brain sizes: Einstein's & women's

John Knight jwknight at polbox.com
Mon Sep 9 09:12:35 EST 2002




  
     
       
           "GEE, I'M NOT A RACIST, WHY...ER...UM...AH..." 
              by H. Millard (c) 2002 
       
     
     I'm getting sick of hearing white people mewling that they're not racists every time some hate filled anti-white bigot uses the term racist to shut the white person up. Such cowardice harms all white people, because it emboldens the anti-white bigots.  
        I've also getting sick of seeing "we're not racists" disclaimers on some pro-white Web sites. It's gotten so silly that many timid whites can't say anything at all about race without first saying "I'm not a racist...." By contrast, I've heard very few non-whites ever claim that they aren't racists. I also don't know of any pro-black, pro-Asian, or pro-Hispanic Web sites that have any such disclaimers that they're not racist.  
         
       
     
     I don't care what kind of cowardly spin timid whites put on the we're not racist disclaimers. By even using the disclaimers they're proving that they are weak and effete. You know what weak means. My dictionary defines effete as: exhausted; no longer capable of producing; spent and sterile; lacking vigor, lacking force of character, lacking moral stamina; decadent; soft. That's how I would describe many of those who use these disclaimers, and also, sadly, how I would generally describe many white people in society today.  
        Notwithstanding this condemnation, however, some timid pro-white Web sites do serve their purpose as a threshold for other timid whites who are just starting to wake up to the reality that they are white and alone on a dark planet whose dark peoples want (on a gene level, at least) to destroy them. Such Web sites allow such awakening whites to take a few tentative steps toward a higher consciousness. 
         
       
     
     Still, a bold vibrant people does not apologize for being as it is and for wanting to remain as it is and to not want to become extinct. A bold vibrant people does not show up in history, hat in hand, begging to be allowed to survive and to BE. A bold vibrant people fights for the right to BE and refuses to take an inferior position to any other people. Such a bold vibrant people recognizes no human authority over it that it can even beg from. Such a people refuses to lie down like a whipped dog that has lost its spirit, and give up the struggle to BE. 
         
         
       
     
     I visited the Web site of a pro-white group the other day and the first few words on the site tell visitors that the site isn't racist and that the group rejects racism. I wondered to myself why the group rejects racism. How can they be for one race and reject racism? Of course, I know that what they were really trying to say was that they don't want to have to waste space to give a proper definition to racism so everyone will know that they aren't pushing racial hatred, which is something different than racism.  
        The truth is that racism is benign. It's a philosophical view that says, in its original sense, that one believes the races of man are different from each other. Isn't that the truth? Aren't the races different from each other? Can't we see a few of the main differences? Are we to pretend that there are no differences? And, if we pretend there are no differences, isn't this one of the first steps toward the genocide of distinct races? Aren't those who are pushing the idea that race doesn't exist or who are attempting to minimize racial differences, in our minds, really attacking us and trying to destroy us as a distinct people? You know they are. 
         
       
     
     They're trying to get the ten percent of humans on this dark planet who are white to mate and blend in with the ninety percent of the humans who aren't white. Such a blending is genocide.  
        Some timid souls will argue that because we've let the anti-white bigots redefine the word "racism" to mean "hate" that we must be sensitive and use the word as they have defined it. I believe we should reject this view. Without the use of this and other words, we have a hard time thinking about the reality of race and genes. Humans think in words and we need words to think. If we do not use the right words in the correct ways, we are cutting off our thoughts. If we let others take away our words, we're letting them take away not only our freedom of expression, but also our very freedom of thought, which is the spring from which our expression comes.  

        But, let's be very direct. Racism is a valid scientific/intellectual/ philosophical view of man. Unlike some other unscientific/anti-intellectual/philosophical views of man, racism actually does hold up in reality and it does explain the nature of man and much of existence as existence relates to living things. To deny that one is a racist is to deny that one sees differences among the races of man. We must add, though, that there is a problem with the word racism in that it is too confining. Since the word race is used only for different human groups and doesn't encompass the whole panoply of life, of which humans are a part, the term racism fails to convey the basic principles behind the philosophy. Perhaps this belief system called racism should actually be called "geneism" since this would be a more accurate expression of the belief system. However, since this later term is still not in wide use, as meant here, we are left with the word racism. 
         
       
     
     The essential thing to remember is that genes and their collective expression as race in humans (and, "breeds" in dogs and similar group terms in other species) are the most important element in life. Another important thing to keep in mind is the fact that we are carriers of our genes and in a sense, the genes are directing us in ways that will protect them, and us.  
        Of course, those who are trying to destroy the reality of separate races try to deny the reality of separate races partly by saying that there are no "pure races." Of course, they are right. This is so, because although races are steps toward the development of different species of humans incapable of breeding with one another, we have not had human isolation for a long enough period of time to have any of the present races become separate species--at least as species is usually defined. Because such cross breeding is possible among the races, and because there is no real human isolation, such cross breeding has and does take place, and this keeps races from being purely this or purely that. This has also kept any human race from separating more from the mass of humanity into a separate species that can no longer cross breed with the rest of humanity. 
         
