Hear, hear.

Got too obstreperous for the editors (too much complaining about [[[YouKnowWho]]]).

There was a strange design difference between German and British single-seaters, in that the British planes all had rear-view mirrors and the German planes didn’t. I don’t know the reason for this.

the Bf 109 had a lot of other problems as a working aircraft

I sat inside a restored one once. The cockpit was very snug for my 6’2” frame, and, worse still, I couldn’t see jack behind me due to the design.

Bubble canopy all the way for me (e.g. P-51).

And genetics(r1a1).

Sorry, I got the numbers and letters wrong. One of the greatest challenges to making blog comments is to have the discipline to do the editing. I try to check all the names and their spellings. I look up any factoid I cite in Wikipedia. It takes only a few minutes write the point I’m motivated to make but checking it so as to avoid these embarrassing errors takes many times as long.

All WWII fighters had developmental problems. One of our most successful fighters the P-38 was fraught with problems till the day it was no longer produced. This pattern has continued with jets. The Bf 109, as I’m sure you know, was a success from early in its development period and all through the war. It was produced in greater numbers than any other fighters on either side. Both it and the Spitfire suffered from the same deficiency – short range. As the war got bigger the planes needed to fly further.

My point about the quality of the fuel was from Daniel Yergin, but Galland also thought that the most critical advantage that the Allies had was oil.

Part of the take off in the early 2000s was the rise of high margin, small workforce companies like Apple (post-iPod), Facebook, and Google.

The DB109 was probably a better fighter than the Spitfire but not on lousy coal derived gas. The Soviets had an ally in the US which was the great oil producing nation at that time.

You mean the Me109, or more technically (as G.Gordon Liddy obsesses) the Bf 109, which had a DB 601 engine, an inverted V-12 with a diesel-like, direct-to-cylinder fuel injection system, and which actually handled poorer octane fuel better than the RR Merlin, which early Marks of had carburetors and later ones indirect fuel injection.

The better fuel was an advantage, but the Bf 109 had a lot of other problems as a working aircraft and even the well trained Germans lost a lot of them in landing accidents. Demonstrated crosswind component on pavement in this airplane is about zero. The Germans would have been better off to give Galland exactly what he wanted, a Staffel of Spitfires. They had several captured examples and the DB engine and Hoffman prop would have been a straightforward FWF swap.

Besides, although the coal gasification made gasoline was not the best thing for the DB 601, the Jumo 004 ate the stuff beautifully. With better materials in the hot section and a Woodward fuel controller it would have been modern in the late fifties: produced in sufficient quantities in 1943 the air war would have went quite differently.

Irony being ironic though, there are several Merlin engine Spitfires in the UK and several more in the US still flying; and almost all of them have German made Hoffman propellers on them.

Given the excellent defensive skills showed by German troops and formations, even defending long fronts with extended lines of communication in WWII, a Soviet invasion of German-occupied Poland circa 1942 or 1943 would most likely have been an unmitigated disaster for the invaders. Lots of battles like the WWI battles of Tannenburg and Masurian Lakes. Everyone overestimated the advantage attackers had in World War II. Defenders usually did better if adequately supplied and commanded. But everyone remembers Erwin Rommel, not Gotthard Heinrici.

Finally someone who answered the question I posed. I will have to read up on Heinrici.

Btw the above video is really good and really watchable. Suvorov is very funny. Hitler got played, big time.

Sorry for my lack of clarity. Which of the arguments against Suvorov’s do you find most compelling?

I know the arguments (Icebreaker, etc); they don’t hold up.

Which arguments do you find most compelling?

Of the Stalin was planning on invading Western Europe in 1941 school? None of them.

What slaughter in Yugoslavia? You are still falling for the “globalist” propaganda that has accompanied all their subsequent “humanitarian wars”.

Milosevic exonerated, as the NATO war machine moves on

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/08/08/milosevic-exonerated-as-the-nato-war-machine-moves-on/

…The ICTY’s conclusion, that one of the most demonized figures of the modern era was innocent of the most heinous crimes he was accused of, really should have made headlines across the world. But it hasn‘t….

The Bogus ‘Humanitarian’ War on Serbia

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/08/24/the-bogus-humanitarian-war-on-serbia/

….. The trouble for NATO was that by the time Milosevic’s trial was due to start, the Kosovo narrative had already unraveled. The lurid claims made by the US and its allies about genocide and hundreds of thousands being killed, catalogued by the great John Pilger here, had been shown to be false. In September 2001, a UN court officially held

…. The FBI failed to find a single mass grave and went home. The Spanish forensic team did the same, its leader angrily denouncing “a semantic pirouette by the war propaganda machines.”

The final count of the dead in Kosovo was 2,788. This included combatants on both sides and Serbs and Roma murdered by the pro-NATO Kosovo Liberation Front. There was no genocide. The NATO attack was both a fraud and a war crime.

