—icons of design and engineering that have left a lasting mark on automotive history,” it pointed out that “most of these cars come from mid-20th-century Europe and America, a time when the auto industry in those regions was indeed dominated by white male designers…The industry reflected the demographics of its era: heavily male, heavily European or American, and thus predominantly white…And if we widen the lens beyond this list—say, to Japan’s Mazda Cosmo (1967) or Toyota 2000GT (1965), designed by talents like Satoru Nozaki—diversity creeps in.”

I kept the list as it was but asked Grok to organize it chronologically.

  1. 1935: Alfa Romeo 8C 2900
  2. 1937: Mercedes-Benz 540K
  3. 1938: Bugatti Type 57SC Atlantic Coupe
  4. 1938: Delahaye 165 Cabriolet
  5. 1939: Alfa Romeo 6C 2500
  6. 1939: BMW 328 Roadster
  7. 1946: Delahaye 135 MS ‘Narval’
  8. 1949: Cadillac Club Coupe
  9. 1952-1953: Alfa Romeo 1900 C52 Disco Volante
  10. 1953: Porsche 550 Spyder.
  11. 1954: Lancia Aurelia B20 GT
  12. 1954: Maserati A6GCS Berlinetta
  13. 1954: Mercedes-Benz 300SL.
  14. 1955: Citroën DS
  15. 1956: BMW 507
  16. 1957: Ferrari 250 GT Coupé Speciale
  17. 1960: Austin Healey 3000 MK1
  18. 1960: Aston Martin DB4 GT Zagato
  19. 1961: Ferrari 250 GT California
  20. 1961: Lincoln-Continental 4-Door Hardtop
  21. 1962: Facel Vega
  22. 1963: Chevrolet Corvette
  23. 1963: Citroën DS Cabriolet
  24. 1964: Aston Martin DB5
  25. 1964: Maserati 3500 GTI Vignale Spyder
  26. 1965: Bizzarrini 5300 GT Strada
  27. 1965: Jaguar E-Type
  28. 1967: Alfa Romeo 33 Stradale
  29. 1967: Buick Riviera
  30. 1967: Ferrari 275 GTB/4
  31. 1970: R/T Dodge Challenger.
  32. 1971: Lamborghini Miura SV
  33. 1972: Opel Rekord Coupe
  34. 1972: Volvo 1800E

XXXI. The Greatest Mountaineers

I left this list as it was, without any non-European name. I am aware that some non-Europeans came along with the Europeans, contributed to the endeavor, and became great climbers in their own right, but my focus is on initiative, leadership, and originality. My initial list included descriptions of the achievements of these men and their nationalities, but I decided to Grok’s neater presentation.

  • 1786: Michel-Gabriel Paccard and Jacques Balmat
    • Nationality: Duchy of Savoy, France
    • Achievement: First ascent of Mont Blanc, the highest mountain in the Alps.
  • 1865: Edward Whymper
    • Nationality: British
    • Achievement: Led the first ascent of the Matterhorn in the Pennine Alps.
  • 1938: Heinrich Harrer
    • Nationality: Austrian
    • Achievement: First ascent of the North Face of the Eiger, known as the “last problem” of the Alps.
  • 1953: Edmund Hillary
    • Nationality: New Zealander
    • Achievement: First confirmed ascent of Mount Everest, the world’s tallest peak.
  • 1954: Achille Compagnoni and Lino Lacedelli
    • Nationality: Italian
    • Achievement: First ascent of K2, the second highest peak in the world.
  • 1978: Reinhold Messner and Peter Habeler
    • Nationality: Italian (Messner), Austrian (Habeler)
    • Achievement: First ascent of Mount Everest without supplemental oxygen in 1978; Messner later soloed Everest in 1980.
  • 1985: Richard Bass
    • Nationality: American
    • Achievement: First to climb the Seven Summits (highest peaks on each continent: Aconcagua, Denali, Kilimanjaro, Elbrus, Vinson, Kosciuszko, and Everest).
  • 1987: Jerzy Kukuczka
    • Nationality: Polish
    • Achievement: Second person to climb all 14 eight-thousanders, 13 without supplemental oxygen, completed in 1987.
  • 1990: Tim Macartney-Snape
    • Nationality: Australian
    • Achievement: Climbed Mount Everest from sea level at the Bay of Bengal without supplemental oxygen.
  • 2005: Edmund Viesturs
    • Nationality: American
    • Achievement: Climbed all 14 eight-thousanders without supplemental oxygen, completed in 2005.
  • 2009 onwards: Simone Moro
    • Nationality: Italian
    • Achievement: Made the first winter ascents of four eight-thousanders, starting with Makalu in 2009.

XXXII. Founders of all the Disciplinary Fields of Knowledge

Possibly the greatest accomplishment of Europeans has been the founding of all the fields of human knowledge: Geology, Astronomy, Botany, Biology, Sociology, Anthropology, Archeology, History, Philosophy, Physics, Chemistry, Psychology, Geography, Political Science, Economics, not to mention many sub-fields. My criteria for the founding of a discipline include clear differentiation and conceptualization of the discipline as a field in its own right, with its own “founding” treatises, methodologies, and objects of knowledge. The identification of individuals who made insightful geological, botanical, economic, psychological or biological observations is not enough.

I asked Grok to “list the individuals, two or three, responsible as ‘founders’ of the following disciplinary fields of knowledge, as distinctive fields with their own unique concepts, methodologies, and treatises: Geology, Astronomy, Botany, Biology, Sociology, Anthropology, Archeology, History, Philosophy, Physics, Chemistry, Geography, Political Science, and Economics.”

The list Grok provided is reasonably good, except that it misses a few of the real founders for other figures who contributed major insights but were not the originators of the discipline. Therefore, I decided to delete the names I disagree with, and to add the names I think were true founders in italics.

Geology

  • James Hutton: Known as the father of modern geology, he developed the theory of uniformitarianism, which posits that Earth’s processes occur gradually over time.
  • Charles Lyell: Built on Hutton’s ideas, popularizing uniformitarianism and influencing modern geological thought through his work Principles of Geology.

Astronomy

  • Claudius Ptolemy: Developed the geocentric model of the universe, which dominated astronomical thought for over a millennium
  • Nicholas Copernicus: Revolutionized astronomy by proposing the heliocentric model
  • Galileo Galilei: A pioneer of modern astronomy, he used the telescope to make groundbreaking observations, supporting the Copernican theory.

Botany

  • Theophrastus: An early contributor, often called the father of botany, he wrote extensively on plant classification and description in ancient Greece.
  • Carl Linnaeus: Established the modern system of binomial nomenclature, laying the foundation for systematic botany.

Biology

  • Aristotle: Made early systematic observations of living organisms, influencing the study of life for centuries.
  • Andreas Vesalius (1514 – 1564): Revolutionized biology by publishing De Humani Corporis Fabrica, a detailed anatomical text based on human dissections, founding modern anatomy.
  • Robert Hooke 1635 – 1703: Discovered cells and wrote one of the most significant books in scientific history, Micrographia.

Sociology

  • Auguste Comte: Coined the term “sociology” and developed a systematic approach to studying society.
  • Emile Durkheim: Established sociology as a scientific discipline with works like The Rules of Sociological Method.
  • Max Weber: Contributed key concepts like the Protestant work ethic and theories of bureaucracy.

Anthropology

  • Franz Boas: Known as the father of American anthropology, he emphasized fieldwork and cultural relativism.
  • Lewis Henry Morgan: Pioneered the study of kinship and social evolution, influencing early anthropology.

Archeology

  • Christian Jurgensen Thomsen (1788-1865):
  • Jens Jacob Worsaae (1821-85):
  • William Flinders Petrie (1853-1942): Developed systematic excavation and recording methods, foundational to modern archeology.

History

  • Herodotus: Often called the father of history, he wrote the first narrative history in Histories.
  • Thucydides: Advanced historical methodology with a focus on evidence and causality in History of the Peloponnesian War.
  • Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886): His emphasis on primary sources and on “as it actually happened” laid the groundwork for the professionalization of history.

Philosophy

  • Parmenides: His focus on what it means to be laid the foundation for metaphysics.
  • Socrates: Laid the groundwork for Western philosophy through his method of questioning and dialogue.
  • Plato: Founded the Academy and wrote influential dialogues exploring ethics, politics, and metaphysics.
  • Aristotle: Systematized philosophical inquiry across numerous fields, shaping Western thought.

Physics

  • Galileo Galilei: Pioneered experimental physics and kinematics, laying the groundwork for classical mechanics.
  • Isaac Newton: Formulated the laws of motion and universal gravitation, foundational to classical physics.

Chemistry

  • Robert Boyle (1627-1691): Known for Boyle’s Law and early work distinguishing chemistry from alchemy.
  • Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1794): The father of modern chemistry, he established the law of conservation of mass and clarified the role of oxygen in combustion.

Geography

  • Eratosthenes: Calculated the Earth’s circumference and pioneered early geographic measurement.
  • Ptolemy (2nd century): In his Geography he rationally explained the principles and methods required in mapmaking and produced the first world map.
  • Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859): Integrated physical and human geography through extensive exploration and observation.

Political Science

  • Aristotle: Analyzed political systems in Politics, providing a foundational framework for the field.
  • Niccolò Machiavelli: Authored The Prince, offering a pragmatic approach to political power and governance.

Psychology

  • Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920): Established the first experimental psychology laboratory, marking the birth of psychology as a science.
  • William James (1842-1910): Influenced modern psychology with his work Principles of Psychology, emphasizing functionalism.

Economics

  • Richard Cantillon (1680-1734): His Essai sur la Nature du Commerce en Général is the first comprehensive treatise on economics, earning him the title of the “father of economics”.
  • François Quesnay (1694-1774): His Tableau Économique is regarded as a precursor to modern input-output analysis and circular flow models.
  • Adam Smith (1723-1790): Authored The Wealth of Nations, laying the foundation for classical economics.

XXXIII. Key scientists involved in DNA, the genetic code, radioactivity, X-rays, neutron, and quantum mechanics in the late 19th/early 20th centuries.

Grok agreed that the names listed below “were predominantly men of European ancestry, with some noted for Jewish ancestry and two identified as women.” 5 out of 31 were of Jewish ancestry, though two of these were only half Jewish. Grok categorized the scientist by discovery.

DNA and Genetics

  • Mendel: Known as the father of genetics, established the laws of inheritance using pea plants.
  • Weismann: Proposed the germ plasm theory, emphasizing that heredity is transmitted via germ cells.
  • Morgan: Developed the chromosomal theory of inheritance, linking genes to chromosomes using fruit flies.
  • Miescher: Discovered nucleic acids, isolating DNA from cell nuclei, a precursor to understanding its role.
  • Griffith: Demonstrated bacterial transformation, hinting that a “transforming principle” (later identified as DNA) carries genetic information.
  • Chargaff (Jewish): Established base-pairing rules (A pairs with T, G with C), critical for the DNA structure model.
  • Franklin (woman and Jewish): Used X-ray crystallography to capture images of DNA, providing key data for its helical structure.
  • Watson, Crick, Wilkins: Collaboratively determined DNA’s double-helix structure, with Watson and Crick building the model and Wilkins contributing X-ray data.
  • Pauling: Though primarily a chemist, proposed an (incorrect) triple-helix DNA model, showing engagement with the problem.
  • Bragg: Pioneered X-ray crystallography techniques, foundational for Franklin’s and Wilkins’ DNA work.

Radioactivity

  • Becquerel: Discovered radioactivity by observing uranium’s emission of rays.
  • Curie (female): Advanced radioactivity research, isolated radium and polonium, and coined the term “radioactivity.”
  • Rutherford: Investigated radioactive decay (alpha and beta particles) and later discovered the atomic nucleus, bridging radioactivity and nuclear physics.

X-rays

  • Rontgen: Discovered X-rays, revolutionizing imaging and inspiring radioactivity research.

Neutron

  • Chadwick: Discovered the neutron, explaining atomic mass beyond protons and advancing nuclear physics.

Quantum Mechanics

  • Planck: Introduced quantum theory, proposing energy is emitted in quanta.
  • Einstein (Jewish): Explained the photoelectric effect using quanta, a cornerstone of quantum mechanics, and contributed to quantum theory debates.
  • Bohr (half Jewish): Developed the Bohr model of the atom, integrating quantum concepts.
  • Broglie: Proposed wave-particle duality, suggesting matter has wave-like properties.
  • Schrödinger: Formulated the Schrödinger equation, describing quantum systems mathematically.
  • Heisenberg: Introduced the uncertainty principle, a fundamental quantum concept.
  • Dirac: Developed quantum electrodynamics, unifying quantum mechanics and relativity.
  • Pauli (half Jewish): Proposed the exclusion principle, explaining electron arrangements in atoms.
  • Thomson: Discovered the electron, foundational for quantum mechanics’ atomic models.
  • Millikan: Measured the electron’s charge, supporting quantum theory’s experimental basis.
  • Lorentz: Contributed the Lorentz transformation, influential in relativity and quantum contexts.
  • Fermi: Worked on quantum statistics and nuclear physics, linking quantum mechanics to particle behavior.

