Human Biological Diversity and Its Implications for Social Structures

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , on March 19, 2014 by FoolishReporter

Indeed, entirely divergent life strategies can be caused by differences in a single gene, as we see in fire ants, where ants with one version of a pheromone receptor live in independent colonies, each having a single queen, while those with the other version live in a sprawling metacolony with many queens. 

–”The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution”

Human biological diversity (HBD) is a field of genetic science that argues, as the book quoted above does, that evolution didn’t stop in humans 40-50,000 years ago, and has been an ongoing, and probably quite an accelerated process, since about 10,000 years ago. The implications of this are that, in essence, the various kinds of people we see today in the world are essentially *different* kinds of people.

And for anyone acculturated in our modern society, this assertion is essentially one of the highest forms of heresy, because, well, it means we aren’t equal. Unfortunately, those who realize this tend to take the information and present it in a certain way, which leads to cries of “RACISM” instantaneously. Which is unfortunate, because as the quote above shows us, in Nature we already know that a *single* gene can determine the social structure for an entire species of creatures.

So what are the implications of HBD on social structures? Well, there are quite a few. Perhaps one of the most interesting ideas is one formulated by Steve Sailer and worked upon by HBD Chick and Jayman and others, hypothesizes that a change regarding social mores with inbreeding/outbreeding quite awhile back has drastic implications for today. In short, the idea is that quite some time ago, humans in western and northern Europe, following the impositions of the Catholic church against inbreeding, began outbreeding, which began a selective evolutionary process. This process made those peoples who followed the Catholic doctrine different. Instead of a clannish, kin-first attitude (what HBD chick calls “familial altruism”) the evolutionary process began selecting for people who would look beyond the family/tribe/clan and more often help/cooperate with “outgroups”. The advent of modern agriculture accelerated this selection process, and, according to Sailer et al, is probably why the ideas of liberal democracy and other related social structures arose from those parts of Europe where this process was taking place.

Conversely, in groups where the interdiction against close familial inbreeding wasn’t in place, the selection process began selecting for HBD Chick’s “familial altruism” gene. These groups had, and continue to have, social structures that align heavily along family/tribe/clan. Think of places like the United Arab Emirates and Dubai, where two families have been in charge for quite some time now. (Which is interesting to think, given their explosive growth in the last decade. Maybe there’s something about monarchy that allows for something different. Perhaps a discussion for another post some other time.)

Anyways, how this all works out with the lead-in quote is this: HBD tells us we’re different and different in some pretty drastic ways. Scientific studies of other species show us that a difference in a single gene can determine the social structure for an entire population. So, if Sailer et al are even somewhat correct about the inbreeding/outbreeding hypothesis, much of our problems in this world come down to the fact that trying to impose Western liberal democracy on groups where that outbreeding dynamic didn’t take place essentially amounts to trying to put a round peg in a square hole.

Does this mean that those groups where the outbreeding process took place are superior? It’s difficult to say. Rather, it’s more having to accept that different groups existing in the world today are essentially on different evolutionary tracks. As the authors of “10,000 Years” pointed out, Tibetans and Amerindians in the Andes developed two different adaptations to their high altitude environments. Does it make one better than the other? Probably not.

It just makes them different.

Impressions of My Friend’s Murderer

Posted in Uncategorized on March 17, 2014 by FoolishReporter



I didn’t know what I’d feel, seeing my friend David’s murderer up close and in person. All I knew is that it would likely suck. And it did.

For whatever reason, two things kept running through my head: jesus christ, he’s tiny and skinny. He has that triangular thing that skinny young dudes often have. Wide-ish shoulders narrowing down to a waist that seems impossibly narrow.  I could probably pick him up and break him if I wanted.

And the second part was just trying to process his age: 17. He looks it all the way. My mind reeled a bit, just contemplating that this piece of human garbage has only had 17 years on this world. If not for him, my friend would still be here.

A hot rush of anger and grief swelled through my body. I wanted to reach through that glass and just end him. An eye for an eye.

Anyways, my mind is blank now, and all I feel is pain in my heart.

And it’s all because of this tiny, fucking piece of trash 17-year-old.


The Horror of the Left

Posted in Uncategorized on March 11, 2014 by FoolishReporter

As Colonel Kurtz so famously said...The horror...The horror!

