Jan 20, 2010

By | 4 Comments | Print Print

Macroevolution, Microevolution, & Race

Ordinarily the study of human evolution focuses on the species as a whole and its supposed descent from prehominid species. But race is preeminently a subspecies phenomenon. Race (as opposed to species) formation and destruction can occur with great rapidity on the microevolutionary as opposed to the macroevolutionary time scale.

The microevolution/macroevolution distinction is important in dealing with most practical issues involving race in an evolutionary context. For a random example of how racial issues that concern us are essentially microevolutionary in nature, glance at Book Review, “Migration and Colonization in Human Microevolution,” Heredity 84 (2000): 619-20. (Book’s Table of Contents and sample pages here.) Another book that tentatively crosses the line into the microevolutionary realm, though not focused on race (possible rapid evolution among Ashkenazi Jews is discussed in one chapter, however) is The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution by Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending (New York: Basic Books, 2009), which was well-reviewed in The Occidental Quarterly.[1]

Macroevolution versus Microevolution

The following definition of macroevolution is from the glossary of a publisher’s website dedicated to a leading undergraduate anthology textbook by University of Oxford zoologist Mark Ridley, Evolution, 3rd ed. (University of Oxford Press, 2003):

Macroevolution is evolution on the grand scale: the term refers to events above the species level; the origin of a new higher group, such as the mammals, would be an example of a macroevolutionary event.

Macroevolution has mainly been studied morphologically, because we have more taxonomic and fossil evidence than for other kinds of characters, such as physiology or chromosomes.

According to the neo-Darwinian theory of macroevolution, major evolutionary transitions such as the origin of mammals from reptiles — well documented in the fossil record — occur in gradual adaptive stages. However, macroevolution may proceed by developmental macromutations as well as by gradual adaptation.

Macroevolution can be contrasted with microevolution: evolutionary changes on the small scale, such as changes in gene frequencies within a population. A major issue relating to many controversies in evolutionary biology is the extent to which macroevolutionary changes can be explained by microevolutionary processes.

The American Heritage Science Dictionary defines microevolution as “Evolutionary change below the level of the species, resulting from relatively small genetic variations. Microevolution produces new strains of microorganisms, for example, or the rise of a new subspecies. The accumulation of many microevolutionary changes results in macroevolution.”

Most evolutionary narratives focus on macroevolutionary change. There is usually a paucity of information in mainstream evolutionary literature about biological change below the species level.

The primary mechanisms of microevolution include mutation, migration, gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection. Artificial selection, too, which human beings have engaged in for thousands of years, and which still holds potentially rich insights into race processes (for example, how, by analogy, culture serves as a powerful selective mechanism in human populations), is a component of microevolution.

These processes constitute the subset of evolutionary mechanisms with which racial science is primarily concerned.

Race Creation and Destruction

Races are dynamic, not static or stationary entities. Therefore, time is an essential dimension in racial studies. Human populations form, thrive, disperse, hybridize, and become extinct. Differential reproduction means that, over time, some races wax while others wane. Even differential reproduction within a race can alter its genetic composition.

Jewish anthropologist Stanley Garn long ago observed:

Races do not remain constant. They change. Natural selection or directed genetic change and nondirected sources of genetic change are continually at work. Some local populations expand tremendously and others die out. Some populations change their genetic makeup rapidly, others at a slower pace. It is unlikely that any geographical race [i.e., large race] today closely resembles the collection of races in the same geographical area 500,000 or 50,000 or in some cases even 5,000 years ago. . . . We know that present frequencies of the sickle-cell gene in Africa are relatively recent. We know that they are changing now. We know that Northwest Europeans were relatively few in number 2,000 years ago, yet today [1971] they comprise the largest subgrouping of the European geographical race.[2]

Dog breeds are an example of race formation occurring with extreme rapidity in evolutionary terms. Similarly, Garn believed that selection has taken place even in hybrid “local races” (smaller populations than large “geographical races”) of recent origin—American Negroes, South African Cape Coloureds, “Ladinos” (Southern European-Amerindian crosses in Latin America), and “Neo-Hawaiians.” Such races (for so he regarded them) were already “moving toward new adaptive modes” and represented “ongoing human evolution on the march.” (p. 177.)

The same considerations apply with even greater force to race destruction. Ukrainian-American geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky wrote:

So long as populations can exchange genes, the genetic differences between them are subject to swamping and dissolution by hybridization. The races of man furnish some of the clearest illustrations of this—history records many examples of race fusion and of emergence of new hybrid races. It is possible at least to imagine a fusion of all human races into a single, greatly variable population.[3]

Dobzhansky expressed the view that “human races are relics of the precultural stage of evolution” because civilization causes race convergence (through gene exchange) to outrun race divergence—an idea also articulated by Italian-born population geneticist L. L. Cavalli-Sforza, Sir Julian Huxley, and others.

