Wise men get it wrong. The USA offers no refuge from evolution.

20220915

Good minds have been thinking long and deeply about how to reverse the decline of the white race in the United States.  It continues inexorably and is accelerating.  Few proposed measures are acceptable enough even to be tried.  Those that are, such as homeschooling, get little government support and are widely resisted.

It is time to reframe the question.  We need to accept that for a vast number of reasons America can never return to what it was.  We must focus more narrowly on our individual interests. 

Our ancestors came to a new continent to safeguard their genetic interests.  They established a new country "for us and our posterity."  For their descendants.  Their bloodlines.  Their people.  There wasn't much argument about who "their people" were.  First and foremost, those from the British Isles.  Though some like Benjamin Franklin caviled, they recognized a commonality with other northern Europeans – Germans, French and Nordic types.

Though some miscegenation with Indians and blacks occurred, there was no need to articulate who "our people" were.  Intimately familiar with breeding animals, colonists applied the same insights to their fellow humans.  Social scientists Luigi Cavalli-Sforza, Frank Salter and Robert Putnam of our era have codified what they knew instinctively.  Like every animal species, our most fundamental drive is to pass on our genome.  That is best done by selecting a mate and living among similar people, a group that will work together to defend their common genetic interests.

Our colonial ancestors lived among and married very similar people.  After a couple of generations of speaking English, language and cultural differences between my Mayflower and German forebears had faded, revealing how closely related they had actually been.  Revolutionary America was English and German, with smatterings of Dutch, French and other Europeans.

After them followed dilution.  First came wooden boats from other parts of Europe as well as Africa, then steamship-borne migrants from other continents, and in recent decades flotillas of airborne asylum seekers from every misbegotten pocket of humanity throughout the globe.

As a result, I have less in common genetically with my fellow Americans than with Eastern Europeans.  My recent fellow Americans – Hispanics, Muslims, blacks, Indians, Jews, northeast and southeast Asians and American Indians – certainly know this to be true.  They increasingly display an atavistic aversion to us white people. Only we whites sustain the pretense that we are brothers under the skin.  Those dwelling within skins of a different hue know better.

My Revolutionary era ancestors owed an allegiance to the United States because it was their people.  The people have changed – they are no longer us.   What allegiance do we owe to a historical name, historical documents that are openly flouted, and to fellow citizens whose feelings towards us range from indifference to outright animosity?  Not much.

Reframing the question, we must ask how we can best satisfy our genetic interests.  Our desire to marry people like ourselves, and raise children to share our culture and defend people like us.  This question has an answer.  Leave the United States, that place that has made itself alien, and position ourselves among people who are more like us.

Let's examine what the wise men of our generation have been saying about the present and future condition of our people within the United States.  I consider Steve Sailer to be a pretty smart fellow.  He has written this article about the differences between two other guys that I greatly respect, Christopher Rufo and Jared Taylor.  About Rufo he writes:

Rufo has now written an essay for City Journal entitled “No to the Politics of ‘Whiteness’: The case against right-wing racialism.” He has a demonstrated track record of political acuity, so it’s worth listening to his opinion:

As a practical matter, too, the politics of colorblind equality is vastly superior to the politics of “white identity.” Whatever one’s judgment on mass immigration, America is now a mixed, multiracial republic, and any successful political movement will need to build a coalition beyond any single racial group. The good news for conservatives—and a point against arguments for demographic determination—is that many racial minorities, most notably Latinos and Asians, oppose critical race theory-style discrimination, support the principle of colorblind equality, and have begun to shift politically to the right. By contrast, the advocates of “white racial consciousness” have a track record with the opposite results: from the late author Sam Francis to the website VDARE, such efforts have failed to garner an audience, much less a political coalition, beyond the fringes. Such a politics is perceived, rightly, as victim-oriented and antithetical to deeply held American principles.

And about Taylor and American Renaissance, Sailer notes that he wrote in 2005:

As Talleyrand might have said, “White Nationalism is worse than a crime, it’s a mistake.”… Any political philosophy aimed at whites today has to be phrased in high-minded terms because mud-wrestling with Al Sharpton over the racial spoils system simply strikes many whites as too demeaning to bother with…. White Americans don’t want to act like the rest of the world, as the white nationalists advise them to, they want to act like white Americans. They don’t want to submit their individual freedom to their extended families, they want to marry whom they want to marry and then focus on their nuclear families. They want the law to treat them not as members of a clan but as individual and equal citizens under the law.

