Anyone here read anything from Julius Evola?

[Heraclitus]

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.

I don't think you realize just how unplesant a high tech future can become
.
The dirty secret of history is that slaughtering the population of a province works pretty well against insurgents. I'm talking about the horrifying possibility of automated genocide here, killing of civlians done on a industrial scale not in concentration camps but in cities and schools and farms and in the forests.

[Heraclitus]

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?

Sorry.

Whites an Asians have nearly the same birthrate in the Western world. Asians have a higher average IQ, thus they will have a higher standing in any society where they live and meritocracy reigns (eventually).
Jews have higher IQs than both of them and also reproduce more readily, they are however bleading and assimilating among Whites.
Africans have low IQs and a high birth rate.


A host of genetic adaptations and historical circumstances means that Whites have low brithrates, a relativley small and old starting population (a billlion?) are more prone to selfhatered and are the only people who seriusly strive for multiracial societies. But in a multiracial society they have neither the birthrate to succed in a r-strategy nor do they have the high IQ and ethnocentrism needed to break the economic glass ceiling above which birth rates begin to rise again.

As such portions of the population are being dragged in both directions. Dysgenic fertility ensures chavs will never go extinct, while asortative maiting means high IQ whites will stick to their own kind and as the kind gets rarer will stick to any other high IQ type they can latch on to.

We shall either see complete displacement of Whites by others or significant changes in the "White" genome. Perhaps gentile whites will evolve a group survival strategy like the Jews, perhaps they will become tribal and religious, perhaps Whites will become reasonably good welfare queens, but in any case real genetic change will take place on a larger scale than ever before because:

a) The environment is radically different from the envrionment of past civilized times
b) The worlds population is larger than it has ever been
c) People don't nesecarily just marry the girl from the next village anymore

These factors mean that all humanity is in for fast change in the next few centurie, faster and more profound than the cahnges seen in humans after the adoption of agriculture. "Whites" in 100AD where not the same as "Whites" in 1900AD genetically, but the "Whites" of 2300 AD will seem more like another race in characteristics.

[Al B. Sure!]

I don't think you realize just how unplesant a high tech future can become
.
The dirty secret of history is that slaughtering the population of a province works pretty well against insurgents. I'm talking about the horrifying of automated genocide here, killing of civlians done on a industrial scale not in concentration camps but in cities and schools and farms and in the forests.

What? Biological weapons? America is not doing that and is going to stop any other country from doing that. Only some catastrophe that destroys the US as we know it would cause something like that to happen. As long as the US in its present form with its present values exists, it's not going to happen.

[Al B. Sure!]

means high IQ whites will stick to their own kind

Who says? I suspect that inter-racial marriages increase with IQ or some proxy for IQ like education level. I don't know what the stats are for this, but I highly suspect this. More educated people tend to be more racially tolerant.

[Al B. Sure!]

Heraclitus, the stuff you're saying doesn't even make any sense. Whites going tribal and religious to preserve themselves from the darker races... sounds like you think everyone European is going to go Neo-Nazi.

Honestly, the most interesting thing for discussion you threw out there which I'm a little disappointed that you didn't respond to my comments on it was the declining selection pressure brought on by warfare.

[DaShi]

Nothing he says makes sense. He's been proven wrong time and again and like Ben keeps up with this nonsense. The sad part is that he actually thinks he's being clever.

[VetLegion]

But in a multiracial society they have neither the birthrate to succed in a r-strategy nor do they have the high IQ and ethnocentrism needed to break the economic glass ceiling above which birth rates begin to rise again.

Birth rates begin to rise again after some ceiling? Rich women who earn X have
fewer kids than rich women who earn X+$10.000?

[Heraclitus]

Who says? I suspect that inter-racial marriages increase with IQ or some proxy for IQ like education level. I don't know what the stats are for this, but I highly suspect this. More educated people tend to be more racially tolerant.

Their own kind in this context was primarily meant high IQ group. My point was kind of that low IQ and high IQ Whites are diverging, remember the prediction of the emergence of a new Eurasian type in America?

Also racial preferences for mates still exist in higher IQ ranges. And BTW a interesting stat: Gentile Whites are, all else being equal, more Liberal and racially tolerant in the US the closer to mono-racial their environment is (cities, neighborhoods).

