The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation

/23 Comments/in , /by

Graph
The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation
Max Hartshorn, Artem Kaznatcheev and Thomas Shultz (2013)
Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 16 (3) 7

Abstract

Recent agent-based computer simulations suggest that ethnocentrism, often thought to rely on complex social cognition and learning, may have arisen through biological evolution. From a random start, ethnocentric strategies dominate other possible strategies (selfish, traitorous, and humanitarian) based on cooperation or non-cooperation with in-group and out-group agents. Here we show that ethnocentrism eventually overcomes its closest competitor, humanitarianism, by exploiting humanitarian cooperation across group boundaries as world population saturates. Selfish and traitorous strategies are self-limiting because such agents do not cooperate with agents sharing the same genes. Traitorous strategies fare even worse than selfish ones because traitors are exploited by ethnocentrics across group boundaries in the same manner as humanitarians are, via unreciprocated cooperation. By tracking evolution across time, we find individual differences between evolving worlds in terms of early humanitarian competition with ethnocentrism, including early stages of humanitarian dominance. Our evidence indicates that such variation, in terms of differences between humanitarian and ethnocentric agents, is normally distributed and due to early, rather than later, stochastic differences in immigrant strategies.

Comment: Ethnocentrism among Whites has been pathologized for decades, while humanitarianism among Whites is constantly encouraged by eliciting spasms of guilt about the White past of colonialism, conquest, slavery, etc., as well as by eliciting the closely related emotion of empathy for non-Whites, particularly refugees and immigrants. Since this anti-White war is massively incentivized, there is no shortage of traitors and selfish Whites willing to aid the ethnocentric strategies of others by, e.g., cooperating with the Israel Lobby, being a cuckservative talking head on Fox News, having a well-paid position with a pro-immigration group, or being a university administrator promoting anti-White indoctrination and special programs for non-Whites — among a myriad of others, even though these are losing strategies in the long run for their people.

At the same time, the ethnocentrism of non-Whites is encouraged and is glaringly obvious. It’s not hard to see the end result.

Science and Politics in Academe: Good Research is Not Enough

/40 Comments/in , /by

At first glance, few people are as disagreeable as individuals with a touch of Asperger’s. Basically, they are high-IQ guys who tend to intuitively grasp things like logic, mathematics, and mechanics, yet are remarkably inept at socializing with other people. Because of their inborn characteristics, people on the Asperger’s end of the spectrum are often “nerds” who spend far more time facing a computer or slaving away in a lab than with other people. We have all seen The Social Network (2010) and its portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg’s alleged personality: a strange mix of raw genius, social clumsiness and lack of scruples, the latter allowing Zuckerberg to rip off the Winklevosses and betray his best friend Eduardo Saverin according to the wish of the gleeful manipulator Sean Parker. (Notice that the shared Jewishness of Zuckerberg and Saverin didn’t prevent the former from betraying the latter. That community has its breakdowns in ethnic networking too.)

Dark Enlightenment figure Nick Land claims that the biodiversity people — those scorned as “racists” by the mainstream media and parasitic class — are endowed with low agreeableness. They tend to have “low verbal inhibition, low empathy, and low social integration, resulting in chronic maladaptation to group expectations. …  Mild autism is typical, sufficient to approach their fellow beings in a spirit of detached, natural-scientific curiosity, but not so advanced as to compel total cosmic disengagement.”

There is a grain of truth here. Trying to understand one’s fellows from the objective, disinterested point of view of science is not a behavior everyone will be attracted to or able to attain. Calm reflection about abstract principles is different from both blind habit and the passionate defense of some dogma — or one’s people. The pure scientist, after all, can never “take his own side.” He must forever be purely objective.

Honest — sometimes excessively; balanced in his epistemology to the point of favoring the groundbreaking — or plain truth in general — to popular dogmas; naively believing that his grand abstractions are an excellent recipe for society, like the Enlightenment thinker Condorcet who believed in an unlimited and exponential progress in future history. Read more

Britain’s migrant invasion summer: Traitors and incentives for treason

/32 Comments/in , /by

What do you do when a story gets so big that you can ignore it no longer — you police the language around it by deploying those tried and trusty weapons; shame and demonization.

Prime Minister David Cameron learned this lesson the hard way on the unlikely location of the roof of the Stock Exchange in Ho Chi Minh City when he was finally cornered into saying something about the growing deluge of illegal immigrants, traversing the English channel on the back of lorries and trains, overwhelming Britain’s flimsy border defences and disappearing into the English countryside.

Look, this is very testing, I accept that, because you have got a swarm of people coming across the Mediterranean, seeking a better life, wanting to come to Britain because Britain has got jobs, it’s got a growing economy, it’s an incredible place to live.

Then the world tumbled in on him.  The Refugee Council, the leader of the Labour Party and many others fell on him like jackals on a wounded antelope — all because he used the “dehumanising” word “swarmed.” The BBC, Mirror Telegraph and Guardian  thought the PM’s language angle so hugely important that they diverted their attention from the real crisis of thousands of immigrants trying to illegally get into Britain every night.   Read more

“Jew baiter” Obama: The same people who brought you Iraq are opposing the Iran deal

/24 Comments/in , , , /by

Sometimes Jewish comments related to anti-Semitism seem so unhinged that they surprise even me.  A Tablet article describes the meeting between Obama and a raft of Jewish leaders on the Iran deal (“Obama to Jewish Leaders: Lay Off the Iran Deal, and I Will Lay Off You“).