However, Sailer is having second thoughts, as he expresses deeper into the article:

On the other hand, it’s now 2023, eighteen years later, and my ideology of citizenism has not exactly swept the country, no matter how sensible people find it on the vanishingly rare occasions when it’s explained to them. Moreover, I’m constantly denounced as a white nationalist or a white supremacist, no matter what I’ve said in the past. And the gentlemanly Jared Taylor, even as we are approaching one year into Elon Musk’s ownership of Twitter or X or whatever it’s called now, is still banned.

Meanwhile, racist antiwhite hate has become mainstream media fodder. Anybody who tries to defend whites from the ethnic slurs of Ibram X. Kendi and the like is denounced as racist. Granted, there’s at present a vague impression that it’s not in Joe Biden’s reelection interest to bring up Black Lives Matters at the moment, but the fact that black deaths by homicide went up 44 percent and black deaths by motor vehicle accident rose 39 percent from 2019 to 2021 is silenced as inconvenient.

Uncharacteristically, Sailer concludes his article without a conclusion. In the place where an author should offer a solution, he proposes none. He is absolutely right not to fake it.

Peachy Keenan, whose book I reviewed a couple of days ago, is likewise rather wan in looking for a solution by encouraging people to marry and have children. David Cole, the Republican Party Animal, offers yet another article about how what passes for conservatism in the United States is failing and bound to continue to fail.

These people are looking for political and social solutions to an evolutionary problem.  They hope to find it within the context of the United States. It cannot be done. The evolutionary problem, as Ed Dutton has written in just about every one of his many books, the latest of which is Breeding the Human Herd, we are getting stupider.  Furthermore, intelligence aside, being diluted by so many non-European people, the United States and Europe have drifted away from the altruism that brought the cohesion that ensured America's success.

Darwin had a key insight a century and a half ago in The Descent of Man.

It must not be forgotten that although a high standard of morality gives but a slight or no advantage to each individual man and his children over other men of the same tribe, yet that an increase in the number of well-endowed men and an advancement in the standard of morality will certainly give an immense advantage to one tribe over another. A tribe including many members who, from possessing a high degree of the spirit of patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy were always ready to aid one another, and to sacrifice themselves for the common good, would be victorious over most other tribes, and this would be natural selection. At all times throughout the world tribes have supplanted other tribes; and as morality is one important element in their success, the standard of morality and the number of well-endowed men will thus everywhere tend to rise and increase.

The key word is tribe.  A breeding group of altruistic people will prevail over breeding groups of non-altruists. This is how Europeans came to dominate the world in Darwin's time. What happened subsequently might be called the tragedy of altruism.  We became detribalized.  Deracinated.  In doing so we lost our altruism and our magic.

Darwin's quote says that morality was no advantage to the individual.  Game theory shows that altruism is disadvantageous.  David Sloan Wilson, writing in Does Altruism Exist, agrees.  He writes that “Selfishness beats altruism, but altruistic groups beat selfish groups. All else is commentary.”  Succinctly put, the United States is no longer an altruistic group, and we whites are slowly learning that others' selfishness beats our altruism.  White teachers in bad neighborhoods are disrespected and beaten up.  Whites acting as good Samaritans get robbed and killed.

Democracy assumes a level of altruism and sufficient intelligence to appreciate its benefits. Enough to realize that the advantages outweigh the sacrifice involved in sharing for the common good. Our society now lacks both the intelligence and the altruism that made democracy work.  Democracy requires that you trust your fellow man. Skepticism about such trust, even when it was much more abundant, was the reason the Founding Fathers created a republic instead of a democracy.  The republic they created has devolved into exactly the kind of democracy that the Greeks feared – a dictatorship by the propertyless masses, cajoled and controlled by unscrupulous oligarchs.

The American electorate does not have a stake in the future of the country. The native-born have few children, and immigrants retain stronger ties to their countries of origin. Many simply don't care what happens to the US. They will take what they can while they can.  Unlike us white Americans, most of them have someplace to run when it all collapses.

The Scandinavian countries were exemplars of democracy. The Männerbund - see Kevin MacDonald - evolved among these Norsemen.  They accorded one another significant equality regardless of their parentage. Opportunity was based on ability. Norsemen respected each other's property, especially wives.  Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland and Finland worked.  It turns out to be the people rather than the political system that made them exceptional.  Democracy came naturally to a people with a genetic endowment of altruism. Widespread African and Middle Eastern immigration has exposed, in a rather dramatic manner, the flaws in their logic.