XXXIV. ALL the Greatest-Original Children Stories

While folk tales are common to all cultures, being anonymous stories communities passed through the generations by word of mouth. Only Europeans started a literary scholarship of folklore, collecting and writing these tales down in published form during the seventeenth century. The Grimm brothers, Jacob (1785-1863) and Wilhelm (1786-1859), with their background in philology, meticulously recorded the tales exactly as the people told them, writing down every variation and publishing about 300. Hans Christian Andersen (1805–1875) not only collected tales but wrote dozens of original fairy tales, leading some to argue that he invented the literary fairy tale of pure fantasy about magical characters. While there were some children’s books in Europe before the 1700s, a literature specifically written for children took off in England during the 1700s. The list below, apart from including a few tales by the Grimm brothers, and fairy tales by Hans Christian Andersen, including Aesop’s Fables dating back to ancient Greece, covers primarily major children’s books of the 1800s and 1900s, before diversity mandates began to degrade children’s literature.

  • Aesop’s Fables
    Author: Aesop
    Nationality: Greek
    Year: 600 BCE (oral tradition; earliest written collections date to around 300 BCE) Caxton’s English edition
  • Gigantick Histories
    Author: Thomas Boreman
    Nationality: English
    Year: 1740
  • Cinderella
    Author: Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm
    Nationality: German
    Year: 1812
  • Snow White
    Author: Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm
    Nationality: German
    Year: 1812
  • Hansel and Gretel
    Author: Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm
    Nationality: German
    Year: 1812
  • Phantasmion
    Author: Sara Coleridge
    Nationality: English
    Year: 1837
  • The Little Mermaid
    Author: Hans Christian Andersen
    Nationality: Danish
    Year: 1837
  • The Emperor’s New Clothes
    Author: Hans Christian Andersen
    Nationality: Danish
    Year: 1837
  • The Ugly Duckling
    Author: Hans Christian Andersen
    Nationality: Danish
    Year: 1843
  • Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland
    Author: Lewis Carroll
    Nationality: English
    Year: 1865
  • The Story of a Bad Boy
    Author: Thomas Bailey Aldrich
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1870
  • Through the Looking-Glass
    Author: Lewis Carroll
    Nationality: English
    Year: 1871
  • Around the World in Eighty Days
    Author: Jules Verne
    Nationality: French
    Year: 1872
  • Black Beauty
    Author: Anna Sewell
    Nationality: English
    Year: 1877
  • Treasure Island
    Author: Robert Louis Stevenson
    Nationality: Scottish
    Year: 1883
  • Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
    Author: Mark Twain
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1884
  • The Jungle Book
    Author: Rudyard Kipling
    Nationality: British (born in India)
    Year: 1894
  • The Tale of Peter Rabbit
    Author: Beatrix Potter
    Nationality: English
    Year: 1902
  • Peter Pan
    Author: J.M. Barrie
    Nationality: Scottish
    Year: 1904
  • White Fang
    Author: Jack London
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1906
  • Anne of Green Gables
    Author: L.M. Montgomery
    Nationality: Canadian
    Year: 1908
  • The Wind in the Willows
    Author: Kenneth Grahame
    Nationality: Scottish
    Year: 1908
  • The Nicest Girl in the School
    Author: Angela Brazil
    Nationality: English
    Year: 1909
  • The Secret Garden
    Author: Frances Hodgson Burnett
    Nationality: British-American
    Year: 1911
  • Pollyanna
    Author: Eleanor H. Porter
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1913
  • The Velveteen Rabbit
    Author: Margery Williams
    Nationality: British-American
    Year: 1922
  • Madeline
    Author: Ludwig Bemelmans
    Nationality: Austrian-American
    Year: 1939
  • The Little Prince
    Author: Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
    Nationality: French
    Year: 1943
  • Stuart Little
    Author: E.B. White
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1945
  • The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
    Author: C.S. Lewis
    Nationality: British
    Year: 1950
  • The Martian Chronicles
    Author: Ray Bradbury
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1950
  • Charlotte’s Web
    Author: E.B. White
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1952
  • The Wonderful Flight to the Mushroom Planet
    Author: Eleanor Cameron
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1954
  • The Lord of the Rings
    Author: J.R.R. Tolkien
    Nationality: British
    Year: 1954–1955
  • Old Yeller
    Author: Fred Gipson
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1956
  • The Cat in the Hat
    Author: Dr. Seuss (Theodor Geisel)
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1957
  • How the Grinch Stole Christmas!
    Author: Dr. Seuss (Theodor Geisel)
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1957
  • Calico Captive
    Author: Elizabeth George Speare
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1957
  • The Weirdstone of Brisingamen
    Author: Alan Garner
    Nationality: English
    Year: 1960
  • Green Eggs and Ham
    Author: Dr. Seuss (Theodor Geisel)
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1960
  • Where the Red Fern Grows
    Author: Wilson Rawls
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1961
  • A Wrinkle in Time
    Author: Madeleine L’Engle
    Nationality: American
    Year: 1962
  • Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
    Author: Roald Dahl
    Nationality: British
    Year: 1964
  • Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone
    Author: J.K. Rowling
    Nationality: British
    Year: 1997

XXXV. Identified the Cosmological and Geologic Time Periods.

While the concept of cosmological time evolved from 20th-century physics and astronomy, and no one “inventor” can be said to have originated a particular time period, it is possible to name scientists whose work is associated with the conceptualization of particular epochs. Similarly, although the conceptualization of geologic time periods is rooted in the development of the science of geology, the principles of stratigraphy first developed by Nicolas Steno (1669), and refined by many geologists later on. we can identify particular names associated with each geologic period. Of all the names listed below, Abdus Salam is the only scientist with non-European ancestry, born in Pakistan. Seven names have Jewish ancestry, and twenty-three are of European ancestry.

Cosmological Time Periods

  1. Planck Epoch
    • Time: 0 to ~10⁻⁴³ seconds after the Big Bang
    • Description: The earliest phase, where quantum gravity dominated, and all fundamental forces were unified. Physics as we know it doesn’t fully apply.
    • Originator: Named after Max Planck, who developed the theoretical framework for quantum mechanics and defined the Planck scale in the late 19th/early 20th century. The concept emerged from quantum theory and general relativity integration efforts.
  2. Grand Unification Epoch
    • Time: ~10⁻⁴³ to ~10⁻³⁶ seconds
    • Description: Gravity separated from the other forces, which remained unified (strong, weak, electromagnetic). The universe was a hot, dense soup of energy.
    • Originator: This phase stems from Grand Unified Theories (GUTs), proposed in the 1970s by physicists like Howard Georgi and Sheldon Glashow, building on earlier unification ideas.
  3. Inflationary Epoch
    • Time: ~10⁻³⁶ to ~10⁻³² seconds
    • Description: A rapid exponential expansion of the universe occurred, smoothing out irregularities and setting the stage for structure formation.
    • Originator: Alan Guth proposed cosmic inflation in 1980, revolutionizing cosmology by explaining the universe’s uniformity and flatness.
  4. Electroweak Epoch
    • Time: ~10⁻³² to ~10⁻¹² seconds
    • Description: The electromagnetic and weak forces were still unified. The universe cooled as it expanded.
    • Originator: Linked to the electroweak theory by Sheldon Glashow, Abdus Salam, and Steven Weinberg (1960s-1970s), unifying these forces mathematically.
  5. Quark Epoch
    • Time: ~10⁻¹² to ~10⁻⁶ seconds
    • Description: Quarks, leptons, and photons dominated as the universe cooled enough for the strong force to separate.
    • Originator: Named from particle physics developments, with George Zweig and Murray Gell-Mann proposing quarks in 1964.
  6. Hadron Epoch
    • Time: ~10⁻⁶ seconds to ~1 second
    • Description: Quarks combined to form hadrons (protons, neutrons). Most matter-antimatter pairs annihilated.
    • Originator: Also tied to Gell-Mann and Zweig’s quark model, with the term “hadron” coined by Lev Okun in 1962.
  7. Lepton Epoch
    • Time: ~1 second to ~10 seconds
    • Description: Leptons (electrons, neutrinos) dominated after most hadrons annihilated. Neutrinos decoupled.
    • Originator: Emerged from particle physics; no single originator, but builds on lepton classification from the mid-20th century.
  8. Nucleosynthesis Epoch
    • Time: ~10 seconds to ~20 minutes
    • Description: Protons and neutrons fused to form light nuclei (hydrogen, helium).
    • Originator: George Gamow, Ralph Alpher, and Robert Herman developed Big Bang nucleosynthesis theory in the 1940s, predicting elemental abundances.
  9. Recombination Epoch
    • Time: ~380,000 years
    • Description: Electrons and nuclei combined to form neutral atoms, making the universe transparent to light (cosmic microwave background forms).
    • Originator: Predicted by Alpher and Herman in 1948, confirmed by Penzias and Wilson’s 1965 discovery of the CMB.
  10. Dark Ages
    • Time: ~380,000 years to ~150 million years
    • Description: A period of darkness before stars formed, with only neutral gas and CMB radiation.
    • Originator: Term coined later by cosmologists; no single originator, but tied to post-recombination studies.
  11. Reionization Epoch
    • Time: ~150 million to ~1 billion years
    • Description: First stars and galaxies formed, reionizing the neutral hydrogen with ultraviolet light.
    • Originator: Concept developed in the 1990s-2000s from observations (e.g., by the Hubble Space Telescope) and theoretical work on star formation.
  12. Stellar Era (Present Era)
    • Time: ~1 billion years to present (~13.8 billion years)
    • Description: Stars, galaxies, and planets dominate, with ongoing structure formation.
    • Originator: Broadly understood through Edwin Hubble’s 1920s work on cosmic expansion, refined by modern cosmology.

Geologic Time Periods

Eons

  1. Hadean Eon (~4.6–4.0 billion years ago)
    • Description: Earth’s formation, no preserved rocks, intense bombardment.
    • Originator: Term coined by Preston Cloud in 1972, reflecting a “hellish” early Earth.
  2. Archean Eon (~4.0–2.5 billion years ago)
    • Description: Early crust, first life (microbes).
    • Originator: Named by James Dana in 1872, from Greek “archaios” (ancient).
  3. Proterozoic Eon (~2.5 billion–541 million years ago)
    • Description: Oxygen buildup, multicellular life emerges.
    • Originator: Proposed by William Logan in 1857, formalized later; “protero” means “earlier life.”
  4. Phanerozoic Eon (541 million years ago–present)
    • Description: Visible life flourishes, complex ecosystems.
    • Originator: Named by George Chadwick in 1930, from Greek “phaneros” (visible) and “zoe” (life).

Eras (Phanerozoic Eon)

  1. Paleozoic Era (541–252 million years ago)
    • Description: “Ancient life” – invertebrates, fish, early plants.
    • Originator: John Phillips named it in 1841, based on fossil succession.
  2. Mesozoic Era (252–66 million years ago)
    • Description: “Middle life” – dinosaurs, first mammals.
    • Originator: Also John Phillips, 1841, noting a transitional fossil record.
  3. Cenozoic Era (66 million years ago–present)
    • Description: “Recent life” – mammals dominate.
    • Originator: John Phillips, 1841, for the modern fauna.

Periods (Phanerozoic Eon)

  1. Cambrian Period (541–485 million years ago)
    • Description: Cambrian Explosion, diverse marine life.
    • Originator: Adam Sedgwick named it in 1835 after Cambria (Wales).
  2. Ordovician Period (485–443 million years ago)
    • Description: Marine diversification, first corals.
    • Originator: Charles Lapworth, 1879, after the Ordovices tribe in Wales.
  3. Silurian Period (443–419 million years ago)
    • Description: First land plants, jawed fish.
    • Originator: Roderick Murchison, 1835, after the Silures tribe in Wales.
  4. Devonian Period (419–359 million years ago)
    • Description: “Age of Fish,” early tetrapods.
    • Originator: Sedgwick and Murchison, 1839, after Devon, England.
  5. Carboniferous Period (359–299 million years ago)
    • Description: Coal forests, amphibians thrive.
    • Originator: William Conybeare and William Phillips, 1822, for carbon-rich deposits.
    • Subdivisions: Mississippian and Pennsylvanian (North American terms by Henry Shaler Williams, 1891).
  6. Permian Period (299–252 million years ago)
    • Description: Pangaea forms, ends with mass extinction.
    • Originator: Roderick Murchison, 1841, after Perm, Russia.
  7. Triassic Period (252–201 million years ago)
    • Description: Dinosaurs emerge, recovery from extinction.
    • Originator: Friedrich von Alberti, 1834, for a three-part rock sequence in Germany.
  8. Jurassic Period (201–145 million years ago)
    • Description: Dinosaurs dominate, first birds.
    • Originator: Alexandre Brongniart, 1829, after the Jura Mountains.
  9. Cretaceous Period (145–66 million years ago)
    • Description: Flowering plants, ends with dinosaur extinction.
    • Originator: Jean-Baptiste d’Omalius d’Halloy, 1822, for chalk (Latin “creta”).
  10. Paleogene Period (66–23 million years ago)
    • Description: Mammal radiation, early primates.
    • Originator: Moritz Hörnes, 1853, for “older recent” life.
  11. Neogene Period (23–2.58 million years ago)
    • Description: Modern mammals, hominids evolve.
    • Originator: Moritz Hörnes, 1853, for “newer recent” life.
  12. Quaternary Period (2.58 million years ago–present)
    • Description: Ice ages, human evolution.
    • Originator: Jules Desnoyers, 1829, for recent deposits.

