The more we find out about genes/evolution thereof (and possibly epigenetics), the more ideas like this and The Spiteful Genetic Mutant Hypothesis will gain validity I suspect.
While I think that you're generally correct regarding societal shifts with the rise and fall of societies over time, I think you're wrong about "mutational load", at least the genetic interpretation. It seems more likely that it is the phenotype (gene expression) that shifts over only a few generations. It's been shown that even without genotype changes, phenotypes can radically change over only a few generations (see the Russia fox study).
Thus, the "high mutational load" that you're referring to consists of both phenotype and genotype changes. But phenotype changes are more radical and faster, it's where you're likely to see the rise in effiminacy, the loss of the masculine, etc. It's also how these expressions can shift so quickly in a population. The environment a child is raised in effects phenotype considerably (see "Hunters Hands" phenotype). It could be that the act of over-civilizing and over-socializing children itself produces an effeminate phenotype.
In the rise of a new civilization, a hardy warrior-people are always found, in its fall it's always an effeminate over-socialized people.
The Leftists TEAR DOWN what the Rightists BUILT UP. They, whoever plays at being in charge, just sets the context to show whats acceptable and let the people then fill it all in with their own desires. If they want to grow a group of people they get all prissy and religious about it pretending "every sperm is sacred". When they want to shrink the group they enable homosexuality and all forms of sexual deviance which has the effect of shrinking the group. That they Dress both angles up in anything and everything to keep the average person from stripping it all back to the bare basics that show CLEAR understanding, is what keeps the THEY as THEY.
And these cycles repeat over and over and over again throughout time. The ones who lag or lead the changes in these contexts are the ones who are seen as the precedence setters if before or dullard laggards if still indulging after the changes have been wrought.
Brilliant article. I’d love to read an expanded version of your last paragraph that discusses interventions. In particular, what would a successful intervention look like within the confines of a democratic multi-racial system? How would it be passed into law? Or would it rely on non-government actors?
Interesting article ... regarding the printing press, while it obviously didn't exist in Roman and Greek times, the increase in homosexuality still followed a rise in alphabet literacy, and so I think the hypothesis that increased literacy alters brain development still has some merit -- I believe feminism can also be attributed (at least in part) to this. I discuss the evidence for this at length here:
As well, in wealthier societies, especially among the upper classes (where feminism and homosexuality tend to be concentrated), it becomes fashionable for mothers to not breastfeed and raise their own children, and instead leave this to slaves / servants / wet nurses etc. I suspect antiracism and out-group preferences are an inevitable consequence of children being raised and nursed by women from a different group. The stress of attachment disruption would also explain some of the mutational load etc. I discuss this in multiple essays, but the two most relevant ones are below, for those who are interested.
I hate Communism, but this is pseudoscientific gobbledygook. Correlation ( if it actually exists) is not causation. What’s next, phrenology, Aryan mythology? Facial feature “analysis” is not DNA analysis. Sorry, everybody is a mutt at this point, like it or not. You’ll have to base your next empire on something else. Maybe a Jiffy Lube Empire of half baked diphthongs. And a better question might be, should we not fund a better basis for interacting than racial selection? How about merit and rule of law? You know like kind of the American ideal? How about we stop acting like monkeys tossing shit at each other and treat one another with some modicum of decency? Just a thought. Another thought: technology changes the playing field. Just like a machine gunner is more valuable than fifty centurions with spears. Being the most beautiful, strongest monkey won’t get it done. Having a huge population won’t necessarily get it done. The past is prologue. It isn’t the entire answer.
Facial symmetry is a very good way to measure mutational load. Humans can identify minute asymetry because this instinct has been selected for before humans existed.
General mutational load is literally dysgenics which is associated with leftism.
Leftists basically have frontemporal dementia. Something like 80% of genes are expressed in the brain, thus if your face is fucked there is a good chance your brain chemistry may be much significantly different.
Uh... no. By illustration, I’m a plastic surgeon. I look at faces and interact with people all day long. It’s gobbledygook. Everybody has a degree of facial asymmetry. A lot of very obviously attractive people have emotional issues. Conversely, many people who are less facially symmetrical do not. If somebody is mentally ill or has neurological issues, you can’t usually tell by looking at their face. It’s an oversimplification. I do think in the other hand that a lot of Leftists have emotional issues, although they aren’t demented by any medical standard. And they may have emotional issues because of environmental and/or genetic reasons, but that’s true for extremists everywhere. This idea doesn’t hold water.
Well, it was led here by our admittedly gay, corrupt elites.
I agree we’re all mixed in, and this is a mishmash, then again it’s political. Seems to be right wing socialism, we’ll redistribute wealth to the conservatives to get the bitchez so we can win wars again... howsa about we win dah wars (seriously, wars not optional now) and then divide up the booty including that phat booty girlz ? > including you cat lady above, don’t worry I got your message. 😉
So we will have to fight the Rus/Viking bred on the Don River wilst rotting from within. Just look at the curent US cabinet members. Technology won't save us.