As Colonel Kurtz so famously said…The horror…The horror!


I have had the distinct pleasure, in the last few days, to discover Radish Magazine. Like all of it’s Dark Enlightenment/Neoreaction counterparts, Radish delivers some searing critique of modernity and the lies that we’ve all been sold to justify, well, the horror that modernity has consistently unleashed upon the world for the better part of two centuries. Radish has a helpful tab titled “Where Do I Start”, which lead me to the issue “Slavery Reconsidered.” It’s an interesting account of what we assume the reality of slavery to have been in the United States, and what the *actual* reality probably was. (Turns out, most everyone was fairly contented with the situation, except for a bunch of people who lived a long ways away).

Regardless, that issue had some of the most horrifying words I’ve ever read, ever, from anyone on the Left.

They belong to Amanda Kijera, who is apparently about as true as a true leftist can get. Anyways, I realize the post these words are coming from are four years old, but again, they are perhaps the most horrifying thing I’ve ever read from the Left. Kijera, you see, went to Haiti shortly after the devastating earthquake in that country in 2010, in an attempt to dispel myths about the rampant violence being committed against women in Haiti, post-earthquake:

Two weeks ago, on a Monday morning, I started to write what I thought was a very clever editorial about violence against women in Haiti. The case, I believed, was being overstated by women’s organizations in need of additional resources. Ever committed to preserving the dignity of Black [sic] men in a world which constantly stereotypes them as violent savages, I viewed this writing as yet one more opportunity to fight “the man” on behalf of my brothers. That night, before I could finish the piece, I was held on a rooftop in Haiti and raped repeatedly by one of the very men who I had spent the bulk of my life advocating for.

It hurt. The experience was almost more than I could bear. I begged him to stop. Afraid he would kill me, I pleaded with him to honor my commitment to Haiti, to him as a brother in the mutual struggle for an end to our common oppression, but to no avail. He didn’t care that I was a Malcolm X scholar. He told me to shut up, and then slapped me in the face. Overpowered, I gave up fighting halfway through the night.


Black men have every right to the anger they feel in response to their position in the global hierarchy, but their anger is misdirected.

Women are not the source of their oppression; oppressive policies and the as-yet unaddressed white [sic] patriarchy which still dominates the global stage are. Because women—and particularly women of color—are forced to bear the brunt of the Black male response to the Black male plight, the international community and those nations who have benefitted from the oppression of colonized peoples have a responsibility to provide women with the protection that they need.


I went to Haiti after the earthquake to empower Haitians to self-sufficiency. […] Not once did I envision myself becoming a receptacle [!] for a Black man’s rage at the white world, but that is what I became. While I take issue with my brother’s behavior, I’m grateful for the experience.

This literally is one of the most tragic, and as stated already, terrifying things I’ve ever read coming from the Left. What have you wrought, leftists?

What have you wrought, leftists, when this young woman, so blind with the Cause, was completely unprepared for the attack that occurred to her because your twisted vision of reality made it so? What have you wrought leftists, when this young woman WRITES SHE IS GRATEFUL FOR BEING RAPED. What have you wrought, leftists, that this young woman doesn’t see the perpetrator of her crime as the problem, but rather some mythical white oppression as being the cause?

What have you wrought, leftists, when, as Radish points out, Haiti had gone from a jewel of a colony to the place we know now, the poorest country in a hemisphere? A place where rape was rampant in the wake of a natural disaster, and your true believer wandered into that time and place thinking that *couldn’t* be true, because it must be The Patriarchy, or that White Oppression making people report something awful was happening, rather than it just being a reflection of reality? When the left meets the results of the left. Good times y’all!

As the father of a daughter, I can’t even imagine trying to wrap the idea of my daughter being raped, and learning my daughter  WAS GRATEFUL because of your retarded leftist ideals of the “noble savage” or some ridiculous bullshit.

This is why, more and more, dear leftists, you find people scoffing in your face when you tell them they’re the evil, ignorant, hateful, insensitive, yadda yadda yadda ones anymore. Because more and more, people realize, either from a study of history, or hell, even just paying attention to the currents of thought, like Ms Kijera’s above, that your system is insane. Insane to start with, insane in implementation, and insane in it’s repercussions.

The horror!….The horror!