This, of course, is precisely the point at which human choice comes into play: whether to preserve or destroy the biological and cultural diversity of the Earth’s peoples. Contemporary elites have voted to destroy at least one major race of mankind—an action, ironically, which only a short time before they’d outlawed as “genocide.” They clearly do not intend to hold themselves legally accountable for their crime.

The Jewish proposal to sterilize the entire German population advanced by Theodore Kaufman in Germany Must Perish! (1941),[4] the murder of tens of millions of Eastern Europeans by Communist elites, and current policies of replacement migration, selective racial censorship and media control all signify biological destruction at a speed unparalleled on the macroevolutionary level with the exception of a few extinction events. Under present conditions, substantial hybridism conspicuous in every city and small town in the ex-First World destroys multiple white racial lines in a single generation. This is biological change at the speed of light. It is happening because there are no longer protective demographic, geographical, or cultural moats protecting the white gene pool from destruction.

The Creation—Evolution Debate

A final consequence of the microevolution/macroevolution distinction is that you don’t need to believe in the descent of man from ape-like creatures to study racial change from a microevolutionary perspective. Even intelligent design advocates admit that “There is abundant evidence that changes can occur within existing species, both domestic and wild, so microevolution is uncontroversial.”

Many establishment evolutionists are ideologically disturbed (here also) by the microevolution/macroevolution distinction, primarily, it seems, because such a large contingent of “creationists” concede the validity of microevolution while denying the possibility of macroevolution. Creationists are thoroughly detested by academic evolutionists, who invariably parade their supposed “superiority” over the former in condescending, pseudo-heroic Monkey Trial terms, as if they were a persecuted minority instead of a powerful, intolerant elite with the deck stacked heavily in their favor. Regardless of one’s opinions about evolution, there is no doubt as to the relative distribution of social power between evolutionists and anti-evolutionists.

True, most creationists and intelligent design advocates, like most Christians, will continue to exhibit indifference or hostility to the survival of the white race (but only the white race, which is what makes them unprincipled). Contemporary Judeo-Christians, left and right, believe they find warrant for white genocide and anti-white racism in their holy book or in politically correct theology. But for any Christian with a moral conscience, objection to racial science should not be grounded in hostility to evolution alone. Acceptance of macroevolutionary theory is not a precondition for the intelligent study of racial biology. It is perfectly possible to remain an unbeliever, skeptic, or agnostic about cosmology and “ape into man” but still acknowledge the objective existence of human races and oppose white genocide because it is evil.


[1] F. Roger Devlin, “The Revolution in Human Evolution” 9 (Winter 2009-2010): 113-27.

[2] Stanley M. Garn, Human Races, 3rd ed. (Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, 1971), 154-55.

[3] Mankind Evolving: The Evolution of the Human Species (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1962), 185.

[4] According to Time magazine’s March 24, 1941 review, “The [book's] grisliness preceded the [arrival of the book itself]. One day [U.S. book] reviewers unwrapped a small, oblong parcel, found inside a miniature black cardboard coffin with a hinged lid. In it was a card reading, ‘Read Germany Must Perish! Tomorrow you will receive your copy.'” In 1939, as chairman of The American Federation of Peace, Kaufman had urged Congress “to sterilize all Americans so that their children might not become homicidal monsters. In step with the times, [by 1941] Sterilizer Kaufman had simply transferred his basic idea to the [German] enemy.”

Share

Related Posts

  1. Biological destruction has also been carried out by abortionists, many of whom are jewish.

    Not having one’s own living space/territory prevents a people from forming bonds and developing a culture. The more diverse a population, the more divided and alienated (and easier to rule.) To not only survive, but also to thrive, a species needs an ecosystem/environment which allows a free and uninhibited flow and exchange of ideas between its members. Anxiety and anomie prevent such an exchange from taking place, or at least makes it difficult.

  2. This is a great article. Clear, concise, gets right down to the major points — including some of the MOST important and neglected points.

    1) The PROCESS of microevolution = not static. Races are GOING somewhere (like dolphins were pressed back into the sea from long-ago land-dwelling creatures).

    Races have different DESTINIES, and Europeans are in motion / intransition to an exciting new intellectual place if we can keep from being overwhelmed. Other races appear to have reached dead-ends of one sort or another with the wrong combination of culture, corruption, and genes.

    2) Culture constitutes the most salient selection pressures for humans.

    Not only is the practice of eugenics MORAL, but morality –and maybe even religion itself– IS a form of eugenics! The very environment of truth (the foundation of morality) also requires great minds to live and grow. It requires objectivity, individualism, self-sacrifice, courage, boldness, and reflective or sensitive minds. All these qualities become liabilities in the face of deceptive or destructive patterns in society.