XXXVI. Invented all the extreme sports

I just asked Grok to organize in a numbered format the following extreme sports, with a brief description of the nature of each sport, and the nationalities of the men associated with their origins. This is based on Grok’s reply.

  1. Highlining
    • Description: Tightrope walking on a strap at elevated heights, typically with a harness for safety.
    • Origin: Pioneered in the early 1980s by American climbers Adam Grosowsky and Jeff Ellington in Yosemite National Park, California.
  2. Free Solo Climbing
    • Description: Climbing rock formations without ropes or assistance beyond a chalk bag and shoes.
    • Origin: Paul Preuss (Austria, 1886–1913) is credited with promoting a purist climbing ethic in the early 20th century that resembles modern free soloing. Alex Honnold (USA) popularized it with his famous 2017 free solo of El Capitan.
  3. Downhill Mountain Biking
    • Description: Racing down steep, rough terrain on a mountain bike.
    • Origin: Downhill mountain biking emerged in the 1970s in Northern California, USA, when a group of cyclists, including Gary Fisher, Joe Breeze, and Charlie Kelly, began modifying bikes to race down fire roads on Mount Tamalpais.
  4. BASE Jumping
    • Description: Jumping from fixed objects (Building, Antenna, Span, Earth) with a parachute.
    • Origin: Modern BASE-jumping traces back to Carl Boenish (USA), who in 1981 coined the term and made it a recognized sport by jumping from El Capitan in Yosemite with a parachute.
  5. Ice Climbing
    • Description: Scaling ice formations like frozen waterfalls or snow-covered peaks.
    • Origin: Ice climbing evolved from mountaineering in the European Alps. Oscar Eckenstein (UK, 1859–1921) is often credited with early innovations.
  6. Cliff Diving
    • Description: Jumping from high cliffs into water.
    • Origin: Cliff diving has ancient roots in Hawaii, where King Kahekili (1737–1794) reportedly leapt from cliffs to prove his bravery. Modern cliff diving was popularized by figures like Orlando Duque (Colombia) in competitive formats.
  7. Wing Walking
    • Description: Standing on a plane’s wings during flight as it performs stunts.
    • Origin: Wing walking began in the 1920s as a stunt in post-WWI barnstorming shows in the USA. Ormer Locklear (USA, 1891–1920) is credited as the first to perform it publicly.
  8. Freshwater Diving (Cave Diving)
    • Description: Exploring submerged cave systems underwater.
    • Origin: Modern cave diving was pioneered by Sheck Exley (USA, 1949–1994).
  9. Volcano Surfing
    • Description: Sliding down volcanic slopes, often on a board.
    • Origin: Volcano surfing (or volcano boarding) was popularized in the 2000s by Darryn Webb, an Australian.
  10. Big Wave Surfing
    • Description: Surfing massive ocean waves, often over 20 feet high.
    • Origin: Big wave surfing originated in Hawaii, with George Freeth (USA, of Hawaiian descent, 1883–1919). Later, Greg Noll (USA) pioneered riding giant waves at Waimea Bay in the 1950s.
  11. Freestyle Skiing & Snowboarding
    • Description: Performing aerial tricks and maneuvers on skis or snowboards, often in terrain parks or halfpipes.
    • Origin: Freestyle skiing emerged in the 1960s in the United States, with skiers like Wayne Wong and John Clendenin popularizing trick-based skiing in the 1970s. Snowboarding’s freestyle form followed in the 1980s, driven by Jake Burton Carpenter.
  12. Waterfall Kayaking
    • Description: Paddling over waterfalls in a kayak, often involving significant drops and turbulent waters.
    • Origin: Evolved from whitewater kayaking, with Tao Berman setting notable records in the 1990s and 2000s, including a 98.4-foot waterfall descent in 2007 in the United States.
  13. Big Mountain Skiing / Snowboarding
    • Description: Skiing or snowboarding on steep, ungroomed terrain, typically in remote backcountry areas.
    • Origin: Big mountain skiing traces back to the 1970s, with Bill Briggs making the first ski descent of the Grand Teton in Wyoming, USA, in 1971.
  14. Ice Cross Downhill
    • Description: Racing down an icy track with jumps, turns, and obstacles on skates.
    • Origin: Created by Red Bull in 2000, with the inaugural event held in Stockholm, Sweden, in 2001.
  15. Skydiving
    • Description: Jumping from an aircraft and free-falling before deploying a parachute.
    • Origin: Modern skydiving as a sport developed in the 1950s, building on earlier feats like Raymond Young’s first recorded free-fall jump in 1919 in the United States.
  16. Canyon Swinging
    • Description: Swinging from a rope or cable across a canyon.
    • Origin: Popularized in the 2000s as an adventure tourism activity, notably in Queenstown, New Zealand.
  17. BMX
    • Description: Bicycle Motocross, involving racing on dirt tracks or performing tricks in skateparks with specialized bikes.
    • Origin: Originated in the late 1960s in California, USA, when Scot Breithaupt organized the first BMX race in 1970.
  18. Extreme Skiing
    • Description: Skiing in extreme conditions, such as steep slopes, deep powder, or remote locations.
    • Origin: Attributed to Sylvain Saudan who in the 1960s and 1970s made pioneering descents of steep Alpine slopes.
  19. Freestyle Motocross
    • Description: Performing aerial tricks and stunts on a motocross bike, often during jumps.
    • Origin: Developed in the 1990s in the United States, with pioneers Jeremy “Twitch” Stenberg and Mike Metzger.

Conclusion

We could go on but these lists are more than enough to convey the supreme achievements of Europeans. In our age of immigrant DEI, which is destroying the West, these lists should become an indispensable part in the protection and affirmation of European identity and heritage. Carry them around, and overwhelm the anti-whites with them.

Contemporary Italian Dissident Thought: The Importance of Masculinity and Heroism

Polemos Editrice, 2024

Despite the rise of computer translation technology, language remains a significant barrier to the sharing of important ideas. Italy is home to an active identitarian scene with its own print and web publications, but most sympathetic English speakers’ acquaintance with it is limited to having heard a bit about Casa Pound—an important component of the Italian dissident right, but not the whole. Recognizing the desirability of broadcasting their message beyond the borders of Italy, five prominent activists arranged for publication of a small anthology of their writings in English last October under the title Italian Vanguard: Ideas for Future Predators.

Important influences on the Italian identitarian movement include Nietzsche, Marinetti, Evola and the French nouvelle droite, especially Guillaume Faye. They reject liberal capitalism and the monotheistic tradition, and much that goes under the label “conservative” in the English-speaking world. Many find inspiration in the myth of Prometheus, the Titan who stole fire from Olympus. Accordingly, they are critical of any tendency to set limits to technological advance—an attitude they consider un-European. (This is not, of course, equivalent to denying that technology can and has been put to harmful uses.)

By way of introduction, we shall look at the essay “Stay Superhuman” by Carlomanno Adinolfi. Signore Adinolfi is an electrical engineer who has written three novels in the fantasy genre and contributed to the nationalist website Il Primato Nazionale (www.ilprimatonazionale.it) since 2005.

Today’s dominant ideology is fond of appeals to “humanity,” a concept useful to egalitarians since it tends to strip actual persons of all that distinguishes them. But a closer look reveals the ease with which these supposed humanitarians can deny the human status of all who oppose them. During Italy’s “years of lead,” a time of political turmoil which lasted from the late 1960s to the late 1980s, leftist terrorist groups proclaimed the slogan “killing a fascist is not a crime,” always with a tacit reservation of the left to decide for themselves who was a fascist. The attitude persists: in February 2023, an Italian “anti-fascist” was arrested for participating in an armed assault on Hungarian citizens taking part in a demonstration. Sympathizers back home got her elected MEP, whereby she acquired parliamentary immunity for her past actions! A license for violence appears the natural result of the cult of humanity. Americans will remember the “punch a Nazi” kerfuffle of a few years ago as an expression of the same mentality.

During the First World War, Italian soldiers adopted the motto “it is better to live one day as a lion than a hundred years as a sheep.” But not everyone agrees with this sentiment, of course. Lions can be scary. Adinolfi sees the dominant ideology of the West as

a great attempt to repress all the “fierce” qualities of the human being. A man who is too masculine is a “toxic male chauvinist;” a child who stands up to the bully by beating him up instead of reporting him to the teacher is punished more severely than the bully himself; a street fight, especially if it happens for political reasons and one dares to have “certain ideas,” is likely to be punished with a disproportionate number of years in prison. This is the path followed, if only unconsciously, by all the crazy vegans and environmentalists who blame hunting, horse racing, [and] bullfighting. The standard bearers of “do-gooder” egalitarianism fear and viscerally hate those ancestral instincts that since the dawn of Man have always elevated the aristoi above the masses.

It is true, of course, that civilization requires channeling and placing limits upon violent human instincts. But it is an illusion to believe they can be made permanently unnecessary and done away with. Life will always remain a struggle, and the heroic virtues will never become obsolete. Adinolfi cites an illustration from Italian history: Garibaldi’s “expedition of the thousand.” His men were denounced as pirates, but they freed and unified Italy when negotiation was failing.

Masculinity, as Jack Donovan has written, derives from the tasks men had to perform in our primary environment of evolutionary adaptation, the hunter-gatherer band: defending territory and overcoming threats from other groups, resource scarcity, and environmental stresses. But modern man has become a victim of his own success, providing so much security and so many resources that the experiences of danger and want have been forgotten. As a result, the masculine virtues that made civilization possible are no longer valued, and they atrophy: “When man no longer has to deal with risk, when from a wolf he turns into a house dog, he is destined to decline.”

Adriano Scianca, another contributor to Italian Vanguard, writes with sensitivity of how primitive masculinity is subsumed and elevated but not eliminated within a flourishing civilization:

Man loves more to found civilizations that to abide by their laws. If subjected too long to given order, he withers. This is why the tendency to gather in a Männerbund, a manly community—gangs, militias, fraternities—manifests itself so often in history. Of course, the gang clashes with another symbolic form of men’s power: fatherhood, i.e., the laws of the city. The band of brothers thrives where the father is missing, no longer there or not there yet, thus at the beginning or end of civilization. When the father is there and performs his function, the brothers feel like sons first and foremost, the bond with the father prevails over that with each other. In order not to wither, civilization must hold the two dimensions together. If the gang prevails, it is anarchy; if the father dominates, it is an oppressive power that stifles individuality. The gang must be organically integrated into the Law.

Adinolfi himself writes of the need to maintain a balance between the dynamic force of the conquering gang and the static force of civilization which must rein in barbaric impetuosity so that it does not overreach and civilization degenerate into anarchy.

He finds a disturbing precedent for today’s human self-domestication in an event of late antiquity:

In the 4th century, Emperor Constantine canceled military service from the political cursus honorum. To become a magistrate, governor, senator, one no longer had to go serve in the legions. As a result, a resident army of barbarians was formed, which was no longer bound to the fortunes of Rome.

Simultaneously, the empire came to be ruled by a class of soft and fearful bureaucrats, and Rome’s end was not far off. Mussolini knew better; he was fond of saying: “One can go from the tent to the palace provided one is prepared to go from the palace to the tent.”

A careful study of today’s ruling humanitarian and egalitarian ideology reveals a firm determination to destroy every attachment presupposed by what Jack Donovan has called the way of men: family, clan, nation, borders, identity. Our task is to safeguard these essential human goods. Adinolfi does not believe “conservatism” can provide a useful model:

Complex dynamic systems, whether biological or mechanical, in attempting to regulate themselves “dampen” certain behaviors so that their output does not become unstable, so that the system always remains controlled. While the progressive is the sworn enemy who wants to kill the noble predator, the conservative is the control valve that seeks to tame and depower it.

Egalitarianism has not simply been ‘taken too far’; it is fundamentally false and pernicious, and we must seek its total overcoming.

Other essays in Italian Vanguard offer meditations on the work of Ernst Jünger, space as the frontier for future human endeavor, and a challenging philosophical meditation on potentiality (“Dynamis: A Philosophy of Force”).

Guido Taietti is perhaps the contributor best known in the English-speaking world due to his appearance at 2023’s Scandza Forum and 2024’s American Renaissance Conference. I have reviewed his book Political Witchcraft here.

In the present volume he offers some thoughts on the concept of heroism in Western thinking. He points out that in a vast, thinly populated country such as Russia, retreat can serve to stretch an enemy’s supply lines and thus contribute to victory, as it did against Napoleon in 1812. In the West, however, a retreat of even 25 miles may involve the loss of an entire city with its population. Hence the ideal of the sacrificial hero on the model of Sparta’s Leonidas.

Today, however, the West is dominated by liberal capitalism, an inherently antiheroic way of thinking based on rational decision making with a view to individual utility. From liberalism’s point of view,

nothing is more absurd than dying for a cause, losing the material good par excellence, the one which makes possible the enjoyment of all others for the sake of something that does not even potentially offer a material benefit (a ‘cause’). Of course, the need for heroes can be considered a rational choice from the point of view of society if one postulates the existence of a mechanism that reasons in collective terms.