A Scandinavian mentality was evident in 1944 in Gunnar and Alva Myrdahl's An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy. They came from a country where people were more or less equal, where democracy and socialism seemed to work. They could not conceive that the people of the races in the United States were different. Their intellectual arrogance blinded them to the wisdom of the white Southerners who had understood the dilemma since Thomas Jefferson and Alexis de Tocqueville had written about it more than a century earlier.  Their book was one of the cornerstones of America's civil rights movement, almost every aspect of which, however indifferent the result for the intended beneficiaries, has been detrimental to the interests of white citizens.

Altruism, propagated throughout our own societies, led to the creation of welfare systems that enabled the less fit to breed. Per Edward Dutton, in several books including At Our Wits End and Breeding the Human Herd, each successive generation since Darwin's time have been not only less intelligent, but less well endowed with the sociability genes that bind our societies together. Altruism, which was key to our rise to dominance, has also been our undoing.

Per Dutton, not only have we evolved to be less intelligent, but since purifying natural selection ended when the wealth and health brought about by the Industrial Revolution ended infant mortality, our gene pool has accumulated a vast number of deleterious mutations affecting our personalities.  Aberrant personalities are permitted to breed.  State subsidies allow their progeny to reach adulthood and generate their own spawn.  Meanwhile, the best and brightest among us (looking at you, dear reader) are not passing on their healthy genes.  They have outsourced their reproductive obligation to degenerates and third worlders.  The results are predictable.

As has been noted by authors such as Kevin MacDonald, Ricardo Duchesne and Joseph Henrich, European civilization is unique in many traits, our altruism among them. We are less tribal than other people.  We are unique in the extent to which we created institutions such as the church, the university and trade guilds in which people could advance on the basis of individual talent rather than family connections.

Though we may conclude that America itself cannot be deflected away from its tragic arc toward self-destruction, all is not lost. Those of us of traditional American stock need to recognize that America is no longer our country. We lost it by degrees, starting with the broad immigration in the late 19^th century. The pace accelerated as we ceded control of our institutions to immigrant groups, the most aggressive of which, per Yuri Slezkine, was the Jews.

The Jews, like every group except us, the then dominant but oblivious Anglo-Saxons, looked out for their own interests. Their interest was promoted by diluting ours. They promoted those of everybody else, notably Blacks through the NAACP and third-world immigration. The 1965 Hart-Celler Immigration Act was promoted by Robert Strauss, chair of the Democratic National Committee, and Emanuel Celler, representative from Brooklyn.  These Jewish sponsors swore up and down that it would not affect the balance of political power. Of course, they knew better. Most of the new immigrants moved to the cities and became part of the Democratic electorate. Enforcement of the border became weaker and weaker.  Illegal immigrants became a dominant force in the politics of California and many border states.

The upshot is that the United States no longer belongs to the descendants of the founders. It is time to recognize this fact and ask where in the whole world our interests might be best served. It is definitely not in the political entity called the United States, not even in more local political entities such as state or local governments.  Federalism, the republican form of government, did not protect these subordinate entities from the growth of the central government leviathan.

Per Frank Salter – follow this link to the video review summarizing his case - our interest lies with our gene pool.  That's the people who are like us. These are not our fellow Americans, but the descendants of the ancestors we left behind in Europe. Sadly, in Western Europe they too have been diluted by widespread, uncontrolled immigration.  Although I would be marginally more closely related to the descendants of my ancestors living in Germany and England, those countries harbor so many immigrants that my genetic interest is best represented by countries further to the east – the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, the Baltics and Ukraine.

Therefore, rather than despair the loss of the United States, I have moved to a part of the world where I feel at home, among my own kind of people. My neighbors are pleasant and sociable. My children are more at home in Ukraine then they could be anyplace in the United States. Their pleasant playmates will grow into self-assured Ukrainian men and women.  They have no questions about their identity.

Ukraine is an overwhelmingly Christian country. The small but visible Jewish, Muslim and Gypsy minorities receive strong and consistent Christian tolerance. Comparing our situation with that of the United States and Western Europe, it is clearly better them depending on our tolerance rather than the other way around.

Returning to the despair felt by the likes of Jared Taylor, Steve Saylor, David Cole, Peter Brimelow, Christopher Rufo and Peachy Keenan, they should bring themselves to recognize the ravages of evolution.  The country they love has evolved away from them and is not coming back.  They have to resign themselves to giving up the comfort of their nation, their language, and what's left of the culture they know, then identifying and moving to a place that conforms better to their personalities, values, and genetic interests.