Anyone here read anything from Julius Evola?

[Al B. Sure!]

And White disease resistance and civilizational adaptations in the 15-19th century are nothing special among Caucasoids or even all old world people in general (Africans have fewever civilization adaptations, however most of them do have agricultural adaptations and those are the ones that really count). The only reason whites got some breathing room was because of a historical accident that they where the first Old worlders to reach these groups.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. You do realize that the Arabs had been all up from the West African kingdoms like Mali and Songhai, through the Central African semi-nomadic sultanates, East Africa as far south as Zimbabwe, the Malaysian and Indonesian islands and the Philippines? The only thing was that the Arabs didn't reach those areas as conquerers but as traders and missionaries only, centuries before the Europeans knew of the existence of those locations.

Granted, Arab is White but you seemed to differentiate White from Caucasian so I'm assuming you mean English, French, etc. although the 'non-white' Spanish and Portuguese were very accomplished in taking over other lands.

[Al B. Sure!]

People that we would today classifly as of the West African type will number in the billions, and "classical" North East Asians will be holding on with numbers of at least a few hundred milllion.

Billions of Blacks and not too many Asians? Are you insane? You do realize that Blacks are the minority on this planet and actually have a declining population in Africa due to AIDS, warfare, and malnutrition in most countries? And that the freaking Chinese are 1/5th of the world population alone!

Granted, you were very specific about West African and North East Asian, but regardless, what would cause such a dramatic change in population and trends?

[Heraclitus]

Heraclitus:

So you're saying that the solution to maintaining a broad range of physically fit individuals in the nation would be to militarize the society. Militarize das Volk?

Please specify what *exactly* do you mean by this?

Okay. Have you learned anything from Vietnam or the recent Iraq and Afghanistan wars?

Compare the uses of remote controled drones and how they have changed in the last 9 years. Their intial entry was overhyped, but their usefullness as well as the frequency of their use is increasing.

If you feel I'm overoptimistics please slap another 100 years on my estimate, but I don't think you can deny the long term trend.

[Dauphin]

After you.

He already has, I understand.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showpost.php?p=4796325&postcount=1

[Heraclitus]

Billions of Blacks and not too many Asians? Are you insane? You do realize that Blacks are the minority on this planet and actually have a declining population in Africa due to AIDS, warfare, and malnutrition in most countries?

Silly you.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...n_%28UN%29.svg


Of course the 2+ billion number will include about 600 million East African types (the ones good at marathons) and about 300 million that aren't either but I don't think growth will stop in majority W. African countries at 2050.

Afircan American populations (mostly derived from W. Africans) are stable, Brazilian ones are growing healthily as are European W. African populations.
Even North African states like Libya and Morroco are experiencing an inundation from beyond the Sahara.

Europe's projected 691 (7.6% of the worlds population) will also be at least a quarter black by then.

As to the East Asian type


South Korea, HK, Tawian, Asian Americans and Asians in Europe are following the same pattern.

China is of course the largest reservoir.



Its massive starting population and late child bearing (slowing evolution) means it will represent more than half of classic type East Asians even as late as 2200.

Granted, you were very specific about West African and North East Asian, but regardless, what would cause such a dramatic change in population and trends?

Some of the trends are going this way even if we assume static types. But I'm not. In these estimates I was talking about "classical" or should I say modern types here, new types will evolve from current Whites, Asians, Blacks or whatever type you choose in the next century.

American Blacks (even "pure" ones) for example have been trending Caucasoid for the past 100 years in north America skeletally speaking, lactose tolerance is rising, sickle cell is fallling. A mere 20% average White admixture was enough to let a few good genes out into their general population.

[Heraclitus]

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. You do realize that the Arabs had been all up from the West African kingdoms like Mali and Songhai, through the Central African semi-nomadic sultanates, East Africa as far south as Zimbabwe, the Malaysian and Indonesian islands and the Philippines? The only thing was that the Arabs didn't reach those areas as conquerers but as traders and missionaries only, centuries before the Europeans knew of the existence of those locations.

Saudi Arabs have better protection against malaria, some Arabs also have quite a bit of Black ancestry and have had for a very long time (long history of slavery).

In any case Arabs where unable to really conquer these lands, let alone settle them in appreciable numbers. The exception may have been Zanzibar.
If anything the classic Arab type was lost in the Arab peninsula due to imports of Black slaves. There are communities of relativley pure "Zanjis" all over the Middle East. I expect "pure" West African blacks making up about a third of Middle Eastern populations by 2100.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. You do realize that the Arabs had been all up from the West African kingdoms like Mali and Songhai, through the Central African semi-nomadic sultanates, East Africa as far south as Zimbabwe, the Malaysian and Indonesian islands and the Philippines? The only thing was that the Arabs didn't reach those areas as conquerers but as traders and missionaries only, centuries before the Europeans knew of the existence of those locations.

Granted, Arab is White but you seemed to differentiate White from Caucasian so I'm assuming you mean English, French, etc. although the 'non-white' Spanish and Portuguese were very accomplished in taking over other lands.

I consider most Europeans, Georgians, Berbers and many Lebanese, Syrians, Iranians, Turks and a few among other Arabs "White".
However White is usually used for European White subtype so I used that one in my analysis.