Heroism thus presupposes the reality of the collective. It is an aspect of the sacred, anti-economistic dimension of life. The struggle against liberal economism is thus the sacred and heroic struggle par excellence.

White Dreams and the Politics of Cold Turkey: The Internecine Proclivities of White People

It was two thousand years ago that the Roman writer Juvenal warned us to beware of our dreams coming true. An attractive Roman noblewoman may go to great lengths in her self-adornment only to discover how intensely she is hated by her less physically endowed female companions. Comes the time when the envy of her less attractive entourage turns her accomplished dreamlife into a living hell. Likewise, a wealthy praetor when travelling with his body guards outside Rome stops indulging in his fame and ruminates how not to get mugged by highway robbers instead. The philosopher and lawyer Cicero was the best orator in the Roman empire whose self-complacency eventually cost him the loss of his head by the jealous would-be emperor Mark Antony. His handsome colleague and client, the famous theater actor Quintus Roscius was forced to forfeit his narcistic self-adulation having been obliged to spend most of his backstage life dodging lawfare for his tax evasion. Had he lost the presidential election, despite his phenomenal combative spirit in fighting the DOJ’s Bolshevik-inspired trumped-up charges, president Trump would be by now en route to federal penitentiary.

“Be careful what you wish for” is a fine English expression which lacks a verbal and conceptual equivalent in other European languages. It does, however, reflect the very opposite of grandiose dreams come true. Maybe the best medicine for a livable life is the suppression of free will as preached by the ikons of cultural pessimism, Emile Cioran and Arthur Schopenhauer. Squashing free will and suppressing all political appetites may be also the best answer for an aspiring public figure given that at some point in time his legacy will only be remembered as a criminal enterprise. Over the course of time the unity of opposites leads to the paradox of unintended consequences and unanticipated political disasters. It is only a matter of time that a ruler’s erstwhile stardom will be labeled a crime, or even worse that his name will be chiseled out as damnatio memoriae. Which option to choose; keep a low profile and live one’s life in self-abnegation? Or dwell in an overdrive promethean hubris-like self-delusion of working for the greater good? Ten, hundred, or five hundred years later a politician’s achieved goals will be the target of public demonization. Tearing down the statues of Confederate heroes is just the latest example of unintended consequences that must have slipped the mind of Jefferson Davis and R.E. Lee. The distinction between good and evil is just a matter of individual judgment in accordance to the dominant lie of a given epoch. Even a popular English proverb that “every cloud has a silver lining,” which has a better graphic equivalent in the French language, à quelque chose malheur est bon (“out of bad comes good”) sounds grotesque. It can’t be a solace for a politician sentenced to death for his lost war, nor can it bring relief to a heretic preaching untimely beliefs. With the increasing racial replacement in the U.S. the founding fathers Jefferson and Hamilton will soon be featured in school curricula as the architypes of White Evil, all ready to join the club of hundreds of the damned ones, including the proverbial Hitler and his ilk.

It is a great merit of behavior geneticists and evolutionary biologists to single out the prime role of heredity, particularly when it comes to our political choices when facing off a hostile outgroup. The study of the genetics of race can also help us much in uncovering a sociopathic would-be loudmouth within our own ingroup. Due to the steady bolshevization of social science studies since 1945, it should not come as a surprise why the research in these fields has been avoided like the plague in the Western school curriculum. The good news is that the post-WWII gigantic egalitarian multiracial scam, whether in its communist or liberal form, is falling apart. The decades-long official U.S. Soviet-inspired multiracial-DEI- affirmative action-woke policies  are showing their dysfunctional and destructive results in an all social, economic, and military realms. Even its erstwhile supporters are increasingly becoming aware of it..

Ingroup infighting

Is a racially homogenous society based on meritocratic and hierarchical principles i.e., that everybody must have his own due (suum cuique) the best answer? The works of dozens of prominent geneticists have confirmed that ingroup members are biologically predisposed to flock to their kind, especially when a threat of aggression from outgroups looms. How is it then that more Whites since time immemorial have been killed by people who were in fact their own ingroup members (whatever labels they were using) than by hordes of invading outgroups? Why deny that the entire history of white Europe and America, despite their cultural braggadocio, is largely a history of civil wars? Wishful thinking about the expulsion of all non-Whites, or a putative establishment of secessionist all-White statelets in the U.S. or E.U. will likely lead to another round of mutual inter-White incriminations and civil wars. Also worth pointing out is that non-White and non-European outgroups perceive the history of interminable inter-European wars very differently from how European nations perceive their dispute with similar neighboring outgroups.

Policies based on identity, however romantic they sound, are based on the exclusion of alterity. All of us define our Selves only in comparison to the Other. Example? There is not a single nation in Europe that has been spared from murderous wars with its next-door European neighbor. Very likely White infighting will continue unabated even if all 30 million non-Whites in Europe and over 150 million non-Whites in North America were miraculously to disappear. Alas, birds of feather do not always flock together. In fact, any conflict becomes the more gruesome the less visible racial, linguistic and cultural lines exist between two neighboring groups sharing the same DNA. On the other hand, the more geographically distant nations are from each other, the more likely they will tolerate their mutual differences. As a rule, each ingroup perceives its next door similar as an affront, as a denial or as a caricature of its own identity, as was amply shown during the recent bloody conflict between Serbs and Croats. “The closer we are to the Other”, writes Alain de Benoist, “the more violently we will fight against him, because the very fact of his proximity makes his Otherness all the more scandalous.”

In their turn non-White, non-European observers and scholars, let alone millions of low-IQ non-White migrants flooding Europe and America must be scandalized and bedeviled by disputes between European nations. Historical disagreements resulting in bloody wars between genetically similar Irish and English, between Basques and Castilians, between, Germans and Poles, between Hungarians and Romanians, between Flemings and Walloons must appear to them as a sign of the insanity of the White man. This is the subject White homeland advocates have failed to address. A well-researched work on the sociobiology of civil wars between European nations is sorely missing.

At the heart of interminable inter-White ingroup disputes and civil wars one must single out the destructive role of millennia-long Judeo-Chistian-Islamic monotheism. The catastrophic results of the Abrahamic dogma have been the main engine of European ingroup civil wars, both in their theological and ideological versions. Belief in the existence of only one God presupposes the belief in only one political truth and the rejection of other possible truths. Civil wars among White Europeans, stretching from the first Christian emperor Constantine to the Second World War, all the way to the current war between genetically similar Russians and Ukrainians, have their roots in secularized forms of Christianity. By contrast, old Romans and Greeks, although waging merciless wars against foreign tribes never imposed their diverse deities and their own political beliefs on conquered tribes. In fact, they often borrowed gods from conquered tribes and had them added to their own pantheon.

One can sing the praises of ancient Roman religious tolerance, but the Greco-Roman civil wars amidst the same polytheistic ingroups were not very divine at all. One does not need to recap he Thirty Years Peloponnesian war between the racially same Athenians and Spartans. Very likely similar inter-White carnage will continue in our postmodernity even if all non-White citizens were forced to depart from Europe and America.

One can justly condemn the jealous Jewish god Yahve and his totalitarian ukases against the unchosen ones: “The Lord your God will cut off before you the nations you are about to invade and dispossess” (Deuteronomy 12:29-32). The secular version of this old Yahve’s decree comes now as a free pass for the IDF serial killings of Arabs in the Gaza Strip. Neither have the Christians lagged much behind in their killing sprees within their own racial ingroup, each ingroup sect or clan claiming to hold the only appropriate master key to the Christian heaven. “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke, 14:26). The Russo- Ukrainian conflict is just the latest Gentile secular offshoot of the monotheist Judeo-Christian- inspired mindset.

Wern Graul (1905–1984): Christian Desecration of the Oak Tree

One must rightly be shocked with ancient Christian and Jewish preachers and their liberal and communist commissars preaching once upon a time the Gospel of antipaganism and lecturing on the importance of antifascism today. But the pagan ingroup and inter-clan violence is also full of gory scenes. Hundreds of historical and mythical texts testify to it. The egotistic Titan Saturn, in order to preserve his sole rule on his global turf did not hesitate a minute to devour his son, the future god Zeus. In the much-vaunted Iliad, the pagan hero Achilles drags the desecrated body of Hector along the walls of Troya, causing discomfort among pagan Troyan mourners worshiping the same gods (The Iliad, Book XXII) . Ovid’s Metamorphoses depicts an orgy of ingroup violence such as when the Balkan-Thracian king Tereus rapes his wife’s sister Philomela and cuts her tongue off in order to prevent her from going public about the crime. Orestes kills her mother Clytemnestra for her cheating on his father and her husband Agammemnon. Neither would have the foundation of the ancient pagan city of Rome been possible without having jealous Romulus kill his brother Remus.

Francisco Goya (1746–1828): Saturn devouring his son

In the study of modern political and academic self-censorship and woke witch-hunts against free thinkers in the EU and the US it is imperative to study Ovid’s bloody allegory of human, subhuman and transhuman transformations.

The cases of more secular and historically recorded ingroup savagery are timeless and countless. The emperor Nero had his mother killed. His lifelong mentor the wealthiest man in Rome, the philosopher Seneca, who liked to brag stoically about modesty and tolerance, was subsequently killed by Nero — his former imperial pupil. Emperor Marcus Aurelius, much eulogized in history books for his compassion and magnanimity toward his defeated foes must have badly misdirected his stoic genes; his son, the emperor Commodus, was the foremost sexual pervert in the Roman empire. Shakespeare’s dramas also abound in ingroup and intrafamilial killings, mostly by the rulers suffering from mental or sexual deformities, as illustrated in his play Richard III. Shakespear’s king Richard is not a far cry from many contemporary White nationalists in the US and Europe parading themselves as undisputed future leaders daydreaming about how to save the West.

And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover
To entertain these fair well-spoken days
I am determined to prove a villain
And hate the idle pleasures of these days.
(Act 1, Scene 1)

White dreams turned into the tragic opposite following 1945. But even if Hitler and Mussolini and similar or sympathetic politicians in Europe and the U.S. of that epoch had won the war, or at least won the day, their dreams would have materialized by now into something entirely different. White dreams caused by acid or crack can help in arresting or even reverse the flow of time, but the aftermath is never pleasant.

……………………..

Further reading:

  1. Alain de Benoist, “Violence sacrée guerre et monothéisme”, Krisis (33/April 2010).
  2. Hervé Coutau-Bégarie “A quoi sert la guerre?” Krisis (34/June, 2010).
  3. Gaius Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars, edited by J. Rives (Penguin Classics, 2007).

James Edwards Interviews Pat Buchanan on the Death of the West

What follows is a transcript of an interview conducted by talk radio host James Edwards with Patrick J. Buchanan upon the initial release of his book Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?  We revisit this conversation because the year in question has now arrived, and many of the concerns raised during the discussion still remain. This transcript has never before appeared online and has been edited for brevity.

* * *

James Edwards: Pat, thanks for being back with me again, and congratulations on the early success of your latest title. Writing a book is like printing money. Everybody loves you!

Patrick J. Buchanan: No, James. They give me an advance and then I go out and try to sell as many as I can to help the publisher get it back.

Edwards: I saw someone buying it at Target last night, of all places. Maybe you should run for president.

Buchanan: Been there, done that!

Edwards: Well, let’s jump right into the thick of it. Do we currently have front-row seats to the end of Western Civilization and culture as we know it?

Buchanan: I believe the answer is yes, from a variety of standpoints. In one chapter, I discuss the “Demographic Winter” of the West. Currently, no Western country has a birth rate among its native-born population that is sufficient for it to sustain itself in any recognizable form by the end of this century.

It is my argument that when Christianity, which was the faith that created the West, when the faith dies, the culture dies, the civilization dies, and then the people die. And I think that’s true down through history. And we certainly see that in Europe, for example, which is well advanced ahead of us, where something like one in ten people go to church in Great Britain, I believe. More people attend Muslim mosques on holy days of the week than go to Anglican churches.

So, I think the West was created by this great religion, and that created the magnificent culture of the Middle Ages, out of which came all these great countries, which really dominated the world through the twentieth century, with empires basically dominating every country on earth almost, except for Japan. And now look at where they are. I think you see a civilization basically in retreat. As Toynbee said, “Civilizations die by suicide, not by murder.”

Edwards: I’m glad you brought up our faith in your book. It is dying in America and that precedes the death of a nation. In Russia, however, there seems to be at least somewhat of a revival of Christianity. I have read reports that the Russian government has even tried to encourage its citizens to have more children. Is Russia coming to its senses in a way that we in the West are not?

Buchanan: Well, I think the Russians went through hell for 70 years under Bolshevism.  They were a deeply religious and patriotic people who were Orthodox Christians. And when Lenin and Stalin came in, the church was literally murdered. I was over there in 1971, I guess, and we went down to this museum of Atheism in Leningrad, which was a gigantic cathedral. They turned it into that, and everything had been emptied out.

So, they went through 70 years of hell. And it’s very true that when they were liberated from Bolshevism and Communism, many returned to the faith. But frankly, James, if you look at the numbers there, Russia’s current birthrate may lead to a loss of approximately 25 million people by 2050. I have the statistics in my book.