    A corrupt society makes “nice guys finish last”. So it is in culture and evolution too — which is why deceiver-patterns like the jewish one seek to corrupt society to gain resources make it safe for them. Race-mixing is permanent biological corruption. The Jews are like a fallen truth-mind now controlled only by animal passions and not a great destiny. This is the most dangerous thing imaginable to the builders and truth-seekers of civilization trying to move in the opposite direction.

    3) Different races have different selection pressures and cultural dynamics which grind them to a halt or open up new paths and vistas for the race.

    An example is the cycles of violence and impulsivity and lack of building in Africa which makes the natural minority emergence of people like us (or the continued existence of) impossible because it would be disadvantageous to settle and build with hordes of the impulsive and violent around. Remember that any advantageous mutation starts out small — with one mutation! The ultimate minority. A European culture and mindset sets the stage for advancement and the emergence of key genes like those Bruce Lahn discovered. European open-mindedness and individuality combined with love of objective truth serves as fertile ground and protection for evolutionary innovation — A BUILT-IN EUGENIC ENGINE.

    To me what really makes humans unique is that we are:
    1)objective (use methods to “mine” valuable information TRUTH)
    2)symbolic (make symbols, models, and of course words)
    3)Eugenic (consciously self-selecting via culture, religions, laws)

    If you will notice, all of these are particularly European traits. All of these are also noticing patterns which literally created us. A symbol is a heuristic device to capture truth, and the objective patterns around us. Genes are a heuristic device as well — containing the accumulated wisdom and the patterns of life and their environments from billions of years of trial-and-error. We are like the processes that created us in this — we INTERNALIZE evolution and magnify it as well as speed it up with symbols. The creation echoes in our brains. We see what evolution itself has been doing and seek to act like this in directed, less wasteful, and non-random ways. It would eliminate the massive suffering and conflicts inherent in the process of the past. It is a miracle, and echo of creation and the creator in us. It is a truly unique and divine thing — the face of god opening its eyes among us.

    Mixing with other races is not simple genocide, to me it is deicide. we reflect and amplify the creator, to snuff out our race is to destroy the living reflection of the creator on Earth as it takes its first steps. It is to unimaginably increase suffering. If we are mixed with other races enough, our kind of people and pattern may never rise on the Earth again… It is as if we are truly in a final, apocalyptic battle of good and evil. I think Jews sense what is going on, thats why they have constructed all sorts of cultural seige-engines and have batted to destroy us and our truth so vigorously. If we insist on not waking up and stopping them, we are truly dead — never to rise again.

    Without understanding evolution, and the processes and genes involved, we will not be able to survive long enough to triumph for all time over the forces of mindless evil and destruction — of bad human choices which shape both civilization and eventually our genes. Understanding evolution to me is religion seen through a glass CLEARLY for the first time — we can understand the past origin and purposes of our sinful urges and keep them at bay, keep them doing what they were for in the past and not let them take over our destinies as the reason for our existence. We can more clearly have hope and keep our eyes on the prize. Evolution can put us much more solidly on the path of salvation — real salvation in the real world come to Earth out of our billion-year dreams.

    European man objectively IS the figurehead of life on Earth if you look at evolution as primarily an information-based process — we have taken the evolution of information-gathering and symbolism and objectivity to its highest levels. We are angels of creation in human bodies and we must not let darkness banish us and our minds from the Earth. We are the seed race of the future. We are truly on the path to something new in the universe, and a living symbol of the creator itself.

    The Jews, on the other hand, just say they are the chosen. The evidence does not back this up. That kind of talk almost automatically makes us listen, like a turkey-call to a hunted animal. Or, more aptly, a wolf in sheeps clothing — cloaked in words and symbols to deceive and destroy. Their religion is not what we would call religion at all, it is more like a strategem to destroy. But as information-gatherers, we eventually realize they are lying when we learn enough and also look at their behaviors through time. Evolution and science are mighty swords of truth against darkness and deception. This was a truly great article — holy even.

    • avatar
      Richard Bohn said:

      Your antisemitism and exclusionary racism define and betray you. “This was a truly great article–holy even.” My understanding of something holy is something set apart for God. The theory of evolution is an atheistic endeavor. The complexity of our universe screams “Creator!”. You would do well to fall to your knees and ask God for forgiveness for your intellectual impertinence. Ultimately it is the human soul that matters, that which separates us from animals. There is no ape-man! Only those who make a monkey of themselves with their rebellion against Christ.

  3. Richard Bohn you are no different than a negro. Creationism is anti-scientific only people with tiny IQ believe in that. Do you believe in flying clowns to? You also claim only humans have souls, I guess you are probably an animal abuser. Your probably black. [Crude example of the argumentum ad hominem tolerated for illustrative purposes only by the moderator]

Back to Top