       
     
     However, the argument that there are no pure races is a red herring. We don't have to have pure races in order to have races. There are different races. We can see different peoples and we can classify like with like based on the sensory information we receive. The reason we have our senses is so that we can survive by knowing like from unlike, dangerous from not dangerous, Us from not Us. Those who want to destroy separate races are telling us not to believe our senses. They are wrong.  
        Now even though there has been a minor blending of races over the centuries, we can still tell the difference between white people and non-white people. There may be shades of brown mixed in, but on the whole, we know who is white and who is not. We can also, if we want, decide what constitutes the ideal of each race and say that this ideal is what this or that race is, when in its purest form, and is freer of genes blended in from other races.  

        We don't need to do a genetic study to determine these ideals. Again, all we need to do is use our senses and our brains. 
         
       
     
     How would we determine what is the white ideal? What would the purest white person look like? To answer this, we would have to look at why there are white people at all. White people, as have all peoples, developed from other human types as a response to environmental conditions. For example, whites are especially adapted to cool, rainy lands with cloud covered skies. We know this, in part, and just as one bit of evidence, because we know that white skin allows in more of the sun's rays in such a climate so that a proper amount of Vitamin D can be produced. Black skin, on the other hand, is designed to keep out more of the sun's rays so that too much Vitamin D isn't produced. With this little piece of knowledge, we can then say that a white person must be--please excuse the simplicity of this--white. So, an ideal white person must be white. We can go on with most other characteristics in the same way to actually reverse engineer an ideal white person or an ideal any other type of person.  
        Nature is a very efficient engineer. It designs life with economy and functionality. Races have arisen to fit certain niches in nature. It's as though nature were given a contract to design human creatures for different conditions. The spec sheet for whites might say something like this: Supply a humanoid creature that is self-replicating. It must be able to live and prosper in a cool climate with clouds and lots of rain. It must be able to find food where it lives. So, what does nature do? Just what a human engineer does. A human engineer doesn't start from scratch, but works from what already exists and modifies it. In the case of nature, an earlier human form is taken and modified much the way someone might modify a VW Beetle into a dune buggy. Now, to follow this example further, at first the dune buggy and the VW Beetle will have many interchangeable parts, but as time goes on, the Dune Buggy may be modified more and more to be more efficient for use in the sand. This may cause a change in the engine or other major components. Eventually, the dune buggy may be so different from the VW Beetle, that it will, in a sense, be of a different species. 
         
       
     
     Our natural instincts and many of our natural desires, which we often think are part of our free will, are often really just our genes telling us things. For example, we are often naturally attracted to people who look a certain way because of what our genes are telling us. Our genes want to spread their kind, and to do this we need to mate with those who have the same kind of genes. So, our genes, in a healthy person, will influence in our mating choices. Again, a healthy person, often finds people who look different to be unattractive. The reason is because our outward appearance is gene caused, and gives quick visual clues to who is Us and who is not Us.  
        This may seem unnecessary to say, but you have a right to be white. You have a right to associate only with other whites if this is your wish. You have a right to not date non-whites. If you want to have your family remain white, listen to your genes. 
       
     
     #  #  #  

    
     
     TWO ICONOCLASTIC BOOKS BY H. MILLARD! 
        (Available at finer bookstores, by phone, or on the net)  
        The links appear to work on some software and not on others. If they don't work, you can order via phone.  
     
      1. ROAMING THE WASTELANDS 
        (ISBN: 0-595-22811-9)  
        NEW! JUST RELEASED! H. Millard's latest sacred cow toppling book, 
        is now available at Amazon.com by clicking on the following link  
        or by calling 1-877-823-9235. 

        "A fun-and sobering-thing to read" Alamance Independent 
       
     
      
        2. THE OUTSIDER 
        (ISBN: 0-595-19424-9) 
        H. Millard's underground classic story of alienation 
        is available at Amazon.com by clicking on the following link  
        or by calling 1-877-823-9235:  

        "Millard is an important writer" - New Nation News Reader 
        "Millard is an original. His books aren't like your typical fiction. If you don't know where to put his books, try the same shelf with Kerouac, Kafka, Sartre and Nietzsche" - a reader. 
       

    
     
     a.. References: (Note: links may expire and content not necessary endorsed by H. Millard  
          or New Nation News but presented for further study for those interested in the topic by the NNN editor.) 
          b.. "Not racist" links  
          c.. Monkey chants as black man died 'not racist'  
          d.. "racial differences"  
          e.. "racial types"  
          f.. "right to be White"  
       

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://iubio.bio.indiana.edu/bionet/mm/neur-sci/attachments/20020909/832b9051/attachment.html


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list