All but a fraction of America’s vaunted “precision guided” missiles hit not military but civilian targets, including the news studios of Radio Television Serbia in Belgrade. Sixteen people were killed, including cameramen, producers and a make-up artist. Blair described the dead, profanely, as part of Serbia’s “command and control.”

Ronald Reagan was the president who started the practice of subsidizing American companies with tax dollars to increase their foreign manufacturing activities. Every president since has continued the programs. Part of the “rule the world” for the benefit of “our” elite that runs both our main political parties.

Invasion is natural.

So is resisting invasion. That’s written into the smallest level of biological existence, as evidenced by our immune systems…or even the fact that we are a big bag of cells that distinguish between themselves and outsiders.

And by the fact that the “plague doctors” of CDC, NIH/NIAID, etc., spend as much time monitoring/tracking biological invasions as fighting/resisting them where defined as “outbreaks.”

What these docs and researchers dare not do is discuss immivasion and its disease consequences, for in the realms of government and the Ed Biz, everyone on earth dying of Ebola/Marburg/MDR TB/newly aerosolized super-HIV is preferable to closing any geopolitical border/point of entry anywhere, at any time.

Hell, in San Francisco I understand “AIDS prevention” now involves telling bug-chasers (men who deliberately seek to be infected by or infect others with HIV) how best to get a life-preserving supply of high-tech, current-generation, extremely expensive antivirals…paid for by others. “If we can save just one life!” is still the battle cry…to preserve those with little to no interest in preserving their own or others’.

Robustness of a people, as that of an individual organism, involves a balance of invasion and resistance. The past 60 years of demolishing any concept of borders has been an agenda half stupid and half malevolent, while posing as altruistic–but very lucrative for those who can embrace its nihilistic path to various careers in the Ed Biz or government….

I know you’re just trying to be humorous, as there’s no evidence of any conflict between the WHG’s and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG’s thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture.

Anthropologist!

Speaking of Steppe people, perhaps it’s relevant to mention the English word ‘daughter’ and its various cognates in other I.E. languages, literally means ‘milker’, in that the female child was defined by her assigned domestic role.

‘Son’ on the other hand, means ‘the begotten one’.

Of course, ‘color’ for fur-bearing mammals is merely a secondary consideration, the pigmentation of hair shafts. The skin of all mammals – or most of them – is pink.
Being hairless, human skin color is corellated with geographical origin – and therefore to the isolation or near isolation of specific gene pools.
The inference is that other genetically determined characteristics, other than the activity of melanocytes, are corellated with these isolated gene pools, and hence skin colors.

My mom just got her results from 23&me. She thought she was French and Portuguese with a smattering of German. It turns out she’s English, French and German with a smattering of Portuguese.

She’s still processing the results. It’s hard to rethink your ethnic identity at 81.

The Chinese don’t give a rat’s ass. They want his brain.

https://www.chinamoneynetwork.com/2018/03/19/nobel-laureate-james-watson-lead-international-life-science-research-center-shenzhen

Milken more than buyout kings like Icahn and KKR?

Disagree. I think Steve’s wrap is excellent and make the distinction very well.

A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:
Invasion is wrong.

Unlike in the days of barbaric nomads, we now have territorial states with internationally recognized borders, countries that are the joint property of their citizens and thus are not the property of noncitizens.

Therefore, German chancellors should neither invade other peoples’ countries nor invite other peoples to invade Germany.

We are now past barbarism–and will stay past if we can defeat the globalists! We have nations with defined borders that belong to their citizens. Others should respect those borders.

That–one people nations behind defined borders–is the path to peace and human flourishing.

~~
There’s been a tremendous amout of retconning of what happened in the 20th century. And because the British were on the winning side in the great 20th century wars, the fundamental cause of these conflicts gets an incomplete airing.

These conflicts weren’t caused by “German nationalism”, nor even by “the rise of Germany and Japan”. But rather by the rise of Germany and Japan at a time when the world had been carved up into empires. These nations–of pretty on the ball people–were rising into a world that the British and French and to a lesser extent the Dutch had divvied up–and small bits by other European states. This pretty naturally caused frition. And there was of course the well noted friction of other peoples against domination by the Ottoman, Austrian and Russian empires.

Fundamentally rising Germany and Japan–quite reasonably–didn’t think they should be commercially locked out most of the world. And if the rule was “empire”, saw no reason they shouldn’t have empires of their own.

The United States had actually developed the correct attitude at it’s founding–stay out! We unfortunately climbed aboard the imperialist train ourselves at the end of the 19th century with the Spanish American War–arguably fine, kicking imperialists out–but then followed with the Philippine American War–our most unjustified and disgusting war–to be imperialists ourselves. A more robust American effort to stand consistently again imperialism and for national self-determination and free commercial access for all nations might have helped avoid much bloodshed.

When the American system with decolonization and open trade was introduced after WWII the results have been rather positive for the world. Germany and Japan–even after the devastation of the War–quickly did well. (They didn’t actually need to have empires for prosperity.)

