White people more ill

Guess we deserve all the positive discrimination, according to the last post‘s link.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4619848/
The science is settled. We’re genetically oppressed, hire us, BBC.
Celtic blood is especially prone.
RH-Neg blood is also connected to Ancient Hebrews, choose your opinion wisely.
It could even be a fine test for Jewish pretenders. If you’re one of the original tribe, you won’t mind a glance at your sheet?
Recessive genetics (islands and nomads) are more fragile and deserve special legal status because we don’t want to be anti-science, do we?

According to this proof, the Japanese, Chinese, Korean and Indians merit less positive discrimination than the British, Basque, other European and American.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rh_blood_group_system#Population_data
I guess Mother Nature isn’t a white supremacist. Tell me, where’s the data for immigrant RHF? Does Magic Dirt transform them? Who is needy?

“Rhesus-positive and Rhesus-negative persons differ in the presence-absence of highly immunogenic RhD protein on the erythrocyte membrane. The biological function of the RhD molecule is unknown. Its structure suggests that the molecular complex with RhD protein transports NH3 or CO2 molecules across the erythrocyte cell membrane. Some data indicate that RhD positive and RhD negative subjects differ in their tolerance to certain biological factors, including, Toxoplasma infection, aging and fatique. Present cross sectional study performed on 3,130 subjects) showed that Rhesus negative subjects differed in many indices of their health status, including incidences of many disorders.

Which direction?

Rhesus negative subjects reported to have more frequent allergic, digestive, heart, hematological, immunity, mental health, and neurological problems. On the population level, a Rhesus-negativity-associated burden could be compensated for, for example, by the heterozygote advantage, but for Rhesus negative subjects this burden represents a serious problem.”

Since wikipedia tends to delete certain data once I link, here’s a spare.

Read it and weep.

Race and ill health

Scrambling for nurture excuses, are we?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK25526/

Fails to account for IQ, social mobility isn’t equally possible.

The participant with a higher visual acuity gets the pilot position.

Unless they’re seriously suggesting we should dole out positions and their responsibility (legal) on the incompetent? That sounds more like a curse on them.

The simpler explanation (Ockham) is that health impacts the ability to strive and lower IQ causing poorer lifestyle choices compounds the ill health as a permanent feature.

How to truly test this?
Within a race, some castes do poorly and this is both represented in lower IQ scores than their genetic kin as well as “poor” health. Where one caste e.g. Western-living Indians, represents a middle-class (as in the UK), white people are at a distinct disadvantage – disproving and debunking the privileged status hypothesis. So-called “positive discrimination” or reverse racism, leads more opportunities to the class who least deserve it (financially stable) purely on the basis of race (racist).

Race isn’t a qualification. To treat it as any sort of meaningful status opposes the Race Relations Act.

The BBC should’ve been stripped of taxpayer funding the moment it refused to hire white people, the taxpaying majority. As a point of fact, how come they’re allowed to turn a private profit? Isn’t that also a monopoly?

You can’t study class and discrimination without classism but ah! They won’t do that!

Wonder why.

How hard do white natives work to reach a given position, eh?

The question never published nor studied.

Who has it easier? It would be easy to study but I’ve seen nada.

Does meritocracy cease to apply if your skin has a certain level of pigment?

Is this the new coffee-coloured aristocracy? Reign of error.
When you hire someone on the basis of skin colour, you make everyone who looks like them look similarly incompetent. Who’s racist?

Public interest, equality in hiring/promotion/wages and all that.

Favouring one party is a direct oversight spurning the other.

Over-representation is treason. i.e. Should whites govern Africa?

Bias is scientifically proven, ruling over the outgroup impartially is impossible for all races.

Whose interests do they represent in practice? That would prove neutrality, if they also plugged white and poor causes. …No? Have they ever represented the majority …. in a democracy? Anything less is indeed treason.

It comes down to this: who pays the academic’s share of taxes for these divisive papers?

Are the poor working two or more jobs expected to slave away for those who write inciteful documents encouraging their oppression?

Trends in genome scans and sources of error

Cropped link – https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13339
I’ll be honest, I’m linking this for a stupid reason.
Links to – https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/mec.13339
One author is called Payseur.

Things that make nerds go Ooh.

But yeah, there are tons of methodological issues with DNA tests, exhibit A.

From issue entitled: “Detecting Selection in Natural Populations: Making Sense of Genome Scans and Towards Alternative Solutions”

They’re studying ongoing human evolution, people. They’re biologists.

It isn’t like every mutation-prone cell in the world decided to play nice and stop while they play catch up.

Don’t give away something so valuable the police can’t steal it to a shady faceless corporation with ties to Israel and Google. Mmkay?