Words have consequences, and when they come from official sources, they can be even more dangerous, the president was told. The community worked hard to keep it from getting personal and didn’t make it specific to him. The president complained about the lobbying, and said some of the same people who brought you Iraq are opposing the Iran deal. He was told those characterizations are not accurate. Jewish lobbyists didn’t support the Iraq war.

Another participant who also asked to remain anonymous told me that some people expressed discomfort with  “how the debate is being framed—framed as, ‘if you are a critic of the deal, you’re for war.’ The implication is that if it looks like the Jewish community is responsible for Congress voting down the deal, it will look like the Jewish community is leading us off to another war in the Middle East.”

Read more

Commemorating British Casualties of Jewish Terrorism, 1944–1948

/39 Comments/in /by

Normally, a gathering of British nationalists in central London, proudly bearing English banners and Union Flags, would be met with a horde of screaming demonstrators bussed in from far and wide. But no disturbance took place last weekend when such a group of patriots assembled near Trafalgar Square and the reason is not hard to discern.

For such interference would have meant drawing attention to a historic episode the British government and the Jewish community leaders would most likely wish forgotten — the killing of 784 British police officers, servicemen, Crown servants and civilian staff by Jewish terrorists in the Palestine Mandate crisis between 1944–48.

So that is why, although every broadcast and print outlet and every political party was circulated with a press release, there was a total media blackout.  It was a far cry from the anti-Shomrim demonstration against the establishment of a sectarian Jewish police force a month ago.

All par for the course. The British government’s attempt to “forget” the sacrifice of these servicemen and dump them down the memory hole is very reminiscent of another similarly embarrassing episode, the murderous Israeli attack on the USS Liberty in 1967. Read more

Philip Giraldi on Jewish Power: The War Inside the Beltway

/86 Comments/in , /by

Chuck-Schumer-20150630211633

Philip Giraldi has long been an excellent observer of the Israel Lobby and its power over the American political establishment. It strikes me that his latest column, “The War Inside the Beltway,” breaks new ground for him with his comments on the wider context of Jewish power in America.

I was watching CBS morning news last Wednesday, the day after it was announced that convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard would be released from prison in November. The “real news,” as the network describes it, recounted what Israeli officials had said about releasing Pollard, which was basically “all right, finally…but we still have to destroy Iran.” You have to hand it to the Israelis, they certainly know how to accept a bribe completely ungraciously.

That straight from the heart advice from America’s best friend and closest ally was followed almost immediately by an interview segment with former CIA Director James Woolsey. Woolsey obligingly informed the interviewer that Pollard had in fact not disclosed any classified information, completely contradicting the results of the Pentagon investigation that had been conducted after the fact. Woolsey is, for what it’s worth, a fully owned parasite hovering in a regular neocon orbit who spoke at the recent “Stop Iran” rally in New York City. He has also claimed falsely that Israel does not spy on the United States. So why would anyone sane pick Woolsey to provide commentary instead of someone who actually knew what he was talking about? To mitigate the Israeli role in spying on the U.S., of course. It had to be a deliberate decision.

Right. I forgot about Woolsey in my article on cuckservatives when I listed Randy Scheunemann, John Bolton and Frank Gaffney as cuckservatives who are part of the neocon foreign policy establishment. I am sure there are many others. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard and Fox News comes to mind. Again, the key to understanding Jewish power is that they are able to establish incredible infrastructure giving career opportunities for ambitious, unscrupulous non-Jews willing to promote Jewish interests at the expense of their own people. Giraldi’s term ‘parasite’ is particularly apt given the cuckservative meme — the term ‘cuckold’ derives from the cuckoo birds’ practice of parasitizing other species by getting them to rear its young. Woolsey et al. are willing cucks.

The link from ‘parasite’ goes to a 2014 article in Counterpunch by David Macary stating “it was reported that former CIA Director James Woolsey, forced to resign during the Clinton administration for his bungling of the Aldrich Ames affair, was going around telling people that the reason Jonathan Pollard, the notorious Israeli spy, was still in prison after 29 years is because the U.S. government is anti-Semitic. In short, Pollard remains in prison because he’s a Jew.” Woolsey is a cuckservative’s cuckservative.  Read more

Orbán: “The real threat is from the heart of Africa”

/51 Comments/in , /by

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has given another hard-hitting speech on the threat posed by multiculturalism and immigration to the future of European nations. Speaking at his Fidesz party’s summer student camp, the Hungarian leader argued that African immigration was an existential threat to European nationhood and civilization. He also denounced international complicity through silence and censorship in the crimes committed by immigrants, particularly citing the ongoing Swedish rape crisis. The speech, while given some coverage in mainstream media, merits closer examination.

Orbán clearly revels in slaughtering the sacred cows of political correctness, joking at the beginning of the speech that he had been looking for something which “representatives of today’s western ideological mainstream could find sufficiently offensive.” (Last year, that was his concept of “illiberal democracy.”)

Orbán notes a number of incredible events in recent years: Europe’s inability to stop a continuous wave of African and Muslim migrants, proposals to transform French churches into mosques, the United States’ systematic spying on European leaders, and these same leaders continuing to cozy up with Washington despite this.

In all this, Orbán recognizes contemporary immigration as an event of epochal significance:

At times there are phenomena which enable us to understand a given era, and which encapsulate its essence. In our lifetimes, modern mass migration is just such a phenomenon. Looking through this window, we can see the whole world. It is by this that the world is framed, and it is through this that we can understand where we are and what awaits us.

Read more