In addition, after the War, we had a “resorting” of peoples. Specifically getting most all the people who considered themselves to be “Germans” inside of Germany. (My best German friend’s family is from the Sudetanland, but they had to move so he grew up as a Bavarian. Being in the right nation is a good thing.) You could think of Israel in this same vein–getting Jews into their own nation–except for the problem of the folks who were already there (hence the continued conflict).

While nuclear weapons, the US army and the example of the War all play a big part, simply having people in their correct nations has been a huge boost to European peace. Where the resorting didn’t happen–Yugoslavia–is precisely where the only significan European slaughter took place. It’s just a trusim: “Good fences make good neighbors”.

And because this post-War ant-imperialist, nationalist settlement of people in their own nations free to manage their own business has been so successful … we have these globalists goons out trampling on borders, inviting in invaders and generally trying to wreck it.

When I got to chapter 4 and learned that there may have been a lot of important human evolution going on in Eurasia for the last million years or so, and that some of it may have made its way back into Africa before the big out of Africa event, I thought to myself, why don’t we hear more about the several interglacial periods, some of which were even warmer than now? As the Ice Ages waxed and waned wouldn’t that have been a natural driver of human evolution? Why does nobody talk about this?

Hitler getting so close to Moscow is yet another example of how he and Germany suffered from initial good luck only to be crushed when normal luck returned. The Nazis paid for their good fortune early in Barbarossa at Stalingrad and then at Berlin.

Hitler shouldn’t have been able to advance that quickly in Barbarossa. Stalin had recently destroyed most of the Soviet officer corps and was suspicious of the remainder. The Soviets against the invading Nazis, like in France, had more tanks and better tanks than the Germans. The Soviets had a much bigger population and a vastly greater industrial base. The Soviets has petroleum and Germany had to cobble together mediocre (87 octane) aviation gas while the allies had Texas gas which was ultimately as much as 150 octane.

The DB109 was probably a better fighter than the Spitfire but not on lousy coal derived gas. The Soviets had an ally in the US which was the great oil producing nation at that time.

Germany on paper, like the South in our Civil War, seemed to be doomed in a struggle with more populous and more industrialized opponents. The South with a number of great generals like Nazi Germany could win a few battles, until their bigger and stronger opponents got organized. But in the long run luck averages out for both sides and the winner was the side with the most industrial infrastructure and biggest population.

It is interesting that color seems to have such limited meaning for horses (also dogs and cats) compared to humans. Any thoughts on why that might be? Is the skin/hair difference a part of it? Or is it an artifact of people (historically) breeding domestic animals for behavior rather than appearance? Are there any good phenotypic correlations with color for those animal species?

Thanks for the tip Greg. I just ordered my copy on Amazon. I have read most of your Christmas book suggestions. Any other book recommendations are very welcome.

I disapprove of white people calling black people monkeys. But what can I do? He certainly looks like Cheetah raising mischief in an old Tarzan movie.

Invasion is natural. It’s the way of all organisms. Bacteria, weeds, wolves, rats, weasels, wild pigs, lions, hyenas, etc.
For much of human existence, there was no morality. Just the way of nature with everyone invading everyone. The Zulus, Mongols, Macedonians, Romans, Turks, Russians, Polish-Lithuanian Empire, Vikings, and etc.
But as nations developed, they began to put down roots and develop a deep bond with their land as homeland. Thus, the idea developed that further invasions must be ended. But even as people defended their own lands, they still wanted to invade other lands. This was more doable against primitive areas sparsely inhabited… like Siberia for Russians and North America for Anglos. The primitives were too few in number and too backward to mount any defense.
But in parts of the world with sufficient native population, the invaders were pushed out… like in Algeria and Vietnam and India.
So, we arrived at the New Order after WWII where nations would be sovereign and independent… but communicate and trade with one another. It became the Golden Rule.
So…
1. World was once open to constant invasions by everyone. Humans acted like animals.
2. World saw the rise of kingdoms and states that could defend their own territories as homelands. But even as they defended their own lands, they sought to invade and dominate other lands.
3. World finally rejected imperialism and arrived at the Golden Rule where all the world would be organized into defensible nations and all nations would respect the right of other nations NOT to be invaded. But there would be exchange of ideas and goods.
But this Golden Rule is being destroyed by Globalism that is unleashing something like the Second Golden Horde, this time mostly from Africa. I’ll take Golden Rule over Golden Horde. Just ask the Russians.
Imperialism did a lot of good by opening up all the world to the advancement of the West. But it is ultimately problematic because peoples don’t want to be ruled by foreigners forever. So, in the end, the ideas remain but the invaders return.
Anyway, every inch of the world has been claimed at this point. There is nothing more to explore and discover. So, the way of nature — the desire for invasion — should be put to rest, and the world can now exchange goods and ideas. That way, all the world can have best of both worlds. National independence and international exchange of ideas.
But globalism made mass invasion a ‘human right’, which is crazy. Granted, Israel gets pass-over rights to this toxic idea. I wonder why.