Medical ethics quiz round, rhetorical Q:

Is it really a murder if they clone your DNA?

Biologically, no.

Minority status and voter dilution

To wet your whistle.

http://courses.math.tufts.edu/math19/duchin/dilution.pdf

Explains why they screech in excitement or sob with crocodile tears about everything demographic. It’s just vote-rigging. Bringing in fake voters (not actually with any birth right to decide the outgroup’s infrastructure and historical matters*) is comparable to a false military (terrorists, importing terrorists is also treason) since it’s the two ways to gain power – the status (political positions, MP, PM, POTUS, AG) and the might (enforcement with force -or else- and violence and little considered but critical intimidation i.e. common example, Western girls scared to wear more feminine AND Western clothing in multicultural areas, who has the balls to do that study?). [has to be both for clear signal value]

Political correctness is the tyranny of cultural intimidation.

*e.g. if they wouldn’t go to the draft, they have no opinion on the draft or the possibility of war. They’d be forced though. Playing victim doesn’t mean acting like an hysterical woman come draft time would work. I’d go to any version of the draft I’d be physically capable of so weak men have no excuse. I heard it described thusly: Do you wait for them to stab you warm in your bed hiding under a blanket or meet death like a man? ‘Like a man’ there referring to physical courage, what modern men sorely lack as they ‘work on’ abs and chest waxes and spray tans. The Hysterical Left can’t expect to always get rescued by the Honourable Loser Right. Actually, a smart general puts the weaker men on the front line knowing they’re A useless (I’d like to see a study on male health status markers for military purposes and IQ**) and B will get picked off anyway… this isn’t mean, and actually less sexist, since it’s good for the war effort*** and the overall fitness of Men as a category. If you spare the feeble men like prize inbred birds in a climate controlled room, as in WW1, you… should look up all the stupid socialist bullshit that got in shortly thereafter. Weak men make weak voting decisions. The best men died on the field, literally. Older and smaller wars, prior to the World ones, were highly eugenic for the male genome and the nomination system of medals for valour etc. reflect this incentive structure. They don’t hand out medals for a good pregnancy because surviving that condition is very random, no precise behaviours really change the outcome and it can have nothing to do with fitness e.g. sepsis****. Military medals handed out all the time make no sense, that’s the arrogance, and medals for mothers only make sense for a high number AND quality of children. We give children (pre-teen and under) medals when logically it should go to the family and strengthen that unit.

**This study is interesting and verging closer but I’ll add it separately.

***A statistic is quantitative whereas the genome is qualitative. If you had a binary choice between your country losing an inferior quality specimen (we are animals) and a far, far better one of its kind, who would you rather help with the rebuilding effort after the war? It’s like weeding a garden, this is so obvious.

****The future is bound to suck with antibiotic resistance AND escalating non-European population, there will be a pandemic. At some point. Mathematical inevitability.

The politicians don’t want the immigrants to know: A passport is a license to draft.

That’s literally what it is, legally, what it’s always been and why they became a big deal in WW2. In the event of a war while abroad, you could be identified with your country of military subscription. I’d love to see a Freedom of Information request on this, what a passport legally enshrines as a duty to the holder. It’s an international symbol of citizenship so burning it won’t make a bit of difference, you agreed and signed over XYZ. Why else would you sign your own passport? You must ensure the person crossing your border is signed on as a friend/ally and not a current enemy (military invasion). Why do passport inspectors ask why you’re there, for legal reasons?

Argh! I give up explaining this point.

The census is about food security, part of national security. Older ones were all about farms.

Back to voter dilution related “problems.”

It’s insane we have foreign nationals who think a passport is something they’ll never need to repay. It isn’t like a blank cheque, the hand-rubbing politicians see you as currency, you as a person. It’s a legal document binding you to the fate of a country, including its national debt, so to ruin that country or prefer your real “home” in policy decisions won’t actually work out for them? Just saying.

Sinking a ship you’re on and celebrating because you hated the captain.

If I’m a bitch, my name is foresight.

It’s a trifecta of stupidity. Citizenship is a noose, and you want dual?
[Actually, why don’t dual citizens pay twice the taxes? No, that would be fair, wouldn’t it? Can’t have that. ‘Fair’ is racist. nb Logically, they get twice the citizenry benefits and effectively pay half the tax for same. The politicians sell pig-shit thick celebrities on dual citizenships by appealing to their ego, which tells you everything you need to know.]

Pissing off the people who helped you (1) with a more advanced military (2) and higher native IQ (3)?

I foresee this ending well… how will we go after them for their share of the debts?

