A Rather Stupid Argument

Franz von Stuck, The Kiss of the Sphinx

The internet is rife with rather stupid arguments against racial preservation, usually put forth by miscegenating whites.  These arguments can be boiled down to the following:

Whites as we know them today did not exist thousands of years ago and will not exist thousands of years in the future, regardless of breeding habits.  Look at the genetic differences of modern Europeans to the Paleolithic hunter-gatherers and Neolithic farmers [cites studies out of context].  The gene pools are different, so . . .

So, miscegenation is justified, since there is no race to preserve anyway.  It’s all “racial mysticism,” don’t you know.

Putting aside the obvious fact that one cannot look at past genetic changes and project them into a future in which migration, breeding patterns, and selective pressures will be totally different (putting aside that modern man now knows about genetics and kinship and could, if desired, intervene in the process), there is a more obvious point to be made.

All genepools shift over time, for reasons of genetic drift, even if for nothing else.  This change is natural and expected, even for the most isolated, endogamous, and homogeneous of populations.  This in no way alters racial preservation and ethnic genetic interests which are predicated on overall degrees of genetic similarity and on the preservation of racial genepools and racial characteristics to the extent possible for evolved organisms.

Thus, if European ethnies practice endogamy and engage in preservationist tactics in ethnostates, their genepools will change somewhat over time.  These changes will not be radical, and would not be expected to significantly alter the overall European genotype and phenotype. The European character of these future populations, and their relationship to today’s European populations, could be easily discerned by genetic assays.  Let’s fix the genetic distance/distinction between today’s Europeans and these putative unmixed future Europeans as “X.”

If, however, Europeans interbreed with non-whites, such as with sub-Saharan African “musicians” or with “hot Vietnamese girls,” then the genepool of this future hybrid Eurafrican/Eurasian population will be much, much more genetically different than modern Europeans – 10X, 20X, 100X, etc.  Changes in genetic structure due to panmixia would alter the genepool in ways that genetic drift and selective pressures never could, introducing new forms of linkage disequilibrium and genetic integration that would never would have occurred in the absence of miscegenation. The gaping logical flaw in these pro-mixing “arguments” is the equation of all forms of genetic change, ignoring the enormous qualitative and quantitative differences between the modest natural genetic changes in an endogamous population and the massive and irreversible genetic changes due to cross-racial intermixture.

And, by the way, Paleolithic and Neolithic Europeans, despite differences to modern Europeans, are much, much, much closer, genetically, to modern Europeans, than are, say, modern Nigerians or Vietnamese.  Hence, any future European population will be much, much, much genetically (and phenotypically) closer to today’s Europeans than are present day or future non-white groups.

As for other arguments, stating that traits such as “high IQ” and “low aggression” are all that matters and that concern for race is “racial mysticism” (does “familial mysticism” exist as well?), I’ve already answered all of these arguments in my writings on Salter’s genetic interests concept, as well as on “racial cuckoldry.”   Adaptive behavior is about genetic continuity/expansion.  Sure, positive phenotypic traits can aid in this; however, Europeans are well supplied with their own alleles for “high IQ” and other positive traits, and these can be increased through assortative mating, eugenics, etc.  One does not have to promote genocidal admixture, destroying genetic interests and parental kinship, to enhance the competitiveness of European genes in the global genepool.

Indeed, if the whole point is enhancing the competitiveness of European genotypes (and consequent phenotypes), then racial admixture should be eschewed, since such admixture eliminates the very genotypes (and phenotypes) we want to become more competitive.  One cannot “save Europeans” by transforming Europeans into Eurafricans and Eurasians.  That “method” would defeat the purpose.