Anon[425] this is a *great* comment. I wanted to write up a bunch of these points, but you did a better job so i’m just restating again so a few more folks might read it.

The nation state is *the* greatest human social achievement/improvement. (Ok, after marriage, which let’s men stop incessant fighting and mate guarding, allowing them to channel male energy to building stuff, like civilization and providing child raising necessary for creating productive and responsible citizens.)

One people nations with defined borders is the *only way* humans have devised to live in peace with–potentially–republican freedom. These “globalists”–commies, big-staters, Jews, utopian academics, cheap-labor capitalists–attempting to push us back to multi-cultural empires–are evil people. The multi-cultural empire is inevitably full of ethnic contention, and inevitably ruled by thuggish bullying, extractive elites–which of course the folks pushing it aspire to be.

Tru dat

You can see why daughters were married off at 19 in a world without reliable contraception or abortion, especially since women were not economically self-sufficient and there was no government welfare.

Whiskey is like an old time Marxist – one who sees all phenomenon as yet another expression of something Marx once wrote – like Labor Theory of Value. Except Whiskey is stuck on the concept of beta males and sexual dominance as his explanation for everything.

Obviously social/sexual dominance is a factor in human affaires but it isn’t the only factor. People who have found “the one great truth” suffer from a kind of blindness.

So do the Russians and all the other slavs and the Germans. The Vikings went east and west, though the ones that went east are sometimes called Varangians rather than Vikings. The slavs of all types and the germanics have been occupying neighboring lands (or the same land) and mixing it up for at least a millennia.

The semi-official ‘last Viking king’, Norwegian Harald Sigurdsson, spent part of his life in exile under Yaroslav the Wise (norse name is Jarlsleif) in Ukraine, after he lost the throne of the North Sea Viking empire to King Canute, and then in Byzantium as a captain of the Varangian guard.

The Rurik dynasty of Russian czars were Varangian scandinavians and the founders of Kievan Rus. Veliky Novgorod is in the Norse chronicles as Holmgard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harald_Hardrada

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaroslav_the_Wise

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_of_Novgorod

Poles are “lechitic”, western slavic, along with the Czechs and Slovaks. Roman alphabet and Roman religion. Czechs are probably the most germanized of all the slavs, although I doubt that is a good thing. They even invented German beer (in the city of Pilsen, or Plzen, hence ‘pilsner’ lager).

“In fact, slavery wasn’t abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it.”

Well, I beg to differ. Slavery was abandoned because of the invention of the steam engine, which rendered animal power obsolete. …

Had the steam engine and its equivalent not been invented, slavery would be found all over the world to this day–as indeed it still is in unindustrialized parts of the world.

Three Cranes, you’re hitting on a useful point–these nominally “moral” concepts take place in a social, economic and technological context.

However, i don’t think this answers what was going on. Steam power which had been around 100 years still wasn’t dominating the economy–mining industry? some textile mills?–when the British outlawed the slave trade. High pressure steam engines were really just getting going. Locomotives and steam ships didn’t exist. Most useful work was done directly by human or animal power.

I think you’re basically right about “the world”–and ironically, especially Africa. It would still be full of slaves today but for the white man.

But there was a long process of social and moral development in Europe–seen in the early aboltion of serfdom in the West and much later in the East. Moral sentiments driven by both Christianity and precisely the detribalization and creation of coherent–”we’re all in this together” “one people”– nations that so enrage Jews, but are a great thing for humanity.

Got kicked out of an edit too late.

My understanding is that bronze age cultures like the ancient Egyptians and the Minoans always depicted themselves with dark hair, although sometimes very light skin. Blond hair did not start appearing in murals until indo-european culture and languages started showing up, like the Hellenic Greeks, who came with a bunch of blond gods.

Supposedly archaeologists have found sites they identify with Hellenic culture dating back to 3000BC or earlier, bronze age period when the Mycenaeans and Minoans were in Greece, the indo-european Hellenes were in Ukraine between Greece and the steppe where the Yamnaya came from. By 1100BC or so they were in Greece and had blond hair, and I believe the first ever depicted blond hair.

Do you have any evidence of that?

Blonde hair had to come from somewhere. I don’t know where but by the current theories there were 3 suspects, the aryans, the middle eastern farmers, and some indigenous hunter gatherer groups. Did one of these other 2 groups have it?

Our education system, and our government in general, should try to make life better for American citizens. The American citizens in question are the American citizens who actually exist, and not the American citizens of some fantasy world. …

And of course there are millions of “low-ability” Americans, and the best way to improve their prospects is to reserve the sorts of jobs they can do for American citizens. Let’s do what we can to make life better for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, rather than telling them they should go to college or should have gone to college.

Very good comment end-to-end Calvin.

I know the arguments (Icebreaker, etc); they don’t hold up.