[inc. odious debt, hours of fun on that one]

Libertarians are stupid because they assume immigrants have common sense and act in their own and their home’s best interests. Haha no.

And the people who think being nice to the outgroup means that group will treat them any better or more stupidly, make them leader of the foreigners?! (See Labour leader contention for that last, no they won’t accept a foreign leader either. If Labour wants to be the ethnic party, it cannot have a white leader any more).

You know the show about dragons. That’s more plausible. This would never happen.

They’d rape her to death in about a day. This is medically possible.

No, your skin is your uniform whether you accept it or not, if you research their cultural psychology, even within the group itself they have caste systems. Multiple. And whitey is on the bottom of that scale too. History doesn’t change because you smiled at someone.

WW1 was the photo war, WW2 was the film. What’s the medium of WW3, memes?

Link: Why we need eugenics

The founding stated purpose of the NHS was eugenic.
It isn’t what your history teacher brainwashed you.
Every celebrity sticking up for “healthcare” is into eugenics.
As long as the NHS pays for abortions and contraception.

Repeat abortions nursing article:

“there is a significant risk that the child would suffer physical or mental abnormalities leading to serious handicap”

Various conditions will disappear.

http://atavisionary.com/why-we-need-eugenics/

Important practical note:

Logically, you’d need proportionate eugenic policies to simply counterbalance the dysgenic ones, purely to even it out and start from neither. neutral position. Eugenic in this case is basically any policy that encourages healthy taxpayers to have more kids and raise them properly (that will also have better life outcomes and so on into prosperity via pursuit of individual happiness helped by the nation state they own, how terrible, right?). Dysgenic is whatever prevents this sustainable circle of life (holds aloft a lion cub) or more directly harmful, promotes ill-health and sterility in a population swayed by antisocial (punitive) policy changes. It’s technically dysgenic to promote the continuation of the “loser” lines of the outgroup too (keeping prisoners and slaves instead of killing them in war means eventually your kids will breed with them) but that’s also pathological altruism (classic empire suicide) and only formerly happened when a major war was lost and most of the healthy men were dead (conquest). Migration patterns is a PC way to say “conqueror boundaries”.

To promote continuation of another genetic line over one’s own isn’t merely genetic suicide and likely a form of madness (nothing in evolution accounts for this and it’s direct ingroup harm), it’s literally a spin on treason.

If the outgroup is so great, go live among them before “helping”.

Demographics matter. Biology matters. People’s personalities, including non-cognitive traits that affect life outcomes, are highly heritable. Specific pro-social temperaments conducive to civilization have been demonstrated to be genetically determined in animal studies with foxesand mice. In addition, all relevant identical twin studies have found that genetics accounts for at minimum 45% of the total variation in intelligence within populations. A significant portion of studies, notably including the most comprehensive ones, have estimated the genetic contribution to be between 70 and 80%. The heritability of intelligence has also been demonstrated in non-human primates.

IQ as a measure of intelligence and a predictor of positive outcomes has been demonstratedbeyond any shadow of doubt. Not only are those with high IQ more likely to have positive life outcomes on a personal level, but their efforts as a class contribute significantly more to the economic health and technological progress of civilization than the average or low IQ classes.

You want equal outcomes?
Start with equal contributions!

“They can’t”? Yeah, we know!

That is literally our point.

So who owes whom, considering the people who take more than they produce have the privilege of living off those other people already, purely for a coincidence of geography?
National socialism, right there. Producers enslaved to consumers, seems temporary.

They complain about The Rich but never want to kick the Russians out of London, do they?
Then it’s lachrymose Guardian pieces blithely bemoaning why property is so expensive.
Putin kicked those corrupt Russians out and you wanna keep them? WHY?

The only Russian collusion is with real estate agents.

IQ is so important to civilization, in fact, that the relative wealth of a country can be accurately predicted from average IQ*. Intriguingly gains that result from increasing intelligence do not suffer from the law of diminishing returns. Therefore, the relative fertility of high intelligence vs. low intelligence people has significant implications for the evolution of civilization and humanity…..

Evolution is ongoing remember.

Incentives make societies based on their priorities and values, punitive sanctions on health and markers of prosociality e.g. income tax paid, decay the society of envy.

The politics of envy end in death. I guess it’s the sociopath’s way to prevent ‘suffering’.

I feel like the only person to notice how America’s hand-wringing guilt over its “evil” supposedly ‘eugenic‘ sterilizations of the grossly dependent went without mention during the unusual boom times a generation plus afterward. The same prosperity occurs after the natural culling effect of major disease outbreaks. This happens everywhere.

Black Death > Boom, Renaissance

Everywhere.