[Heraclitus]

Heraclitus, the stuff you're saying doesn't even make any sense. Whites going tribal and religious to preserve themselves from the darker races... sounds like you think everyone European is going to go Neo-Nazi.

Religious, think Amish or Brither.
Tribal think Jews or as an alternative the clannish structures that exist in the Middle East where nearly every minority religious group tended to form secretive inbreed tribes.

They aren't going to exterminate anyone, unless provoked, but they may change so that they greasing each other's elbows, help each other out and implicitly arrange marriages. They may go from people who trend towards building high trust societies to the kind that works in low trust societies, helping out family first, then clan, then tribe or fellow believers.

Honestly, the most interesting thing for discussion you threw out there which I'm a little disappointed that you didn't respond to my comments on it was the declining selection pressure brought on by warfare.

I didn't have much time to respond. Yes warfare was in ancient times eugenic. It in many ways encouraged the development of altruism, even today most soldiers who have seen combat would die for their "buddies" even the ones they hate, but would feel rather cold in comparison to die for a random soldier on "their" side. Turns out military structure, the size of the smallest groups matches more or less the size of a tribe. Our brains are wired to die for other buddies in our warband, since even if we die they are our relatives and are fighting for our children as well. People who haven't seen combat or haven't been in the military have a hard time understanding the strength of these feelings, Tolkien tried to for example portray some of these feelings in the Lord of the Rings (his WW1 experiences meant he understood them) and kids today think its gay (the movie didn't help).

And I suppose I should emphasize that I don't think IQ in itself is good measure of the worth of a man.

[Heraclitus]

Birth rates begin to rise again after some ceiling? Rich women who earn X have
fewer kids than rich women who earn X+$10.000?

Yes. Not necessarily women but the extremely wealthy have above replacement fertility.

[Heraclitus]

What? Biological weapons? America is not doing that and is going to stop any other country from doing that. Only some catastrophe that destroys the US as we know it would cause something like that to happen. As long as the US in its present form with its present values exists, it's not going to happen.

How exactly do you prove biological warfare? Suppose a genetically engineered virus makes a population more docile or infertile.

How do you prove it didn't evolve naturally? When would you even notice something like this being deployed especially if it didn't have that huge an effect. Would a 10 million nation reallly notice 300 000 less babies over a course of a few years for example? Would anyone figure out why insurgency against occupying forces has nearly ceased if a pacification virus was deployed?

And as to the US, don't be so sure. In 1945 more than 7% of Americans tought the Japanese should be exterminated, google up "Germany must die", there where people preWW2 proposing all Germans should be sterilized. Google up the small scale slaughters of civilians during Vietnam.

And at the end of the day, mass automated slaughter of civilians can be justified by the same logic as bombing Dresden to the ground or nuking of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

These things are merely decades in the past.

As to other countries. The US did not intervene in Rwanda and they aren't doing so in Darfur. Suppose one side in a unimportant conflict begins using automated hunter killer drones to wipe out villages or towns? Why would the world care more than it does why those villages and towns are emptied by machete?

Regardless the US is in relative decline, they will have less and less power over other nations than they do now.

[Heraclitus]

And Slovenia? What's going to happen there?

Unpredictable for such a small player.
But most likely scenario is that we share the fate of the EU.

Regardless the scenario its nearly certain that Slovenians as a people are dead in the long term, perhaps a Slovenian derived language will still be spoken on the territory in 200 years time but that is nearly irrelevant if the genetics and memetics change so radically.

The EU will probably see either civil wars and balkanization or a blending ala Brazil and the emergence of a brown cognitive Eurasian elite similar to the US, the elite will be numerically smaller and dumber due to European demographics (few Jews, few high IQ immigrants) ruling brown lower and black underclasses.

[DaShi]

Unpredictable for such a small player.
But most likely scenario is that we share the fate of the EU.

Blasted off the face of the Earth? Yes, most likely.

[Heraclitus]

Blasted off the face of the Earth? Yes, most likely.

Do you mind sharing why you think the EU will be blasted off the face of the Earth?

[C0ckney]

hera, one day you're going to wake up and realise that none of this matters, at all. and, even if it did, there's not a thing you can do about it.