Which arguments do you find most compelling?

Btw I found a pdf of the book.

http://www.jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/icebreaker.pdf

Also a video presentation.

Interestingly although the early book only gets 3 stars on Amazon (lotta 5s some 1s not much in between) a current book of his gets 4.6. “The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II”. Maybe nobody told the ADL Or now you have to buy books to rate things, giving that many shekels(!) to such viewpoints(!!) is too painful.

If the term ‘Aryan’ is taken to mean the Corded Ware descended groups, typified by the Sintashta/Andronovo horizon – that is the later PIE groups, believed by some to be the ancestors of the Indo-Iranian Steppic groups, then the answer is that they were phenotypically north/eastern European.

For various reasons, this finding seems to be very hard for certain ‘swarthy’ west/south modern Indo European speakers to accept.

Steppe/Aryan people were not “blond beasts”. Genetic pigmentation data shows they were mostly brunet. Makes sense considering they were half Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer (related to the Neolithic farmers and other Levantines) and half Eastern Hunter-Gatherer (a mix of those dark-skinned Western Hunter-Gatherers and a Siberian component related to Native Americans). Depigmentation was heavily selected for later in the Northern European climate.

The Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean categories don’t trace a transition from “Steppe” to “Levantine” since Alpines are not a mixture of the other two (they’re a Paleolithic survivor type), and Nordics are depigmented Mediterraneans. It would be more correct to say that both Nordics and Mediterraneans (and Dinarics) represent Levantine/Caucasus morphology while Alpines (and Borrebys, East Baltics, Ladogans) represent indigenous Steppe/Siberian morphology.

And I don’t know why you bring up the ridiculous racialist ideas of Tom Buchanan/Fitzgerald. They’re still wrong. Europe has no creeping “negroid streak”.

Given the excellent defensive skills showed by German troops and formations, even defending long fronts with extended lines of communication in WWII, a Soviet invasion of German-occupied Poland circa 1942 or 1943 would most likely have been an unmitigated disaster for the invaders. Lots of battles like the WWI battles of Tannenburg and Masurian Lakes. Everyone overestimated the advantage attackers had in World War II. Defenders usually did better if adequately supplied and commanded. But everyone remembers Erwin Rommel, not Gotthard Heinrici.

The Wehrmacht got closer than that. The “Hedgehog Memorial” in Khimki (a Moscow suburb) is at kilometer 23 on the Leningrad Highway. It marks the spot that is generally accepted as the closest German troops came to Moscow–23 kilometers from the center of Moscow (Red Square). At this point, however, the Wehrmacht was at the end of its rope and was driven back by Red Army offensives beginning December 6, 1941.

Interesting. Thank you.

Another factor is the decline in the number of workplaces that are organized by a union. Although the factors that you have listed have contributed to the increasing number of “unorganized” workplaces, management has become quite skilled at resisting organization and willing to use lockouts and non-union workers to break union influence. Individual workers have very little leverage when confronted by management.

The typical jati has been very, very endogamous for two or three thousand years.

They weren’t all blond, but they’re the ones hat brought the blonde alleles in. KITLG mutations has been traced back to ancient siberians.

“there’s no evidence of any conflict”

Sure there is. Read War Before Civilization.

One effect that the book has had on me is that my time travel fantasies now include visiting a group of my ancestors from 100,000 years ago or more. The detail that they have now about population movements make me wonder more about what they were like, in the flesh.

Armenians cluster more with the distinctly ‘un-Aryan’ Assyrians than they do with any other ethnicity.

That’s controversial.

If by ‘corded ware’ you mean later PIE groups – such as the peoples who migrated from *Europe* to the plains of central Asia to become known as the ‘Iranians’, before their descent into Iran proper, that bridge of land between the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea, some authorities, on the basis of genetic evidence state that the original unadmixed Iranian groups, before their descent into Iran, were, phenotypically fully European in terms of the alleles known to be associated with light skin, light eyes and light hair, not to mention autosomal clustering.

I assume Unz wants the traffic here

It is generally discounted but that doesn’t mean it is wrong. If you read the article there are a few others who have made the case.

I know the arguments (Icebreaker, etc); they don’t hold up.

It was not like Stalin was a shrinking violet – he conquered some territory too prior to Barbarossa.

Courtesy of the Hitler-Stalin Pact…..

What’s so difficult to grasp about people considering issues on their own merits, while not holding the other opinions of those who agree with them on some issues? Are we all required to engage in groupthink?

All they have left is a battle over terminology, it seems; ancestry rather than race, and what to call the ancient Aryan peoples.

“Race” originally meant ancestry: the term has its origins in horse racing. Somehow the meaning changed to something like “visible phenotypic differences shared by a group”. Hence it was possible for 18th Century writers to talk about “the German race” or “the French race”, although nowadays we would think of the two as belonging to the same race.

It’s like Douglas Murray agreeing with the Right but also attacking the Right because of its baggage.