Suicide of a Superpower also deals with what’s happening in Russia and these other countries. They’ve already lost 8 million in the last two decades ever since they became free, and the women are not having children. I think the median death age of Russian men is now something like 60. It has not only to do with the lack of births but apparently, the health system is terrible. There’s alcoholism. I think the average woman has seven abortions. I’ve had that in an earlier book.

Edwards: I once said during an appearance on CNN that you can’t have a first-world nation with a third-world population. Moving on to another aspect of your excellent new book, which I have a review copy of right here on my desk, you write that “White America is an endangered species.”  Pat, what is America going to look like if Whites go extinct?

Buchanan: I don’t think Whites are going to go extinct — I mean, certainly not in the near future.  But what is happening, as you see in California, is that Americans of European descent are already a minority, and that is true in Texas, and it is true, I believe, in New Mexico and Hawaii.  And in this decade, I think six more states will pass the tipping point where Whites become a minority. I think the best way to understand what America will look like is to look at California today. The Hispanic population will be immense, 135,000,000, according to the Census Bureau of Statistics.

California was once the Golden Land. Everybody went there. It was paradise. The soldiers who went out to the Pacific came home and then made their homes there.

But what is happening out there, James, is that the bond rating is the lowest in the country. The taxes are enormously heavy on the well-to-do and the successful, and these folks are leaving the state while one-third of poor, illegal immigrants head for California. You’ve got a Black/brown war of the underclass going on in Los Angeles, according to Sheriff Lee Baca, in the gangs and in the prisons. The welfare state is bankrupting California, and they have some of the highest taxes in the nation.

So, I think this is what the country is going to look like. And I quote the famous Harvard sociologist, Robert Putnam. He did a study of all the major cities of the United States and some others throughout the world. He found that social capital, that disposition of people to work together and live together and join together for common causes and good causes and political and social causes, is at its lowest in the city of Los Angeles.  He said he had never seen social capital so low anywhere and that diversity brings about people moving into their own enclaves, segregating themselves, separating themselves, and really cooperating in very little.

Edwards: Pat, we were talking about the demographic decline of European stock around the world and here in America. As you know, every minority group in this country has numerous organizations and representatives seeking to protect and advance their unique group interests. I find that to be quite natural and healthy, and, of course, it’s not only allowed when they do it; it is encouraged and applauded.  You discuss this tribalism in Suicide of a Superpower. Clearly, tribalism has empowered minorities in America and Europe. What happened to the tribal instincts of European Americans?

Buchanan: Frankly, it’s almost impermissible for folks of European descent to organize around their race. But you have a point, and in the book, I do talk about the Black caucus in Congress, which organizes and operates on Capitol Hill on government property, and it does not admit White members and several Whites who’ve tried to get in — Jonathan Bingham, I believe, and Pete Stark — have been denied admission because they were not African American.  And then there was your congressman in Memphis, they basically slammed the door in Steve Cohen’s face.

Edwards: It is one of the greatest hypocrisies that exists. African Americans voted 95 plus percent for Barack Obama, and people just shrug and say, “Well, of course they did. Why wouldn’t they?”  You have the Black congressional caucus, as you just mentioned. You have organizations like the NAACP. However, if White people express similar ethnocentric tendencies, they face harsh denunciations and condemnation.

Buchanan: That’s right. The African American community voted 95 to 4, which is 24 to 1, for Barack Obama, which is astounding.  Even prominent Republicans like General Powell turned against his fellow Vietnam vet to vote for Obama and Powell admitted that race had something to do with it, even though Obama ran denouncing the war that Powell sold to the country.

But you know, 85 percent of White folks in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama voted against Obama. There is this fellow for the New Yorker who wrote that he sees a new people emerging in the White community and that people who are constantly under attack and discriminated against by affirmative action will eventually unite around what it is that is being attacked and what they have in their own identity.

And frankly, this is something that somewhat concerns me. If you have no ethno-national poor in a country, such as they didn’t have in Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union, and Czechoslovakia, as soon as they lifted off that repression, those things flew apart into something like 24 or 25 countries, whereas Poland stayed together, and Germany reunited on ethnic grounds.

And so, I feel that this power of ethnonationalism and religious fundamentalism is really the coming force in the world and you can see these things tearing countries apart.

Edwards: This is a follow-up to my previous question. It seems to me that many White politicians in Washington often work against their own group interests, which stands in stark contrast to the actions of their minority counterparts. Your chapter titled “The Diversity Cult,” begs me to ask this question: Why do so many Whites remain entranced by diversity when the social and cultural effects of diversity are almost entirely negative for themselves and their children and grandchildren?

Buchanan: I’ve been asked by people why it won’t be a really good thing when Whites become a minority nationwide. I mean, real problems are attendant to this.

If you go with the average American, let’s take the fellow who does the anti-affirmative action and civil rights initiative things. He conducted those ballot initiatives that abolished affirmative action in Michigan by referendum, in California by referendum, and in Washington by referendum, in three states that normally vote Democratic.

So, there is a growing majority of American people, even among the young, who feel that racial preferences and affirmative action are simply unjust. There’s a great belief that everybody should have a shot at getting on the team or getting in the band, or whatever. But the prize should go to those who are the best and work the hardest. And the idea that people should be discriminated against because of the color of their skin or where their ancestors come from, I think they find that profoundly offensive.

I think the further we go down the road with this affirmative action, especially now when you have women who qualify for affirmative action, Hispanics do, although there was no slavery of Hispanics. African Americans do. Then you’ve got 30 percent of the country, White males, who are really the ones who are the victims of affirmative action, not the beneficiaries. White males are 30 percent of the country, but they’re 75 percent of the dead and wounded coming back from Afghanistan. That’s not a formula for social peace.

Edwards: No, it’s not. But if these disenfranchised White males tried to come together politically to assert themselves, they would be shouted down as racists, supremacists, and so on and so forth.

Buchanan: Well, you know Shelby Steele wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal several years ago.  He’s an African American intellectual and scholar. And he said this type of racial identity politics is simply denied to Whites. I don’t know if he was saying this was a good thing or not. But clearly, if this type of organization took place it would be denounced. But I remember several years ago they had a meeting over in Leesburg of the Asian American caucus, the African American caucus, and the Hispanic caucus to decide how they can get more benefits out of the Congress for their own communities.  And you would say, “Wait a minute. At whose expense are these going to come?” I think, regrettably, that’s where America is headed.

Edwards: Let’s talk about the end game. Where do all the liberal, multi-racial, multi-cultural utopian fantasies that are destroying American pride and prosperity end?  You have written that we don’t share the same heroes, faith, or even the same language anymore.

Buchanan: Well, this is it. What are the basics of a nation?  It is a common language, common borders, a common faith, moral consensus, and moral code. Certainly, a common history, heroes, holidays, and literature are things that make up the culture. But you’re right. When I grew up in Washington DC, even though we were a segregated town, Blacks and Whites shared a lot of those things in common, and now we have very little in common that we share. And in addition to that, our politics and ideology are dividing us. If all these things go and we no longer have something like the Cold War to unite us where we could all stand together against Communism, then what do we have left?

Edwards: So where are we twenty years from now?

Buchanan: James, what I believe is that the United States will be a legal and political entity in 2041 when there is no majority anymore, and we’re all minorities. But I’m afraid the things that hold us together seem to be weakening, and the centrifugal force that is pulling us apart, as Lee Hamilton said, is strengthening. I think we will be a legal nation, but I don’t think we will be one nation under God, indivisible, and one people again. We will be a Balkanized country, sort of a tower of Babel, and we will be at war with each other over our differences in culture, language, politics, ideology, and religion.

We already see it happening now. I mean, the atmosphere, especially up here in Washington, is just poisonous. And I hear the term “racist” thrown out there. It’s a constant on cable television these days. Just disagreeing with somebody and calling them a racist. Those were horrendous terms 50 years ago, even when you had the civil rights struggle going on.

Edwards: I love God. I love my family, Pat. I want to see our destiny and traditional cultural heritage reclaimed for the benefit of all Americans. I don’t want that to come at the expense of anyone, but I also don’t want to be forced to trade down.

Buchanan: James, my hope is certainly that we’re going to be free to do that. But what I think is going to happen is the folks who believe as you do are going to basically, I think, retreat into enclaves of their own kind.

You know, all over the world, as I write in the chapter, “The Triumph of Tribalism,” ethnonationalism, and religious beliefs are driving peoples to separate from each other and to set up their own small nation-states where their own religion is predominant, and their own culture is predominant, and they themselves rule to the exclusion of all others.

Arthur Schlesinger and Pat Moynihan, both of whom I knew and who came to be my friends, wrote in the 1990s that these are the forces that will shape the future. It will not be Democracy versus Communism, Democracy versus Fascism, or ideology at all.  But these fundamental forces.

Edwards: We know a lot of the problems, but what can we do?  I don’t think it’s ever going to be 1950 again, though that certainly looks like an oasis by comparison.

Buchanan: You were born in 1980. I go back a long way before that. But you know, I’ve talked about the 1960s transition from Eisenhower to Kennedy. And the 1950s were really a wonderful time in America. I thought we were one people. We had won the World War. We were united. Ike was in charge. We were challenging the Soviet Union. The young president was coming in. He was going to the moon. And you know, I just don’t know if we’re ever going to be anything like that again. I think we are going to be utterly different than that in the future.

And I saw a review of my book that quoted Russell Kirk asking what a conservative’s duty is. And Kirk had said it is to preserve a particular people in a particular place at a particular time. And I think that’s what I’ve been trying to do with little success, and we have to look at things realistically. We can preserve this, but it’s not going to be dominant in the country anymore as it was. It’s not going to be the view of all. It will be the view of some, and others will have ideas, beliefs, and cultures that are in utter conflict.

And so, I see, as I said, sort of a Balkanization and a separation of peoples coming in this country over these most fundamental beliefs.


When not interviewing newsmakers, James Edwards has often found himself in the spotlight as a commentator, including many national television appearances. Over the past 20 years, his radio work has been featured in hundreds of newspapers and magazines worldwide. Media Matters has listed Edwards as a “right-wing media fixture” and Hillary Clinton personally named him as an “extremist” who would shape our country. For more information, please visit www.thepoliticalcesspool.org.

How Did It Come to This?

Reposted from:

Danmarks Frihedsraad

The last white people

This article was originally published in Danish on December 30, 2017.


Povl H. Riis-Knudsen

Just 50 short years ago, you would have been considered delusional if you had told anyone what Denmark would look like in the year 2024. In your wildest nightmare, you would not have been able to imagine a multicultural Denmark with representatives of all the world’s exotic peoples walking freely in the streets, a country where Danish schoolchildren are in the minority in their school classes, where an ever-increasing part of the state budget is spent directly or indirectly on foreigners while our infrastructure is in decay, our hospitals have to save on both treatment and patient care, and our elderly are left to lie in their own filth. And no one seems to protest vociferously. The few who do are quickly shamed by the united media mafia, and the particularly stubborn dissidents are hunted down by the system’s storm troopers from Redox, Demos1 and whatever else these criminal organizations are called. But this is really unnecessary, because such difficult individual who persist in demanding free speech are quickly excluded from the labor market and the community of the saved, and their voices are not heard. No wonder, so few dare to speak out, and when some few do, they do so with so much flour in their mouths that they are shrouded in a dust cloud of nonsense and contradictions.

How has it come to this? How has a healthy and thriving society on the rise been turned around in such a short time so that it is now headed towards not only cultural, but biological extinction at the speed of light?

Well, you do it like this:

First you destroy the family, and you do this by destroying the woman, because she is responsible for the family and the next generation2. She is made to believe that she cannot “realize” herself as a mother, even though the maternal role is her natural biological role. In media and movies, the housewife is portrayed as stupid3, naïve, and bland, and the job market courts her so that she can get out and “realize herself” at an assembly line or a cash register for a few pennies. The children, who used to roam freely and play naturally with the neighbors’ children, are now caged in kindergartens where they are looked after by young girls and boys who know nothing about children, and the culture that has been passed on from generation to generation through the mother for millennia is suddenly no longer passed on. The kindergarten staff are just looking after the children, that’s all there is time for. But let us face it: a random assortment of teachers and helpers with no real education wouldn’t be able to do this important job – even if they had time. The children have become the property of the state, just as they are in other totalitarian regimes. The resources that strong and well-educated parents previously passed on to their children are now lost to society. Everyone must be equal (i.e. disadvantaged), and as the labor market in the 1970s succeeded in attracting foreigners whose children also go to kindergarten, there can be no question of transmitting any culture at all, because now there are suddenly several cultures, and emphasizing the country’s own culture is considered discrimination. Gradually, the staff also become multicultural. Danish culture disappears from kindergarten and later from schools and universities.

Parents, schools and institutions are forbidden by law to educate children. Neither teachers nor parents are now allowed to put power behind their words, and both families and schools are transformed into discussion clubs where the 6-year-old’s words carry as much weight as those of parents and schoolteachers. All discipline disappears and with it the basis for concentration and “readiness to learn”. Children, who used to be a blessing, are now, in far too many cases, ill-mannered, impudent egotists who spread fear and terror wherever they appear in a crowd.