The only way for sure is to get full genome sequence (not tags SNP genotyping). One's mutational load goes back to past, the only thing you can be sure is that you don't have very strong dominant deleterous mutations. You could get more or less than usual just with common shuffling of genome in meiosis.
Possibly. I am speculating here but wouldnt rightwingers also have a good amount of spiteful mutants indicated by their following of anti-mainstream ideas?
Or maybe not at all because right wing tendencies are very much primordial/evolutionarily adapted, thus significant mutational load usually results in some form of leftism.
I read your article with polling from Prolific, looks like you had a major omission: number of older siblings or number of siblings. Older father might have produced children at earlier age, so it might be that effect dominates.
Hmm I can probably check it with GSS myself. I hope to write you back if I ever do this.
Neither my study nor the GSS are powered enough to test for birth order effects. Nonetheless, paternal age effects similar in magnitude to the one for leftism exist for mental illnesses and IQ, based on molecular and high powered family level data. I find it extremely rude to blithely claim I had a "major omission" when this is all discussed in the article in question and you are seemingly unaware of it. Feels like you are just looking for reasons why the hypothesis isn't true.
Banned for concern trolling while having this subscription list: https://i.imgur.com/uTopfKx.png (notice Richard Hanania, but not Joseph Bronski -- yeah I don't think this touch-and-go pseudo-interaction with the literature is in good faith)
The concept of leftism being a composite of the three scales described is a helpful one. I also like Charles Haywood summation of what defines the left as "Total emancipation from unchosen bonds & forced egalitarianism".
I wish DR authors would stop this annoying trend of picking up and using weird foreign terms however. "Asabiyyah" comes to mind... just write "social cohesion" instead. We don't need words borrowed from mongrel race outgroup languages to express ourselves.
We Bronskimaxxing out here.
Did they not do the experiment - with mice? Multiple generations living in a Mouse Paradise ("wealthy"), and the mice turned effeminate, gay, and lazy
I Would assume that embroyo selection/repro-Tec+ a strong state would be able to effectively remove leftism from existence within a 3 generations
Inşallah
The more we find out about genes/evolution thereof (and possibly epigenetics), the more ideas like this and The Spiteful Genetic Mutant Hypothesis will gain validity I suspect.
While I think that you're generally correct regarding societal shifts with the rise and fall of societies over time, I think you're wrong about "mutational load", at least the genetic interpretation. It seems more likely that it is the phenotype (gene expression) that shifts over only a few generations. It's been shown that even without genotype changes, phenotypes can radically change over only a few generations (see the Russia fox study).
Thus, the "high mutational load" that you're referring to consists of both phenotype and genotype changes. But phenotype changes are more radical and faster, it's where you're likely to see the rise in effiminacy, the loss of the masculine, etc. It's also how these expressions can shift so quickly in a population. The environment a child is raised in effects phenotype considerably (see "Hunters Hands" phenotype). It could be that the act of over-civilizing and over-socializing children itself produces an effeminate phenotype.
In the rise of a new civilization, a hardy warrior-people are always found, in its fall it's always an effeminate over-socialized people.
Its not as complicated as people want to make it.
The Leftists TEAR DOWN what the Rightists BUILT UP. They, whoever plays at being in charge, just sets the context to show whats acceptable and let the people then fill it all in with their own desires. If they want to grow a group of people they get all prissy and religious about it pretending "every sperm is sacred". When they want to shrink the group they enable homosexuality and all forms of sexual deviance which has the effect of shrinking the group. That they Dress both angles up in anything and everything to keep the average person from stripping it all back to the bare basics that show CLEAR understanding, is what keeps the THEY as THEY.
And these cycles repeat over and over and over again throughout time. The ones who lag or lead the changes in these contexts are the ones who are seen as the precedence setters if before or dullard laggards if still indulging after the changes have been wrought.
Brilliant article. I’d love to read an expanded version of your last paragraph that discusses interventions. In particular, what would a successful intervention look like within the confines of a democratic multi-racial system? How would it be passed into law? Or would it rely on non-government actors?
It would likely require some kind of non-democratic government.
Once we win the war, all us conservatives will be on welfare plus Pater Familas and the women our slaves.
TBH I like everything but the welfare part ...
Interesting article ... regarding the printing press, while it obviously didn't exist in Roman and Greek times, the increase in homosexuality still followed a rise in alphabet literacy, and so I think the hypothesis that increased literacy alters brain development still has some merit -- I believe feminism can also be attributed (at least in part) to this. I discuss the evidence for this at length here:
https://thecassandracomplex.substack.com/p/the-androgynous-mind
As well, in wealthier societies, especially among the upper classes (where feminism and homosexuality tend to be concentrated), it becomes fashionable for mothers to not breastfeed and raise their own children, and instead leave this to slaves / servants / wet nurses etc. I suspect antiracism and out-group preferences are an inevitable consequence of children being raised and nursed by women from a different group. The stress of attachment disruption would also explain some of the mutational load etc. I discuss this in multiple essays, but the two most relevant ones are below, for those who are interested.
https://thecassandracomplex.substack.com/p/the-dangers-of-reading-too-much-part-df8 (The Dark history of Parenting Books)
https://thecassandracomplex.substack.com/p/the-lost-girls-and-boys
Very beautiful article. Cool. But it's so over because eugenics can never be mainstream.