This is a widespread phenomenon, isn’t it? Murray will rail against the effects of Islamic immigration, but don’t get him started on that imbecile Trump!

Peter Hitchens will decry mass Third World immigration into Britain, then denounce Enoch Powell for noticing it too soon. According to Peter, Powell made it impossible to do anything about it because he upset the liberals too much.

Steven Pinker plays this game as well. He tells his audience that the alt-right attracts young converts because it exposes them to truths that those on the left deny. But it’s not a problem, according to Pinker, because the left just has to get the young people to accept its convoluted and unconvincing arguments against those truths.

Hitler regarded the Slavic Russians as Untermenschen with or without communism. Anti-communism was just the cherry on top of his anti-Russian ideology and a point for rallying support in the rest of Europe (and a successful one at that, until he stepped on the wrong toes).

In hindsight with genomic maps of the world, world maps of IQ etc. it’s pretty easy to point out how dumb an idea it was that Russians were in the same league of spear/bow wielding easy targets that say, Amerinds or Australian aborigines were in terms of yielding their territory. I think the British with their island maritime experience would have had significantly better knowledge of what peoples are like compared to Germans, and warring in Europe was a pretty common thing over the centuries.

Whiskey, you should write a version of this called “Let’s Generalize About Women.”

Nicholas Wade is very mild-mannered also. He was the featured guest at a dinner group I used to attend.

Reich would probably say he never heard of him. Steve who?

That here in flyover country is not a terribly common reply, but out East you hear that a lot. “Never heard of him”.

In some cases it’s obviously humorous, but a lot of the time people say that when they know damn well who someone or something is and further know that you know they do too. Do they think that if they say it enough the person in question will be unpersoned?

Watson is an old, old man who … probably doesn’t give a rat’s ass what others think

Not so sure (from 28 Nov 2014):

James Watson, the world-famous biologist who was shunned by the scientific community after linking intelligence to race, said he is selling his Nobel Prize because he is short of money after being made a pariah.

Mr Watson said he is auctioning the Nobel Prize medal he won in 1962 for discovering the structure of DNA, because “no-one really wants to admit I exist”….

Mr Watson told the Financial Times he had become an “unperson” after he “was outed as believing in IQ” in 2007 and said he would like to use money from the sale to buy a David Hockney painting.

Mr Watson, who shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for uncovering the double helix structure of DNA, sparked an outcry in 2007 when he suggested that people of African descent were inherently less intelligent than white people….

Mr Watson said his income had plummeted following his controversial remarks in 2007, which forced him to retire from the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on Long Island, New York. He still holds the position of chancellor emeritus there.

“Because I was an ‘unperson’ I was fired from the boards of companies, so I have no income, apart from my academic income,” he said.

The Russian billionaire who bought the medal returned it to Watson out of respect.

“Sweden is instructive here”

Possibly but Steve basically used the same rationale for inferring that India had ZERO mobility for a millenia! But Indian last names seem like a poor way to infer that, since many seem to be mostly descriptive stuff, like occupation or village, rather than clan or ancestry. Not the kind of thing passed down over centuries!

Maybe there’s some more rigorous methodology used in the book but Steve hasn’t given any indication of that in the half dozen times he’s brought up the topic.

It’s a mystery to me, too.

If Hitler had realized that the communism was not going to see out a century it likely would have changed the calculus.

Hitler regarded the Slavic Russians as Untermenschen with or without communism. Anti-communism was just the cherry on top of his anti-Russian ideology and a point for rallying support in the rest of Europe (and a successful one at that, until he stepped on the wrong toes).

It is generally discounted but that doesn’t mean it is wrong. If you read the article there are a few others who have made the case. There has been an immense amount of propaganda towards creating a cartoon view of WW2, where the evil beast Hitler was champing at the bit to enslave and genocide everyone in the entire world, Western Europe, Britain, even the USA, some time after he taught everyone German. So it’s only natural for the majority of people and historians to take the established view.

It was not like Stalin was a shrinking violet – he conquered some territory too prior to Barbarossa. And there was a large military buildup prior to the event. Governments don’t telegraph their invasions in terms of announcements, that’s for sure.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy#/media/File%3ASecond_World_War_Europe_05_1941_de.svg

Poles, and other groups throughout the Baltic region, have a mixed Germanic-Slavic heritage. The only distinctively Slavic thing about the Poles is their language.

It sounds like Reich did not spew irrational rage against Steve, but I’ll bet he would if someone were to ask his opinion about Steve.

Maybe not, because Steve can fight back with wit, and has a lot of secret fans in elite circles. Reich would probably say he never heard of him. Steve who?

Is that true? Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only “might makes right”? I don’t think so. Stalin “won” but this did not win the “argument” in his favor.

Of course, you are Jewish, I don’t expect you to ever see Hitler as a good or even as a neutral guy. That’s natural, wrt you and your tribe personally. As far as adopting your tribe’s morality re: Hitler… what’s in it for me? Is it good for the Whites? What’s your pitch?