Women are then fed birth control pills so that they have fewer children – never mind the side effects – and if they do get pregnant, they are allowed to kill their child before it is born, even encouraged to do so – it is called “an adult decision”. A woman is the sole master of her own body, of course. However, she probably should have considered the possibility that she might get pregnant, before it happened, because now it is no longer her body. It is a small independent being that is now being killed. Abortion is genocide and the doctors who perform it are murderers. The women are helpless victims. And the father is left out of the equation. It seems like such an easy solution, but they often suffer the physical and psychological consequences for the rest of their lives. This ensures a sharp drop in the number of children and thus, in the long term, in the population. Where there used to be numerous flocks of 4 and 6 lovely children, it’s today considered to be a flock if you have 2, and many have none at all.

As women no longer have the time to cook from scratch, we are seeing more and more industrially processed food, while agriculture, which used to employ half the population, is turning into industrial companies owned by corporations. The farmer becomes a food producer. People are gradually losing all connection to the land, and the connection to nature that was once taken for granted disappears. The land, once sacred, is reduced to a means of production. Most farmers leave the profession and become industrial workers. Often they move to the cities. In the pursuit of profit, endless amounts of pesticides are poured over our food. Disease and increased infertility are the results. This is deliberate – it lowers the numerical strength of the people.

The rise of women in the labor market puts family life under pressure. The number of broken families is increasing. The moral stigma of extramarital affairs is being condemned and is disappearing. At the same time, it becomes economically feasible to break up families, which was previously more difficult. Children are now growing up outside the safe confines of a strong coherent family. They are no longer automatically part of a community because the family itself is no longer a small community, only perhaps a shared address. The adults put their selfishness above the children, who are just left to the “care” of the state. The family members live their own lives without having anything really important in common.

Not only the family, but also all other natural human communities are under attack. Singing is an essential factor when it comes to strengthening a community. We know this from the community singing during the German occupation. People gathered in public squares to sing – a kind of protest, for sure, but a positive protest – a protest in the form of a cultural expression of the people’s hopes and wishes, based on the love of their country! Today, there is no community singing, even though the situation today is a lot worse than the situation during the occupation. However, hardly anybody can sing anymore – that is, sing properly. This used to be taught in school – more or less. Proper singing lessons are long gone, as is the communal morning song. It ensured that people got to know the most important songs and hymns, it strengthened the cohesion of society and showed that people had something in common. That’s why it had to go. The church is the last place where you can still cultivate the community of song to some extent, but because no one has learned to sing, many people flee to the theology less and the Africanized universe of free churches with gospel singing and other things that simply do not belong to our culture and our community.

The natural historical geographical communities have also been torn apart by various municipal mergers, with many rural municipalities being incorporated into the big cities, where they quickly lost their identity, the merging of police and judicial districts, the closure of hospitals, medical practices, schools and railways, the centralization of tax services, emergency services, etc. Areas that naturally and historically belonged together were torn apart and areas that had never had anything to do with each other were forced together. As a result of this catastrophic development, many jobs disappeared. Doctors, lawyers, judges, teachers, nurses and many others left the small cities and villages, simply because their jobs disappeared. This spread like ripples in the water. There were fewer customers, businesses closed, people fled, and the remaining craft and industrial companies followed. Suburban Denmark had emerged, rural areas were depopulated, people lost their roots and their connection to nature. Cemeteries, which for centuries had been monuments to family cohesion, were transformed into grassland. There was no longer anyone to look after them and visit the graves of the deceased, and the churches’ inflated prices for the purchase and care of grave sites accelerated this sad development. Instead of the community, the individual, the rootless isolated human being, is cultivated.

The large state institutions that connected the nation as a powerful symbol were privatized and disappeared. Today DSB – the Danish State Railroads – is just one commercial company among many other railway companies. The postal service no longer exists. The state’s daily contact with every Dane in the form of the postman is gone. The impressive headquarters of the postal service and DSB, which in themselves represented the power and splendor of the state and the community, have been sold for hotel and residential purposes. The same goes for the military’s historic buildings. Earlier, there used to be magnificent barracks in almost every major city, which represented the power of the state and connected it to the people. Today there are only a few modernist facilities left – far from the rest of the population, so that the military is not part of people’s daily lives. Conscription has of course been abolished in practice. There is no longer anything to defend. The defense is just a business that seems to have no real purpose.

In school, culture and history are abolished, along with homework and the necessary memorization training. Effective teaching time is drastically reduced and, in reality, it becomes even shorter as a result of the lack of discipline. Higher education is de facto abolished, and the country’s three real universities are transformed into vocational schools. Classical education is abolished. The church is dismantled as an authority. Theologically, it is degraded to being part of the goodness industry, where everything is acceptable as long as it fits into the politically correct picture. People lose their moral compasses. Television and radio degenerate into the most banal form of so-called entertainment, and the language is degraded to the point where you can’t express deeper thoughts. The “heroes” of the new age are football players and pop stars, not Absalon, Niels Ebbesen or Voldemar the Great, who are completely unknown. A hero is someone who puts his life on the line for the sake of others, for the sake of the people – not a bunch of fools who, for sky-high wages, produce bland or insipid entertainment.

History is “deconstructed”, and “the people” is abolished as a concept. Everything that previous generations have revered and been proud of is ridiculed and “revealed” as “myths”. The people becomes a population, a seemingly random collection of individuals with no common religion, identity or history and no deeper sense of belonging. The concept of race is hated, indeed, races are said not to exist, even though every farmer, rabbit breeder or bantam keeper knows better. It is no longer allowed to see the difference between a Negro and a European – indeed, you can no longer even say ‘Negro’. “The only difference is the skin color,” they claim, even though the pharmaceutical industry, hormone and intelligence researchers, biologists, psychologists and physical anthropologists (not to be confused with today’s “anthropologists” who don’t even know what anthropology is) all know (or should know) better. However, it doesn’t pay to know. It pays to jump on the politically correct bandwagon. Universities are turning into spiritual brothels whose whores sell themselves to the highest bidder.

Instead, a wide range of unscientific and nonsensical ideas are put into circulation to keep people occupied and confused. Man-made climate change is a good example of such nonsense – and these and other crazy ideas can only be propagated in a population that is completely ignorant when it comes to history and science, a mass of people who are simply incapable of checking these distorted notions against reality and common sense. What these ideas and ideologies usually have in common is that they make people feel guilty (about the climate, slavery, imperialism, racism, refugees, eating meat, etc., etc., etc.) A population with a guilty conscience is not a proud people with a proud identity that upholds its culture and traditions. It is a people who has lost its bearings, a people who no longer has anything to commemorate, celebrate and be proud of, in short, a people marked for destruction.

Classical literature, painting and music that created a universe of beauty and harmony is abolished and replaced by talentless smears, bogus daubs and discordant noise – all preferably produced by foreigners who are presumed to be able to tell us so much more about the essential things in our life than our compatriots.

Literature revels in primitive depictions of the bottom of society. One need only think of Jakob Ejersbo’s Nordkraft, which is one of the most perverse, filthy and depressing works imaginable, yet its author was praised as “the greatest talent in Danish literature in generations”. That’s saying a lot. Obviously, forgotten are Jacob Paludan, Martin A. Hansen and a large number of other excellent writers who are no longer read. Another good example is the criminal Palestinian Yahya Hassan’s so-called “poems”, a talentless, infantile drivel from the gutter that was praised as brilliant by an almost unanimous group of critics and which sold more than 120,000 copies (where poems usually only sell a couple of hundred copies). The language was characterized as innovative, and indeed it is: a catalogue of oaths, insults, obscenities and other primitivities, the likes of which you have to look hard to find – thank goodness. Its popularity was largely due to the fact that, on the surface, the content seemed critical of immigrant communities. Bourgeois Denmark wanted to read it, even if they had to swim around in Hassan’s excrements along the way. Needless to say, Hassan was showered with important awards that have made him a wealthy man. He was laughing all the way to the bank, apparently having a great time in the environment he pretended to distance himself from. An overdose finally put an end to him.

When it comes to music, it doesn’t look any better. Who doesn’t remember Niels Viggo Benzon’s “piano concerto” that ended with the “artist” sawing the legs off a Steinway grand piano?

The different art forms have the task of uniting people around a common culture, each art form in its own way. Art should be a mirror of the people’s experiences and reflect its experiences reality – and its dreams and values. It can debate problems and important issues, but the result must be, in modern terms, cultural added value. In short, you need to gain a better understanding of the problems being raised. You need to get closer to a solution. Moral issues must be illuminated and clarified. Characters and issues must be relevant and credible. Art should not be glossy, but neither should it offend, it should be edifying in the broadest sense of the word. In this context, art should always be aware of its social and moral responsibilities. “Art” that sees its task as destroying the values that form the basis of national and popular unity dissolves the community and thus the precondition for an orderly and organized society, which is the condition for art to exist at all. It adds no value, but plunges mankind into an unmanageable chaos that only benefits the forces that want to destroy us!

Furthermore, art as a whole must be beautiful. People thrive best in beautiful and harmonious surroundings – this makes for harmonious people. Today, this beauty is deliberately trampled underfoot. Humans are accustomed to ugliness. Even the clothes we buy are ugly – with expensive holes in highly visible places. The body is desecrated with tattoos, piercings and the like. People have been purposefully prepared for ugliness, the ugliness that has entered all levels of society with immigration. An unaesthetic element has entered the streets, an element that does not fit into our world. Everywhere, ugliness is the great common denominator, and ugliness leads to physical and mental imbalance – to the loss of civilization as we understand it.

At the same time, the business community is crying out for foreign labor, even though we have over 100,000 unemployed people in Denmark. What the business community means is cheap labor. Moreover, this is a means of mixing populations, eroding borders and creating a large homogeneous global market. It will increase profits! And if we all just speak English, it will save a lot of money and effort. We must never forget that there is a political driving force behind business organizations and that business has always sided with profit at the expense of people’s unity.

All these things are the basic prerequisites for a healthy society to degenerate and head towards destruction.

However, all this is not just happening; it is being created to destroy Europe and the people who come from there. Behind it is a small, but highly influentialethnocentric minority that has set itself the goal of eliminating the majority in order to maneuver more easily in a world that exclusively consist of minorities. Among the authors of all the evils listed above, not least the so-called student revolt of 1968,4 which greatly accelerated the development, or rather dismantling of society that we have witnessed, this minority is represented in large numbers, just as it has a decisive influence on the media world that peddles this madness.

Despite this, the right wing loves this minority and does not tolerate criticism of it. People who, like the Swedish journalist Ingrid Carlquist, have seen the connection between this minority and the dismantling of the homogeneous European nation-states are excluded by nationalist circles who suddenly fear being labeled anti-Semitic. But it is necessary to address this problem, to articulate it, as it is called today. How can it be that the overwhelming majority of this minority vigorously promotes immigration to Europe and its successor states, but does not make the same demands of Israel, which must remain a homogeneous Jewish community? As long as European nationalists refuse to open their eyes and analyze the situation as it is, but continues to talk about Muslims, burkas and all the other symptoms of impending doom, it will remain insignificant and unable to make a difference. The salvation of Denmark and the entire Western culture requires the courage of truth, however unpleasant that truth may seem! It is time to stop dealing only with the symptoms. You have to start calling a spade a spade and a shovel a shovel!

It is not the Palestinians who are destroying us!

Povl H. Riis-Knudsen

Translated by means of AI


  1. Redox and Demos are two notorious Anti-Fascist organizations that gather information and plan attacks on right-wingers. ↩︎
  2. This realization is not new. You find it in the Laws of  Manus, a some 2000-year-old Sanskrit collection of fundamentals for human life, which – by the way – has also been claimed to be one of the foundations of the Quran.   ↩︎
  3. See, for example, the extremely popular Dirch Passer movie “Dust on the Brain” from 1961!! ↩︎
  4. Pat Thomas: Did It! From Yippie To Yuppie: Jerry Rubin, An American Revolutionary. Fantagraphics Books; First Edition. August 29, 2017.
    ↩︎

Saccharine Sentiment and Slitting Throats: How Feelism Triumphs Over Realism in Leftist Propaganda

The central strategy of leftism is very simple and very effective. It runs like this: “Heads we win, tails you lose.” In pursuit and preservation of power, leftists will distort, mutilate and censor reality ad libitum. Or they will simply lie. When the Black criminal George Floyd caused his own death in 2020, the left responded with deadly riots and lying rhetoric about the “murderous racism” of the police. When three little White girls were slaughtered by an imported Black savage in 2024, the leftist politician Humza Yousaf, former First Minister of Scotland, demanded something entirely different:

Our only response to the evil we witnessed in Southport yesterday should be an outpouring of grief for the children and adults killed in such a senseless attack.

