—“Races don’t genetically exist”—
I don’t generally want to debunk this argument, because it’s intellectually insulting to even have to and it brings Island 120 wannabe idiots out of the woodwork.
(a) it’s pseudoscientific nonsense that takes advantage of human statistical and genetic illiteracy. People don’t like feeling stupid and played, or being corrected when they’re stupid and played, even if they’ve been played for a very long time. And they have been played for a long time – by nearly all social ‘science’ from boas, marx, freud, frankfurt’s counter-enlightenment through perhaps the 1990’s. Boas, marx, freud and Frankfurt school comprised the majority of the ashkenazi scientific-counter-enlightenment against Darwin, Pareto/Durkheim/Weber, Spencer, Menger, Maxwell, and Poincare. The pseudoscientific trend was reversed due to advancements in genetics and brain imaging, and the subsequent lack of repeatability of nearly all social ‘science’ – meaning nearly every publication in social science was and most remain false.
Conversely, Stereotypes – of which races are a category, are the most accurate predictor in the ‘real’ social sciences. Which is counter to identity-politics messaging. Stereotypes must survive constant daily empirical testing, by individuals, and that is why they are so accurate: they survive constant testing.
(b) Just as we differentiate from chimps by only 3% genetically, and the rest is ‘noise’m a great deal of our genome is ‘noise’. Intelligence for example requires a large number of genes to express, with most variations harmful, appearing as ‘noisy’ in the data; and a large number of genes control our endocrine systems and therefore rates of development and gender-trait biases in development. And while those traits are many, they are a tiny bit of variation in the genome – as such BROAD statistical analysis of ALL traits vs NARROW MEANINGFUL traits simply serves mislead – to lie: to justify the falsehoods; and;
(c) it’s unproductive to debate people, since all life is and must remain a biological competition and sortition to defeat the evolutionary Red Queen, and people are not arguing their intuitions rationally but on behalf of their political demands for increasing collective allies (left, female, r-selection strategy), or separating into specialized allies (right, male, k-selection strategy). In other words, It’s all just genes speaking, not sense – which is why we’re susceptible to such sophisms. In other words, we’re just using language to shame, gossip, and rally as a proxy for evolutionary violence.
(d) under Nationalism groups can pay the costs of their underclasses and therefore they limit them – thereby assisting all of humanity in betterment. Under globalism (imperialism), groups can outsource the cost of their underclasses and therefore expand them at the host’s expense. In other words, bad governments that export underclasses are just conducting war by genetic rather than religious, economic, or military means.
A SMALL NUMBER OF AXIS OF SPECIATION
There are a small number of very important axis in differentiating human beings by physical, behavioral, and intellectual traits:
(a) rates and depth of sexual maturity;
(b) symmetry or asymmetry of gender expression (which matters a lot when it comes to brain structure),
(c) and because of a+b, verbal acuity (data hints that we sacrifice capacity for verbal ability – which follows the trend of sacrificing some physical traits for cognitive traits, which appears necessary given that every gram of brain is eleven times as expensive as every gram of muscle.)
WHY RACES EXIST: DEMONSTRATED BEHAVIOR
1 – Races exist as observable differences in morphology (physical); Most of which either increased neotonic evolution (finer), or reversed neotonic evolution (stronger) by changes in rate and depth of sexual maturity.
2 – They exist in demonstrated traits (distribution of abilities and behaviors), (meaning emotional, psychological, and intellectual) and;
3 – They exist in demonstrated kin selection in association and reproduction, with crossover still under 15%, which is largely at the extremes where the ratio of available mates of similar status is asymmetric.
4 – They exist by self sortition, in that groups tend to sort by neighborhood, by friends, by mates, by work, by voting block;
5 – They even exist at scale in the coloration of demonstrated social economic, and political classes, for the painfully unpleasant fact that neotonic traits are always and everywhere preferable to their opposite, and as such we ‘sort’ into classes (or castes) by neotonic differentiation. We still ‘pair off’ reproduce in a Nash equilibrium that continuously reinforces the classes limiting rotation except for slight up and down out of the middle.
6 – for those of us in the intellectual and upper middle or upper classes the differences are marginal, largely because we are reproductively, economically, and informationally independent of others, and the cost of those differences is lower within kin groups. However, for the vast majority, they are dependent upon reproductive, economic, and informational utility of working with near kin who is as equally ‘socially undesirable’ or ‘limited in productive capacity’ or ‘limited in out-group reproductive desirability.
We develop with different levels of clannishness (kin selectivity) and different levels of disgust response. A conservative (male bias) quite literally feels genetic distance as ‘disgust’, and opportunities to cooperate only as valuable as they are in advancing the competitiveness of the group in the long term. A progressive (female bias) quite literally feels any chance of conflict with fear, and all opportunities for cooperation with others as potentially beneficial.
The fact that two species can interbreed or two species not interbreed, or the distinction between species and breeds (races) is for the purpose of classification. And homo sapiens were pretty clearly in the process of speciation again, when trade, domestication of plants and animals, and finally metallurgy reversed it. We have been developing very quickly over the past 2m years, and frighteningly so once we developed language.
EQUALITARIAN NATIONALISM OR UNEQUAL CASTE IMPERIALISM
We get the opposite of what we think we’re seeking.
This is why WE CAN ONLY CHOOSE between NATIONALISM where by we produce small equalitarian, homogenous polities, and EMPIRES where we produce many hierarchical classes. No matter what you do we do or we want, evolution (selection) will do its job and devolution its job. We will sort into large castes, or sort into small nations.
The data shows that large caste systems increase underclass reproduction and imprison demographic groups in competitive deprivation (relative poverty), while small national systems decrease underclass reproduction and liberate demographic groups from competitive deprivation (relative prosperity).
Races exist – they are a stereotype. Stereotypes are the most accurate measure we have to work with. We are exceptional judges of STATUS, meaning sexual, social, economic, and political market value.
We call this market value “class”.
We each vary in value in each of those markets.
We will, forever, out of evolutionary necessity, SELECT for optimum possible sexual, social, economic, and political market value.
It is what it is.