So far I have heard from you in response to AnotherDad’s comment here:

http://www.unz.com/isteve/david-brooks-denounces-tribalism-and-also-is-stoked-to-learn-hes-steven-pinkers-3rd-cousin/#comment-2216819

AnotherDad

Cut through all the b.s. and Brooksian\Wilkinsonian ideology as just parasitism on white nations. The evil here–and yes it is evil–is not their (stupid) utopian dreams. (Stupid utopianism seems to be a common human failing.) If they want it and want to build it–great. No, the evil is that they insist on having their utopia in *other people’s nations*. The evil is insisting that the rest of us–we normies–are not allowed to have our lives in our nations, but must be part of their glorious experiment.

Jack D

If you want your nation “back” then win at the ballot box, take back all the institutions – the courts, the universities, the media and the permanent government and it’s yours. Better hurry ’cause the demographics look worse every day. The globalists had a 50 year head start while you were snoozing so you had better rush to catch up.

Not a great deal of reciprocated empathy there. But you wish me to feel empathy for your special case that for me is not much different than Hutu vs Tutsi, Israelite vs Canaanite, Turk vs Armenian, Mongols vs everyone who was left in their wake.

There is evidence that the USSR was poised to invade Europe.

Nobody takes that seriously.

Some were, some weren’t. Northern coastal tribes had permanent settlements somewhat like Jomon settlements in ancient Japan. The Chumash had long-established settlement in the Channel Islands. The Iroquois had a relatively advanced economy and even a political system. But there is substantial evidence for major demographic replacement with the Athabaskan migration through the Great Plains and points beyond. Those on the receiving end would have been fortunate to face a result more like that of the European migration through North America.

Add trade with third world to the list, especially letting China into WTO with most favored nation status, which means they can’t be treated any differently tariff-wise than high-wage countries in Europe, which forced Western corporations to invest and produce there or else go out of business, especially in labor-intensive forms of manufacture. In other words, it caused a decline in the relative demand for labor, and hence wages were drawn down.

wrd9, that sounds like a pretty good reply to me.

Now, however, power is more a function of technology, productivity, and infrastructure — all of which are related. And so there is no need to expand, and therefore it would be immoral to do so.

That’s not particularly forward thinking because eventually you hit Malthusian limits. They can be postponed somewhat but eventually you will hit levels of how much food can be created and how much waste can be treated, amongst other uses of energy, by watts per square meter of solar flux.

If you can defend territory until it is fleshed out enough with your population to grow at a more orderly pace, you can ultimately build a larger population with more resources and more ability to defend and project force. If the founders of the USA had thought along your lines they would still be stuck with the 13 colonies.

Hitler got 60 miles from Moscow in 1941, before the US entered the war. If the German Army had gotten some milder weather or some better logistics, Eurasia might be speaking German today.

Definitely a dark timeline….

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Plan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost

“Dunno. HGs typically don’t take to agriculture very well. For example, the HGs in Britain were largely displaced by the incoming Neolithic agriculturalists.” You mean, like, American Injuns?

Probably.

I hope so too. It does look like the Internet Archive saves Taki’s pages: https://web.archive.org/web/20180328143147/http://takimag.com/article/reichs_laboratory_steve_sailer

“Reich wants us to comprehend, no race is wholly unmixed if you look enough millennia back into the past:”

Please share this article by using the link below. When you cut and paste an article, Taki’s Magazine misses out on traffic, and our writers don’t get paid for their work. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. http://takimag.com/article/reichs_laboratory_steve_sailer/print#ixzz5B6G9rVkm

When race scientists referred to pure races, I doubt they ever thought they were unmixed. More likely is that they were referring to purity in their present forms or some snapshot in time.

You’ll probably learn as much (or more) from Greg’s Cochran’s forthcoming review of this book as you you would from the book.

No way. His three posts and a podcast about Bryan Caplan’s Case Against Education contained hardly anything about the book. Cochran only mentions stuff he agrees with or against which he has some contrarian opinion. But he mainly just goes off on tangents where he can write about himself or some pet peeve. He can be fun to read, but not as a replacement for a book.

Triumph of the Will was trumped by Triumph of Heavy Industry.

It was basically triumph of the GDP. USA + Russia > Greater Germany.

There is evidence that the USSR was poised to invade Europe.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy

I wonder if Hitler had let the USSR invade, would the results have been different? Russia is a horrible place to try to invade. An invading USSR would tend to galvanize support for Hitler and against Stalin, one would think. I am not sure that the amount of territory that Hitler conquered prior to Barbarossa was favorable for this. Stopping at some point earlier might have been advisable.

That error was committed back in the MK days though. Who would have thought that Russia would have been able to throw off the communist shackles? If Hitler had realized that the communism was not going to see out a century it likely would have changed the calculus.

Yeah, but Milken was around in the late 80s (I think), but corporate profits as a % of GDP didn’t take off until early 2000s.