Endless Iterations of Absurdity

Posted in Uncategorized on March 3, 2014 by FoolishReporter



Bryce Laliberte had a really interesting post last week, “The Structured Ignorance of Progress.” In it, Laliberte points out how the modern structure and it’s keepers are now having to engage in an endless attempt to keep up with the deep inconsistencies that underpin their whole worldview. As Laliberte writes:

What is it to “structure ignorance?” It is to be engaged in the task of endlessly adding epicycles and ad hoc stipulations in order to save the theory from any actual and potential instance of falsification.

The orthodox feminist model, for instance, has an abundance of epicycles required  to save the theory from falsification by available evidence. Whenever a systematic difference in outcome occurs that women happen to be disadvantaged by, the explanation becomes a wieldy narrative about how sexism magically separates the men from the women on the basis of nothing but a simplistic association of skill between sex, and disallows the explanation may have something to do with innate advantages/disadvantages and preferences.

In short, as more heretics come into being against modernity, the keepers of modernity have to stretch even further to maintain a) their ideological dominance and a closely related maintenance b) their ability to position themselves “on the side of the angels” against the forces of evil, as Thomas Sowell likes to put it. As Steve Sailer nicely put it, the forces of the left have had to move from “World War G” (the gay marriage crusade) to “World War T” (the plight of anyone who has a conceptual self identity that begins with “trans”, at least in my mind.)

In this post over at Taki’s Mag, Sailer sums it up succinctly when he writes:  “The problem from a political-correctness standpoint is that the worst abuses of homosexuals in the world today take place in black Africa or the Muslim Middle East. So it would be racist or Islamophobic to go global at the moment.” In short, the left is having to nibble at more and more extremes in order to continue their eternal quest for “social justice”, ie, as the image in this photo conveys, the Left has become an ouroboros, slowly but surely devouring itself.

I call this process “endless iterations of absurdity.” Too many abound on any given day, but I did see something go flashing through my Twitter timeline regarding Jared Leto’s shoutout to the protestors/peoples of Ukraine and Venezuela. A worthy sentiment, as people die in their streets, and, as especially with the Ukraine, developments continue to run apace that have many fearing armed conflict that will expand beyond just a regional tussle.

No no no. Leto’s show of support for people dying in their streets wasn’t good enough, according to The Daily Show co-creator Lizz Winstead, because Leto didn’t take the time to talk about the plight of “transpeople.” (I’m assuming she felt this criticism was necessary because Leto played a transperson in one of the night’s big winners, Dallas Buyers Club). So there we have it though. An actor giving his support to people *ACTUALLY DYING IN THE STREETS* was *NOT* sufficient. Instead, he should have taken the time to address the concerns and problems of a tiny minority of people whom most of the world’s population will never interact with, affect, or be affected by.

In Winnstead’s own words:

“The movie that he just won the Oscar for, if you talk about an invisible community that needs an advocate, the trans community is there,” Winstead observed. “I wish that he would have taken that time.”

“Not that the Ukraine isn’t awful,” she continued. She added, however, that a more powerful statement from Leto would have been one centered exclusively on the plight of transgendered individuals.

“That, to me, would have been a really awesome moment instead of, ‘I know Ukraine is happening,’” Winstead critiqued.

As I said, endless iterations of absurdity.


What Exactly Have We Created Here

Posted in Uncategorized on March 3, 2014 by FoolishReporter

My friend David was murdered. The five hardest words I’ve ever had to confront in my life.

My. Friend. Was. Murdered.

Details were sketchy at first, although it was pretty well established those who killed him were a trio, two young black men and a white woman. According to information provided by Seattle Police, authorities believed the trio had been on a robbery spree that night, including other attempted robberies and at least one successful robbery of a restaurant in the area. And then they came upon David, decided they wanted his cell-phone, and that was that.

More information has come out regarding those responsible, with David’s likely killer being a SEVENTEEN YEAR OLD KID. The enormous absurdity of ALL of this has left all of us who knew our friend reeling.

And me, in my weird, nerdish way, I’ve been thinking about what exactly David’s story is indicative of, in regards to society and the type of people that are being produced by our modern society. There are two absurdities in a society that produces these outcomes: a) that a FUCKING CHILD has so little respect for life and property that some random murder isn’t too far off his choice horizon, especially, when it’s for a fucking ubiquitous gadget like a cellphone. and b.) That occurrences like these are so close to being common place that most people are just inured to their commonality.