Arabs as a whole are a racially mixed ethnicity. Even the ones that clearly aren't White they are ,except in places like Sudan, nearly all Caucasoid.
Indians are also generally Caucasoid, thought a argument could be made that Dravidians are a seperate type.

[Heraclitus]

BTW If you are interested for my predictions for North America a cognitive overclass consiting of a new Eurasian type (the top WASPs and Jews have already merged - Indians and East Asians as well as outliers from all groups will join the mix) will emerge lording over a large dysfunctional lower class (Mestizo, Mullato, Black, 80 IQ "Whites", Other) and a small black underclass (no more than 15% of the population) by around 2100.

[VetLegion]

Regarding the OP, first time I hear about this guy, but skimming the wikipedia,
what's new about his ideas? The talk about the "superior Nordic race" has been
around for a long time. And what is an Italian doing trying to pretend he is
Nordic anyway

[VetLegion]

BTW If you are interested for my predictions for North America a cognitive overclass consiting of a new Eurasian type (the top WASPs and Jews have already merged - Indians and East Asians as well as outliers from all groups will join the mix) will emerge lording over a large dysfunctional lower class (Mestizo, Mullato, Black, 80 IQ "Whites", Other) and a small black underclass (no more than 15% of the population) by around 2100.

And Slovenia? What's going to happen there?

[Al B. Sure!]

Please specify what *exactly* do you mean by this?

You seem to imply that pre-modern (well, pre-1980's) warfare by being smaller in scale and incorporating a smaller percentage of the population who are not afforded any reproductive benefits by their participation in warfare, is limiting positive selection pressure on societies that have this model of warfare. In other words, bronze age Homeric warriors were the physical and mental ideal and those who survived battlefields did so by their abilities as opposed to the random chance of the trajectories of bullets that can be fired by any random individual. Therefore, ancient battlefields provided some selection pressure and those who survived were afforded the spoils of war which included raping the women and wealth that would allow them to reproduce more successfully at home, increasing the numbers of their superior stock.

In other words, are you implying that a return to this, perhaps by militarizing das Volk and engaging in constant warfare, as perhaps would be supported by Julius Evola (it sure was supported by Hitler and Mussolini), would provide for positive selection pressure on a nation's population.

I, personally, find that more appealing that your IQ obsession, although that's been done before unsuccessfully and to the horror of well, the whole world.

[Al B. Sure!]

If you feel I'm overoptimistics please slap another 100 years on my estimate, but I don't think you can deny the long term trend.

It doesn't matter. All the technology in the world doesn't change the facts of asymmetrical warfare. A determined rabble can still poke and peck successfully at the most powerful and advanced military in the world. There are advantages to the low overhead and flexibility that such circumstances provide. Guerilla warfare will always have the potential to be successful, no matter if the US fights its wars with remote control mech warriors. So while your argument may hold true with regards to the superpowers, there'd be enough 'old-school' fighting still to have the same effects.

[VetLegion]

Whites are just a slightly smarter than average Caucasoid that dosen't have a good ecological neiche to fit into (since the advent of modern industralized warfare, before that the combination of a IQ of 100, easily molded tribal instincts and reasonable muscle mass was a good build for a soldier), that's why we will be replaced, that's why we fail to reproduce

You lost me there. What ecological niches are you talking about? Why would one
race be fitter for the modern world than another? What does it have to do with
reproduction?

[Al B. Sure!]

Vet:

And what is an Italian doing trying to pretend he is
Nordic anyway

A Sicilian at that!

[Al B. Sure!]

Hera:

BTW If you are interested for my predictions for North America a cognitive overclass consiting of a new Eurasian type (the top WASPs and Jews have already merged - Indians and East Asians as well as outliers from all groups will join the mix) will emerge lording over a large dysfunctional lower class (Mestizo, Mullato, Black, 80 IQ "Whites", Other) and a small black underclass (no more than 15% of the population) by around 2100.

That's ****ing retarded. First of all, there would be no racial lording over anyone in the United States unless catastrophe happens and the US as we know it no longer exists. Secondly, what trends are telling you this? I suppose you're talking about the supposed rising inequality in the US but you really think it would result in something like Mexico? And thirdly, Black Americans are obviously not in the ideal circumstances and not particularly where it would have been hoped they would be economically and socially as a population at this point 40 years after the Civil Rights movement but overall, the trends are positive, if slowed. There will definitely be more Blacks in the upper economic strata in 90 years than there are now.

[Al B. Sure!]

You lost me there. What ecological niches are you talking about? Why would one
race be fitter for the modern world than another? What does it have to do with
reproduction?

I think he's claiming that the trends are that the African population is rising (which is not what I've seen referenced in the past although I really don't feel like looking for stats) and Western populations are declining so therefore, Africans are better adapted for modern living. Of course, how truly modern the lifestyle of most Africans actually is would be debatable as would be whether or not they would see a population shift with a more Western lifestyle, accompanied by the decline seen in Europe, Japan, etc. Also, it generally seems odd to say that an ethnic group is better adapted to modern civilization because they can out-reproduce other groups. I mean yeah, from a Darwinian perspective I suppose it would be true, but not in any human social sense. Assuming that's what he's trying to get at, then by that logic, all those sub-80 IQ people who are reproducing like rabbits according to Hera would be supremely adapted to the modern condition.