Wages as a % of GDP had been steadily falling since early 1970s.

But there seems to be no doubt that there’s a steady reduction in worker wages since the early 1970s. Could be that women entering the workforce, automation and immigration started it but corporate profits have exacerbated the trend for the past 15 years.

Who knows.

But no doubt that Americans workers are now getting a lot less of the pie.

I do recommend the book. It’s written in quite a clear style, no Steven Pinker words. It has a bit of a mystery novel aspect to it, with time machine sci fi thrown in. And it’s pretty detailed about how exactly, technically, they get the data they get, the machines, the procedures, the math. It’s not easy, and it’s subject to a certain amount of interpretation, so anthropologists are not out of work just yet.In fact it’s a very interdisciplinary job, starting with they have to get their hands on old bones.

You can take a bit of pride in how Reich apprenticed in Europe, then came back tho the US and duplicated the set up, but with Henry Ford style mass production as the goal.

But, yeah, Reich does seem reticent at times to make explicit some of the things suggested in the book. For instant, population replacement meant rape and pillage, right? Just say that. Although you do have to get your head around the enormous time spans involved, so maybe other explanations fit.

Painting white Englishmen as conquered people is not cool, but dark-skinned Indians, forever conditioned to be under a foreigner’s boot, is, eh?

To paraphrase Trump: Somebody’s doing the paintings.

Not just that but he’s been a “27 year old” for the past 4-7 years. Must be 32 or 33 by now.

So look at the surnames of nobles who are preoccupied with their lineages and police each other assiduously. Sweden is instructive here.

The mannerisms of someone who knows he’s handling dynamite and better be really careful?

Don’t forget the modern verse of Page & Plant.

How soft your fields so green
Can whisper tales of gore
Of how we calmed the tides of war
We are your overlords

You are misunderstanding the claim. It doesn’t mean “more Neanderthal” = less fecund. Read about Dobzhansky-Muller incompatibilities.

One of your best columns ever, Steve! If Taki’s ever goes dark, I hope Unz will archive all the work you’ve done there.

Along with some others here, I have one quibble about your conclusion: I understand your greater point vis-à-vis the Zeroth Amendment and Merkel’s Mangy Mufti Merkin, but the question of any given invasion and its result is more of a who/whom matter rather than one of absolute morality: No Manifest Destiny, no golden age Beach Boys California.

History is made
History is made to seem unfair

We, many of us, on this site kvetch about all those Muslims invited to settle in Europe and the States, bemoan honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: “Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.”?

I respond that “we” didn’t do jack shit.

Invasion is morally acceptable if your choices are “expand” or “be extinguished”. Given the primacy of population w.r.t power in past years, and the limited ability to extract food from the land, I suspect that there was a degree of truth in “expand” or “die.”

Now, however, power is more a function of technology, productivity, and infrastructure — all of which are related. And so there is no need to expand, and therefore it would be immoral to do so.

The mark of an adolescent worldview is to place avoiding hypocrisy at the top of one’s moral/political priority list.

What is adolescent is to never advance beyond the purple prose period of junior high. Your link… are they attempting to convey a point or to spam paragraphs in case one might hit the target? He jokes about “always be closing” – he was indeed joking.

” . . . [T]hey know well the West’s strange guilt fetish . . .”.

Yeah, AM, maybe there ought to be a statute of limitations on the West’s self-mortification after the 1914-1945 War, which may be giving the casual barbarities of Africans, Middle Easterners, and non-Japanese Asians a pass.

“…it was already very different by the 70′s and 80′s.”

Yes. Already, by about 1969, everything had changed.

Forgot the link.

http://www.information-age.com/men-women-ceos-fortune-1000-123465514/

What a jerk this guy is. I was going to buy the book but unless it is absolutely crucial, I’ll rely on others to summarize it for me.

He has hurt himself going forward. The liberal crowd was never going to buy his material. People like us were the most likely buying audience. And he basically attacked all of us.

Your signal to noise ratio is very low.

The articles about Cheddar Man claim he was dark skinned, blue eyed, and lactose intolerant. So maybe lactose tolerance explains the pots, used to store milk, and the axes, used to clear land for pasture. The axes were likely not battle axes. Or at least used much for battle. If the axes were used for battle it was probably against other pastoral people.

“blond beast pastoralists from the steppes” Hair color genetics is beyond my ability to understand, but from what I read European blonds appear as a result of a mutation that occurred in the Baltic area. The mutation spread because blond chicks are hot.

Hey Steve, was wondering if you’re aware that the Comments are disabled for this piece over at Taki’s. I really enjoy contrasting the comments of your Unz readership with those of the “Takirati.” Thought you might want to know.

The problem with gays in the US military is that they don’t have their own battalions. I’m sure there are plenty of enemies who would be freaked out by homo-troops. Put them on the frontline I say. The trannies too: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_gist/2003/08/scare_tactics.html