I mean, at least for me, this is a fundamentally re-thinking everything issue for me. We’re told we’re better, we’re superior, that so and so group is better off than they were before thanks to modernity and it’s incestuous relationship with education and the law. But the question is rarely asked: Are we?

My friend is dead and gone because a child wanted something he had, and he wouldn’t give it to him, so BAM! My friend is dead. Other’s children are so adrift in this nihilistic, YOLO inspired culture that, for a decent sized portion of them, outright destruction of their physical self through suicide becomes more and more of a common occurrence. For those children who don’t take that fatal step, we end up with pathologies like cutting, oversexualization and drug addiction.

What exactly have we created here? The one more thinks about it, the more preposterous it becomes to think that the current order and current way of doing things is working in any meaningful way. A polarized society moving faster and faster towards its own destruction, consuming it’s own energy until finally there’s nothing but emptiness and blackness.

My friend is gone, and it physically sickens me to think that this is essentially an acceptable outcome to our greater society, in some odd way.

*homesteads a deserted island in the South Pacific*





Remembering @PracticeTheory

Posted in Uncategorized on March 3, 2014 by FoolishReporter




We laid to rest a dear friend on Saturday, David Peterson, known as @practicetheory to his Twitter family and friends. During the service at Washelli Cemetery in Seattle, the priest/pastor overseeing the ceremony asked us to think of a single word that would describe David, and that if we felt so inclined, to share that word at a later time in the ceremony when the priest/pastor opened it up to those gathered to see David off.

And while I didn’t share my word on Saturday, I feel like sharing it now. That word was “animated”.

Politics and culture are what brought David and I, along with his wife Kim, and our other Twitter friends, together. We made it a regular occurrence to get together to have some drinks and just bullshit about life, politics, and Twitter. Hell, we were in the midst of organizing our next get together when what happened…happened. Anyways, I chose “animated” as my favorite way of remembering David. For anyone who ever had a chance to have  discussion with him about, well, anything, his enthusiasm for exploring the ideas/controversies of the day was never dulled.

His eyes would light up, and he’d gesture widely, sharing his thoughts on whatever the topic of discussion was. Sometimes, it could be a bit tough to get a word in edgewise, but even then, David was self-aware enough to put his foot on the brake a bit so you could also be part of the conversation. There was a pure joy that emanated from him when he knew the possibility of substantive debate was in the air.

He had fast become one of my favorite people to talk about everything to in the two years I had known him. His openness, and his enthusiasm for always learning something new, and learning about a different perspective, were infectious, and, if you weren’t careful, you’d find yourself reversing your own opinion if he was on an especially good roll.

We miss you terribly David. I don’t want you to worry about Kim, those of us still here will take care of her forever, and don’t doubt it. I love you both to death, and I wish there was more I could do.

And even though I’m not Catholic, this benediction in Latin has always been strangely soothing to me, so I will close with this:

Réquiem ætérnam dona eis, Dómine, et lux perpétua lúceat eis. Requiéscant in pace. Amen.

Carrying Casket

PC Insanity

Posted in Uncategorized on February 24, 2014 by FoolishReporter

I was reminded of the utter absurdity political correctness and the modern structure pushes on us recently, as I sat and listened to a school board member describe her thoughts and impressions of a trip the board had collectively taken to various European countries late last year. On their itinerary were stops in England, Scotland and Finland. Our school board member, bless her heart, described her impressions of arriving at one of the schools they visited in Finland (this is an approximation of her words):

“We were greeted by a bunch of blonde haired, blue-eyed children, both girls and boys… and there was an…African-American boy there too,” she said.

Yes, you read that correctly. Political correctness has been so thoroughly ingrained in this woman, that when describing a situation in a foreign country, the only “appropriate” response she could think of to describe the one black kid at the Scandinavian school was “African-American.” I mean, here we are, talking about a child who’s likely never set foot in America, and, at least from our point of view, we have no way of knowing of whether he’s of actual African descent, or yannow, a black kid from a black Scandinavian family. But our political correctness overlords have so thoroughly indoctrinated us against certain types of speech that we end up having to completely misrepresent reality in order to appease the idea of political correctness.

Anyways, just a random thought here on this Monday afternoon.



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,083 other followers