If you use such a horrific tragedy to fuel bigotry, then you are the worst of humanity. (Tweet by Humza Yousaf, 30th July 2024)

Yousaf demands that Whites “thinka da paw ickle kiddies” – and do nothing more than that. Leftists like him want grief to be the “only response” because grief is useless. It will not solve the very serious problem of non-White violence against Whites. Leftists don’t simply refuse to care about that problem: they refuse to admit that it exists. It’s real, after all, and leftists don’t believe in realism. Instead, they believe in feelism, in the exploitation of emotion to promote or protect leftist lies. When Number 10 Downing Street, the official residence of the British prime minister, was bathed in pink light “to remember the Southport victims,” the Labour government was using feelism to protect leftist lies. When the Guardian published a cartoon of an entirely imaginary little girl, it was using feelism to promote leftist lies. Here is the cartoon in question:

Saccharine cartoon and soyboy cartoonist: Ben Jennings demands sympathy for an imaginary little brown girl

As Tom Sunić pointed out in a comment at the Occidental Observer: “Excessive sentimentality and hypermoralism are trademarks of the Liberal System.” The cartoonist Ben Jennings was dishonestly exploiting the innocence and helplessness of little girls (note also the slender, unthreatening neck of the caring non-White father). His cartoon says: “Finka da paw ickle kiddies!” But unlike Humza Yousaf, Jennings wants a lot more than that. He’s not just being sentimental, he’s also justifying the harsh repression of the White working-class whom he sneers at the cartoon. It was his leftist response to the White riots of 2024 and to a violent attack on a hotel housing so-called “asylum seekers” in the Yorkshire town of Rotherham. White girls and women have been raped, prostituted, tortured, and murdered by non-White Pakistani Muslims in Rotherham for decades. Jennings has never drawn any cartoons about the rape-jihad in Rotherham or about the murder of three little White girls in Southport. After all, the rapes and murders are real.

Realism vs feelism: the thuggish Trayvon Martin near the time of his death and the much younger Trayvon Martin used in leftist propaganda (images from the Occidental Observer and CNN)

Instead, he has drawn a cartoon about an entirely imaginary little girl. The hotel in Rotherham was housing adult male non-Whites. There were no little girls on the premises. If there had been, they would have been at serious risk of molestation and rape by the non-White men. After all, those men come from the most misogynist and rape-friendly countries on earth. If you want to learn more about the rape-culture and misogyny that flourish in the Third World, the Guardian itself is an excellent source. On the day after the newspaper published that cartoon about an imaginary non-White girl being menaced by White men, it published this story about real non-White women being brutally harmed by non-White men:

She wanted a divorce so her father hacked her legs with an axe: how Pakistan fails women

Sobia Batool Shah is being protected in hospital after a mob of male relatives attacked her in a harrowing case that highlights Pakistan’s epidemic of gender-based violence

The household was fast asleep when the six men broke in. They sought out Sobia Batool Shah, 22, and one of them attacked her with a hatchet, chopping at her limbs in an effort to sever her legs. “He was relentless and must have hit me at least 15 times,” she says. … Shah was attacked by men from her own family – including her father, Syed Mustafa Shah, her uncle and cousins – who broke into the house, in Naushahro Feroze, in Pakistan’s Sindh province, as “punishment” for refusing to withdraw her application to divorce her husband. …

“It’s all about power control,” says Dr Summaiya Syed Tariq, chief police surgeon in Sindh’s capital, Karachi. Syed Tariq, who also heads the Sindh police medico-legal department, has seen hundreds of women physically and mentally abused, raped, burned and murdered over the last 26 years. “We are nurturing abusers who are worse than animals,” she says.

On an average day, the department receives reports of about six cases of sexual violence and 10 to 15 cases of domestic violence across the medico-legal centres at three public hospitals in Karachi. “In the case of sexual violence against minors, my assessment is that for every three cases that come to us, seven more go unreported. And I am not counting the dead bodies that we receive,” Syed Tariq adds.

Gender inequality is a global problem, but Pakistan’s indicators reflect especially alarming rates of disparities and violence faced by women. According to this year’s World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap report, Pakistan is ranked second from bottom out of 146 countries, behind only Sudan. It ranked 164 out of 193 countries on the 2023-24 UN gender inequality index. (“She wanted a divorce so her father hacked her legs with an axe: how Pakistan fails women,” The Guardian, 6th August 2024)

To repeat: “Pakistan is ranked second from bottom out of 146 countries, behind only Sudan.” Guess what? The Guardian had reported on Sudan a few days before. The headline ran like this: “Girls as young as nine gang-raped by paramilitaries in Sudan.” The following report said that “Some of the attacks … were so brutal that women and girls died ‘due to the violence associated with the act of rape’.” Both Pakistan and Sudan are non-White and Muslim. But what would happen if you told a Guardian-reader that the Guardian’s own reporting proves that immigration from Pakistan and Sudan will be very bad for White women in Britain? You will of course be denounced as a disgusting racist and Islamophobe.

“I’m so glad you’re safe here” – Chuck the Cuck schmoozes Sudanese Blacks on Holocaust Memorial Day (image from HMD Memorial Trust)

In other words, you’ll be denounced as a realist, a hate-filled bigot who believes in basing his ideas on objective reality rather than ego-feeding emotion. Leftists believe in feelism, not realism. King Charles III, or Chuck the Cuck as I prefer to call him, is one of those leftists who prefer feelism to realism. He places feeding his own narcissism far above the welfare of his White subjects. Indeed, he doesn’t care in the slightest about the welfare of his White subjects. In March 2023, the BBC reported how Chuck the Cuck had met “former refugees from [the] Sudanese community” and told them “It’s been such a pleasure to meet you all — I’m so glad you’re safe here.” Chuck the Cuck can be “glad” about Blacks invading Britain because he doesn’t have to pay the costs of their presence. But a White woman had to pay those costs in 2019. She nearly died after her skull was shattered during a brutal rape by a Sudanese enricher called Zakarya Etarghi.

Raping White women delighted him

Among the many reasons that Blacks should not be residing in White nations is the stark fact that Black men commit sexual crimes at vastly disproportionate rates. Not only that: they specifically target White women, as the American Black Eldridge Cleaver (1935–1998) boasted way back in 1968:

Rape was an insurrectionary act. It delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the white man’s law, upon his system of values, and that I was defiling his women – and this point, I believe was the most satisfying to me because I was very resentful over the historical fact of how the white man has used the black woman. I felt I was getting revenge. From the site of the act of rape, consternation spreads outwardly in concentric circles. I wanted to send waves of of consternation throughout the white race. (Quote from Cleaver’s Soul on Ice, 1968)

Black men have a genuine “rape culture” directed at White women. But leftists in 1960s America did not care about the rape and murder of White women by Black men. That would have been realism about Blacks and leftists were concerned only with feelism about Blacks. Here’s a definitive example of that leftist feelism in one of the iconic images of the Civil Rights era:

Norman Rockwell slathers schmalz in The Problem We All Live With (1964)

Norman Rockwell (1894-1978) was both an excellent artist and a lying leftist. Like Ben Jennings’ cartoon, his painting dishonestly exploits the innocence and helplessness of little girls. It says: “Finka da paw ickle kiddies!” To be fair, Rockwell’s painting, unlike Jennings’ cartoon, was at least based on a real little girl, the now-sanctified Ruby Bridges (born 1954). But Bridges was not at all representative of Blacks and the threat they posed to Whites. That’s precisely why Rockwell chose her, of course. She’s a helpless little girl who has to be protected by large law-enforcement officers from evil White racists. She just wants to learn, as you can see from the ruler, pencils, and books she’s carrying. But that portrayal of Blacks as simultaneously helpless and studious is a lie. It’s feelism, not realism. In reality, Blacks are disproportionately violent and stupid. The entry of Blacks into White schools was a disaster for Whites and did nothing to improve academic achievement among Blacks.

And although Rockwell’s painting was based on feelism, it does contain one element of realism. The large US marshalls reflect the reality of state force. Whites did not want their schools to be ruined by Blacks. But the state forced desegregation on them even as lying leftists like Norman Rockwell slathered schmalz over the process. Nor did Whites want their neighborhoods to be ruined by Blacks. Again, the state forced desegregation on them. And lying leftists like Norman Rockwell again slathered schmalz. Here’s another of Rockwell’s dishonest pro-Black paintings:

 

Norman Rockwell slathers more schmalz in New Kids in the Neighborhood (1967)

Again Rockwell uses a helpless little girl to propagandize for Blacks. Look at her in her pink dress and pink ribbons, with her adorable little pig-tail. She’s no possible threat. And see the white cat she’s affectionately holding. She loves animals just like the White children facing her with their young black dog. The whiteness of the cat and blackness of dog are symbolic, of course: the Black girl already loves something white even as the White children already love something black. This time there’s a Black boy in the painting too, but he’s slender-necked and goofy-looking. He’s no threat either. He’s carrying a baseball glove, so he loves baseball just like the White boy facing him in a baseball uniform. The Black and White children are the same under the skin, united by their love of pets and baseball. Harmony will surely reign after the moment of mutual uncertainty that Rockwell so charmingly captures.

That’s what the highly dishonest painting says. In reality, harmony didn’t reign after Blacks moved into White neighborhoods. Instead, violent crime reigned. So did noise, vandalism, and street-strewn garbage. In reality, the goofy-looking Black boy in the painting would have been beating up the White boys and, within a year or two, raping the White girl. And the little Black girl would have been torturing the white cat, not treating it with affection. Abuse of animals is characteristic of Blacks, not love of animals. But that’s realism about Blacks and leftists believe in feelism about Blacks. However, there are two sides to leftist feelism. Recall Tom Sunić’s comment about how “Excessive sentimentality and hypermoralism are trademarks of the Liberal System.” He went on to point out that the sentimentality applied only to approved groups, while the moralism justified any level of violence against unapproved groups: the Royal Air Force and United States Air Force “firebombed German cities during WWII – considered lairs of nonhumans.”

You can see those two aspects of leftism in the Guardian journalist Marina Hyde. She no doubt nodded with moist-eyed approval over Ben Jennings’ cartoon about the imaginary little brown girl. But a few years before she had sniggered and joked about the White nationalist Eugene Terreblanche being hacked to death by Blacks in South Africa. Countless other Guardianistas will have nodded with moist-eyed approval over the cartoon. And some of them were in the crowd that cheered, clapped, and laughed when the non-White Labour councillor Ricky Jones recommended a robust response to the “the disgusting Nazi fascists” who don’t like little White girls being slaughtered by Black savages. Jones said: “We need to cut all their froats [throats] and get rid of ’em all.” He then paused to let the cheers and laughter die away before leading the crowd in a chant of “Free, free Palestine!” Here’s a still from a video of the incident:

Leftists cheer and laugh as a non-White Labour councillor recommends throat-cutting for the White working-class

Note the two White woman grinning with approval as they stand next to the aspiring throat-cutter. The woman in glasses is wearing a tabard for Amnesty International, a self-proclaimed humanitarian organization that is resolutely opposed to violence. Out of sight she’s holding another of the SWP placards that say “SMASH FASCISM & RACISM By any means necessary.” The SWP is the Socialist Workers Party, a Trotskyist cult that hates White workers even more than the so-called Labour party does. When a senior male apparatchik in the SWP was accused of rape in 2010, the SWP responded not by reporting the matter to the police but by smearing the female accuser and clearing the male accused in a kangaroo court.

As ever, you can see that leftists are interested in only two things: pursuing power and feeding their narcissism. They are not interested in helping the groups they claim to care about. And they are certainly not interested in helping the White working-class. In this article I’ve discussed a leftist drawing a saccharine cartoon about a non-existent little brown girl menaced by the White working-class. And I’ve discussed another leftist recommending that his comrades “cut the throats” of the White working-class. Those are the two complementary sides of one evil ideology: “Excessive sentimentality and hypermoralism are trademarks of the Liberal System.”

The Move to Seek Fellowship and Common Values on the Right

As someone who has moved twice to seek fellowship and a sense of safety in a country hostile to people on the right, I can totally relate to the people described in the article below, except that the people discussed here are serious Christians—true believers. They’re not just “cultural Christians” like me —i.e., someone who admires some aspects and influence of the Church in European history, such as the strong Christian identities of those who fought in the Spanish Reconquista, but who deplores the recent descent of  so much of mainstream Christianity into wokeness and subservience to the dominant, essentially anti-Christian culture. Many of these people doubtless imagine a Western European Reconquista that would return Christianity (and perhaps implicitly at least, Whiteness) to the center of Western culture.

But, despite these differences, we have pretty much everything else in common, including place of residence and a desire to fit into a community with shared values. The main places mentioned here are Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, a small-town near Nashville, and suburban Dallas-Fort Worth. These locales are all in red states, at least for now, until the immigration deluge has its intended consequence of turning the country into a White minority nation saturated with people who identify as LGBTUQIA+ and the accompanying propaganda that is attempting to maximize the number of people with these identities. This propaganda is being blared throughout the educational system and all the major media. It’s striking that in the article, a wife exchanges teacups with her husband so that she has the more feminine one. These people uphold traditional notions of sex roles. They seem to understand that biologically based sex differences are real and that its adaptive (or perhaps part of God plan) to adhere to them. And notice the photo of the girl doing embroidery.

But it’s one thing to be in a conducive area, it’s still important to develop social relationships with people you can trust. In my case I am part of a small, all-male group sharing the same values and trying to develop projects that would bring more people like ourselves to our area and to similar areas throughout the country. I realize that people often can’t simply up and move, but many people can. And for long-term happiness, I highly recommend living among like-minded, culturally and ethnically homogeneous people is essential. Robert Putnam, whose research on increasing loneliness in American society and the detrimental effects of multi-culturalism on community (e.g., lack of willingness to contribute to public goods) is well known, realizes the importance of bonding with similar others although, like the mainstream liberal Jewish community he identifies with, he is entirely in favor of the multicultural experiment.