I’m not sure at all Eugenics is a good idea.
I’m certain beyond doubt the absolute worst people would be in charge of Eugenics, because it already happened.
I can predict with confidence we’d get a conservative case for Eugenically eliminating conservative voters...
We won’t get 10 years of peace from welfare to conservatives, you get peace the way it’s always been gotten; Victory in War.
I hate Communism, but this is pseudoscientific gobbledygook. Correlation ( if it actually exists) is not causation. What’s next, phrenology, Aryan mythology? Facial feature “analysis” is not DNA analysis. Sorry, everybody is a mutt at this point, like it or not. You’ll have to base your next empire on something else. Maybe a Jiffy Lube Empire of half baked diphthongs. And a better question might be, should we not fund a better basis for interacting than racial selection? How about merit and rule of law? You know like kind of the American ideal? How about we stop acting like monkeys tossing shit at each other and treat one another with some modicum of decency? Just a thought. Another thought: technology changes the playing field. Just like a machine gunner is more valuable than fifty centurions with spears. Being the most beautiful, strongest monkey won’t get it done. Having a huge population won’t necessarily get it done. The past is prologue. It isn’t the entire answer.
Facial symmetry is a very good way to measure mutational load. Humans can identify minute asymetry because this instinct has been selected for before humans existed.
General mutational load is literally dysgenics which is associated with leftism.
Leftists basically have frontemporal dementia. Something like 80% of genes are expressed in the brain, thus if your face is fucked there is a good chance your brain chemistry may be much significantly different.
Uh... no. By illustration, I’m a plastic surgeon. I look at faces and interact with people all day long. It’s gobbledygook. Everybody has a degree of facial asymmetry. A lot of very obviously attractive people have emotional issues. Conversely, many people who are less facially symmetrical do not. If somebody is mentally ill or has neurological issues, you can’t usually tell by looking at their face. It’s an oversimplification. I do think in the other hand that a lot of Leftists have emotional issues, although they aren’t demented by any medical standard. And they may have emotional issues because of environmental and/or genetic reasons, but that’s true for extremists everywhere. This idea doesn’t hold water.
I’m for accepting war and winning as step one.
Accepting.
Not seeking, it found us.
Well, it was led here by our admittedly gay, corrupt elites.
I agree we’re all mixed in, and this is a mishmash, then again it’s political. Seems to be right wing socialism, we’ll redistribute wealth to the conservatives to get the bitchez so we can win wars again... howsa about we win dah wars (seriously, wars not optional now) and then divide up the booty including that phat booty girlz ? > including you cat lady above, don’t worry I got your message. 😉
I even like cats.
They catch vermin.
So we will have to fight the Rus/Viking bred on the Don River wilst rotting from within. Just look at the curent US cabinet members. Technology won't save us.
Why will you have to fight at Don River?
My father is a hard conservative person he even have whitenat leans and he have me with 33 years old, the mutational load reached me or I had escaped?
The only way for sure is to get full genome sequence (not tags SNP genotyping). One's mutational load goes back to past, the only thing you can be sure is that you don't have very strong dominant deleterous mutations. You could get more or less than usual just with common shuffling of genome in meiosis.
Possibly. I am speculating here but wouldnt rightwingers also have a good amount of spiteful mutants indicated by their following of anti-mainstream ideas?
Or maybe not at all because right wing tendencies are very much primordial/evolutionarily adapted, thus significant mutational load usually results in some form of leftism.
@big bronski are we om the same page?
I read your article with polling from Prolific, looks like you had a major omission: number of older siblings or number of siblings. Older father might have produced children at earlier age, so it might be that effect dominates.
Hmm I can probably check it with GSS myself. I hope to write you back if I ever do this.
Neither my study nor the GSS are powered enough to test for birth order effects. Nonetheless, paternal age effects similar in magnitude to the one for leftism exist for mental illnesses and IQ, based on molecular and high powered family level data. I find it extremely rude to blithely claim I had a "major omission" when this is all discussed in the article in question and you are seemingly unaware of it. Feels like you are just looking for reasons why the hypothesis isn't true.
Banned for concern trolling while having this subscription list: https://i.imgur.com/uTopfKx.png (notice Richard Hanania, but not Joseph Bronski -- yeah I don't think this touch-and-go pseudo-interaction with the literature is in good faith)
The concept of leftism being a composite of the three scales described is a helpful one. I also like Charles Haywood summation of what defines the left as "Total emancipation from unchosen bonds & forced egalitarianism".
I wish DR authors would stop this annoying trend of picking up and using weird foreign terms however. "Asabiyyah" comes to mind... just write "social cohesion" instead. We don't need words borrowed from mongrel race outgroup languages to express ourselves.
Thank you for your work.