The people described here are successful economically, and they are well educated, including some refugees from the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank, More importantly, they are highly fertile, with intact families with 4–8 children (likely with more being planned). They are thus part of the hypothesized demographic revolution described by Edward Dutton and J.O. Rayner-Hilles in which cultural conservatives will become dominant because of their fertility, although our hostile elites will do their best to import the multiethnic, non-White mélange that they favor to ultimately dispossess them.

These people are organizing into small groups. They are not the types to take to the streets with their guns. And I suppose they tune in to mainstream conservative media like FoxNews which will never educate them on the importance of ethnicity in human affairs, much less inform them of the reality of how a very influential Jewish elite is well on their way to shaping the country into something they loathe. An example from the article:

In Mr. Kressin’s new hometown in Idaho, the streets are clean and people leave their doors unlocked. His family lives in a house they can afford to own, with a white picket fence and room for a trampoline in the yard. In the cozy living room, an upright piano stands in the corner, and hymnals and classic novels line shelves on the wall.

“Many in our generation are very, very much longing for rootedness,” he said. “And they were raised in an era where that was really not valued very much.”

On a weekday morning this spring, he took a brisk morning stroll out his front door and up Tubbs Hill, with wildflowers sprinkled along the path and soaring views of the crystalline lake below. At his house afterward, Lauren Kressin, who was pregnant with the couple’s eighth child, served peach tea in tastefully mismatched china, quietly switching cups with him so he would have the “less feminine” one, she said with a smile.

Starting over in Idaho, Mr. Kressin said later, was part of a project so long term that he does not expect to see its conclusion. “The old landed aristocracy in England would plant oak trees that would only really mature in 400 years,” he said. “Who knows what the future holds, but if you don’t even start building a family culture, you’re doomed to fail.”

But of course, this being the New York Times, it’s mandatory to haul in an academic who is hostile to all this:

The circle’s critics say they present a cleaned-up version of some of the darkest elements of the right, including a cultural homogeneity to the point of racism and an openness to using violence to achieve political ends.

“It’s this idea of organizing discontent at the local level and building a network that over the next decade or three decades or even half-century would just keep moving the Republican Party further and further rightward, and mobilizing voters in discontented parts of the country, a lot of them men,” said Damon Linker, a senior lecturer in political science at the University of Pennsylvania, who has written critically of the crowd. “It’s a highbrow version of the militia movement.”

The Smug, Self-Righteous Damon Linker

Yes, nothing worse than being among people like yourself. People who share your culture and your values, and yes (God forbid!), even your ethnic background (unmentioned here of course) — a sure sign of racism to your garden-variety journalist-academic like Linker.

***

The article is well worth reading: New York Times: “Why a New Conservative Brain Trust Is Resettling Across America.”

The Claremont Institute has been located in Southern California since its founding in the late 1970s. From its perch in the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains, it has become a leading intellectual center of the pro-Trump right.

Without fanfare, however, some of Claremont’s key figures have been leaving California to find ideologically friendlier climes. Ryan P. Williams, the think tank’s president, moved to a suburb in the Dallas-Fort Worth area in early April.

His friend and Claremont colleague Michael Anton — a California native who played a major role in 2016 to convince conservative intellectuals to vote for Mr. Trump — moved to the Dallas area two years ago. The institute’s vice president for operations and administration has moved there, too. Others are following. Mr. Williams opened a small office in another Dallas-Fort Worth suburb in May, and said he expects to shrink Claremont’s California headquarters.

“A lot of us share a sense that Christendom is unraveling,” said Skyler Kressin, 38, who is friendly with the Claremont leaders and shares many of their concerns. He left Southern California to move to Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, in 2020. “We need to be engaged, we need to be building.”

A bearded man looking to the left, partly in sunlight, partly in shadow, in front of a modernistic fountain.
“There’s an interesting shift going on to Texas. I think there’s a renewed sense of seeking community and shared values and culture amongst right-wing folks.” said Ryan Williams, president of the Claremont Institute. Credit…Shelby Tauber for The New York Times

As Mr. Trump barrels through his third presidential campaign, his supporters buoyed by last week’s debate, many of the young activists and thinkers who have risen under his influence see themselves as part of a project that goes far beyond electoral politics. Rather, it is a movement to reclaim the values of Western civilization as they see it. Their ambitions paint a picture of the country they want should Mr. Trump return to the White House — one driven by their version of Christian values, with larger families and fewer immigrants. They foresee an aesthetic landscape to match, with more classical architecture and a revived conservative art movement and men wearing traditional suits.

Their vision includes stronger local leadership and a withered national “administrative state,” prompting them to celebrate last week when the Supreme Court effectively ended the “Chevron deference,” which could lead to the weakening of thousands of federal rules on the environment, worker protection and beyond.

Fed up by what they see as an increasingly hostile and disordered secular culture, many are moving to what they view as more welcoming states and regions, battling for American society from conservative “fortresses.”

Some see themselves as participants in and advocates for a “great sort,” a societal reordering in which conservatives and liberals naturally divide into more homogenous communities and areas. (And some, including Mr. Kressin, are simultaneously chasing the cheaper costs of living and safer neighborhoods that fuel many ordinary moves.

Former President Donald Trump puts a medal around the neck of Ryan Williams of the Claremont Institute.
Ryan Williams is presented the National Humanities Medal by President Donald Trump on behalf of The Claremont Institute during a ceremony at the White House in November 2019.Credit…Samuel Corum for The New York Times

The year Mr. Kressin moved to Idaho, he and Mr. Williams were part of an informal conversation at Claremont about the need for new institutions in what some hope will be a rejuvenated American society. The idea was a “fraternal community,” as one leader put it, that prioritized in-person meetings. The result was the all-male Society for American Civic Renewal, an invitation-only social organization reserved for Christians. The group has about 10 lodges in various states of development so far, with membership ranging between seven and several dozen people.

The group’s goals, according to leaders, include identifying “local elites” across the country and cultivating “potential appointees and hires for an aligned future regime” — by which they mean a second Trump presidency, but also a future they describe in sweeping and sometimes apocalyptic terms. Some warn of a coming societal breakdown that will require armed, right-minded citizens to restore order.

The group’s ties to Claremont gives it access to influence in a future Trump administration: Mr. Anton served on Mr. Trump’s National Security Council, and a Claremont board member, John Eastman, advised Mr. Trump’s 2020 election campaign. He faces criminal charges in Arizona and Georgia over schemes to keep Mr. Trump in power after he lost that race.

Their rhetoric can sound expansive to the point of opacity. “As the great men of the West bequeathed their deeds to us, so must we leave a legacy for our children,” the group’s website proclaims. “The works raised by our hands to this end will last long after we are buried.”

Their output, so far, looks more modest. Mr. Kressin’s home chapter has hosted an expert in menswear, who exhorted members to dress in a “classical American style,” and a screening and discussion of the 2003 naval adventure film “Master and Commander.” The men socialize outside of meetings and pass each other business.

Two adults and six children out for a walk, They are dressed neatly in attire appropriate for school or work.
Skyler Kressin and his family moved to Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, from Southern California in 2020.Credit…Margaret Albaugh for The New York Times

The circle’s critics say they present a cleaned-up version of some of the darkest elements of the right, including a cultural homogeneity to the point of racism and an openness to using violence to achieve political ends.

“It’s this idea of organizing discontent at the local level and building a network that over the next decade or three decades or even half-century would just keep moving the Republican Party further and further rightward, and mobilizing voters in discontented parts of the country, a lot of them men,” said Damon Linker, a senior lecturer in political science at the University of Pennsylvania, who has written critically of the crowd. “It’s a highbrow version of the militia movement.”

In its first two years, leaders said, SACR received significant funding from Charles Haywood, a former business owner in Indiana. Mr. Haywood seems to delight in being an online provocateur. He has called the riot on Jan. 6, 2021, an “electoral justice protest” and praised the racist 1973 novel “The Camp of the Saints.”

Posting on the platform X last month, he wrote that foreign-born citizens should be deported for offenses including “working for Left causes.” Other leaders attribute the apocalyptic tone of the group’s founding documents to Mr. Haywood, who declined to comment.

A young girl, photographed from the neck down, in conservative attire, sewing next to a table full of books.
An interior scene in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. Many of the young conservatives who have risen under Mr. Trump’s influence see themselves as part of a movement to reclaim the values of Western civilization as they see it. Credit…Margaret Albaugh for The New York Times

Members of the society are young, mostly white-collar (and mostly white), and often wealthy. Some have left elite institutions to start their own firms and invest in conservative-leaning ventures.

Josh Abbotoy, the executive director of American Reformer, a Dallas-based journal that serves as an informal in-house publication for the movement, is moving to a small town outside Nashville this week with his wife and four children. Through his new professional network, he is raising funds to develop a corridor of conservative havens between Middle Tennessee and Western Kentucky, where he has also purchased hundreds of acres of property. He expects about 50 families to move to the Tennessee town — which he declined to identify — in the next year, including people who work from home for tech companies and other corporations.

Mr. Abbotoy is betting big on the revitalization of the rural South more broadly, as white-collar flexibility meets conservative disillusionment with liberal institutions and cities. He sees the Tennessee project as a “playbook” for future developments in which neighbors share conservative social values and enjoy, he suggested, a kind of ambient Christian culture.

“I personally would happily pay high H.O.A. fees to be in a neighborhood where I have to drive by an architecturally significant church every day, and I can hear church bells,” he said.

The Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which legalized same-sex marriage nationally, was a watershed moment for Mr. Abbotoy and other conservatives’ understanding of how quickly the ground could shift under their feet. It is a decision that signaled to them the onset of an era that the conservative Christian writer Aaron Renn — who has spoken at the fraternal society’s events — calls “negative world,” an influential concept that describes a culture in which “being known as a Christian is a social negative, particularly in the elite domains of ­society.”

Image

A man in a gray sweater looks out the window from a sparsely furnished office.
Josh Abbotoy, director of the American Reformer, is counting on the revitalization of the rural South as white-collar flexibility meets conservative disillusionment with liberal institutions and cities. Credit…Shelby Tauber for The New York Times

Mr. Abbotoy was raised in an evangelical culture that encouraged conservative Christians to go out into “the world” and influence secular institutions, including corporations and universities. But that approach, which defined the last several generations of mainstream evangelicalism, feels increasingly untenable to people in his circle.

Mr. Abbotoy, who graduated from Harvard Law School, left a job with a major infrastructure company in 2021 and came to work for Nate Fischer, a Dallas venture capitalist and prolific networker whose firm invests in conservative projects and opposes “DEI/ESG and the bureaucratization of American business culture.” Mr. Fischer is the president of SACR’s Dallas chapter.

Andrew Beck, a brand consultant for conservative politicians and entities including SACR and Claremont, moved with his wife and their now six children, along with his parents and five of his siblings and their families, from Staten Island to suburbs north of Dallas in 2020. Almost 30 members of the family now live in the same area, just as they did in New York.

“Something is shifting that’s tectonic,” said Mr. Beck, who wrote a widely shared essay on “re-Christianizing America” for Claremont’s online magazine the American Mind. “It’s not so much about staking out some stronghold where you can live in a cocoon, it’s to be a part of a place you can truly consider to be home.”

Members must be male, belong to a “Trinitarian Christian” church, a broad category that includes Catholics and Protestants, but not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Members must also describe themselves as “unhyphenated Americans,” a reference to Theodore Roosevelt’s speech urging the full assimilation of immigrants.

A stack of copies of the publication, the Claremont Review of Books.
An issue of the Claremont Review of Books from winter 2016-2017.Credit…Brad Torchia for The New York Times

The group’s interdenominational membership reflects the fact that in the Trump era, conservative Christianity is increasingly becoming a cultural and political identity, with theological differences falling to the wayside and Christianity serving as a kind of generic expression of rebellion against modernity. A significant minority of members are Catholic, including Mr. Kressin. The group also includes Presbyterians, Baptists and charismatics.

In Mr. Kressin’s new hometown in Idaho, the streets are clean and people leave their doors unlocked. His family lives in a house they can afford to own, with a white picket fence and room for a trampoline in the yard. In the cozy living room, an upright piano stands in the corner, and hymnals and classic novels line shelves on the wall.

“Many in our generation are very, very much longing for rootedness,” he said. “And they were raised in an era where that was really not valued very much.”

On a weekday morning this spring, he took a brisk morning stroll out his front door and up Tubbs Hill, with wildflowers sprinkled along the path and soaring views of the crystalline lake below. At his house afterward, Lauren Kressin, who was pregnant with the couple’s eighth child, served peach tea in tastefully mismatched china, quietly switching cups with him so he would have the “less feminine” one, she said with a smile.

Starting over in Idaho, Mr. Kressin said later, was part of a project so long term that he does not expect to see its conclusion. “The old landed aristocracy in England would plant oak trees that would only really mature in 400 years,” he said. “Who knows what the future holds, but if you don’t even start building a family culture, you’re doomed to fail.”