(Part 1 of a series on genocide)
Our text for the day is Exodus 17:14, “Then the LORD said to Moses, Write this in a book as a memorial and recite it to Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.”
Brazil. Grant “white genocide” value as a rallying cry. Grant that the fevered fantasies of the Left feature the disappearance of the white race. But as a matter of making accurate,
exact predictions about the future, can the white race be subject to genocide? Should we fear the disappearance of the white race?
Answer: qualified “yes”. I hope to defend that answer in later posts in this series. But first I want to address a more narrow question: are there any historical examples of whites vanishing in a country with a politically powerful white majority? The fear of white genocide is sometimes framed as a fear that every white country will become “like Brazil”. In the Brazilification scenario, various non-white human subspecies continue to exist in their original homelands while white exist only as a mongrelized version of their former selves.
(If we need to phrase the Brazilification scenario precisely, let’s say the question is, given a country with a proportion p of whites, 1-p of non-whites, and rate r of miscegenation, and probability Ω(n) that whites will cease to exist within n years, how does Ω(n) change as p falls and as r rises?)
Let me open with a skeptical observation. This inevitable comparison to Brazil is not apt. Brazil currently has a population that is just over 1/2 white (“white”), 1/5 black, and 1/5
somewhere in between. But this is out of an original population that was 4% white, 96% black or Amerind. Brazil’s current population is the result of one of the world’s most aggressively pro-white demographic policies, whose results are still impressive even though it was abandoned more than three generations ago. Dicker over what “white” means in Brazil, gripe about genetic purity, but the bottom line: far from getting closer to disappearing, whites are more entrenched in Brazil in 2016 than they were in 1816. In terms of our model, p has been growing and Ω(n) has been falling. There is no empirical evidence from Brazil’s mixed society to demonstrate that mixed societies lead to the gradual disappearance of the white race.
Can the growth of the impure white population in Brazil at least point to a trend towards impurity? Again, no. Only 31% of the Brazilian population has European mtDNA, which implies that at least 20% of the Brazilian population is classified as “white” but had one mulatto or mestizo female ancestor in the nineteenth century. This implies a much larger mixed-race population at the time which has since been pared down. (Brazilian anthropologists noticed this elimination at the time, and had the charming theory that it was due to the influence of Brazil’s mild climate.)
The reader may object that this introduction of trace amounts of undesirable DNA into a white population of 100M constitutes white genocide. But in my experience, the more committed the “white advocates”, the more angry they get at the suggestion that Sicilians, Russians, and other peoples on the periphery of Europe are less-than-fully white. But a half-English, half-Arab would be genetically and phenotypically extremely similar to a Sicilian. A half-English, half-Kazakh would be genetically and phenotypically extremely similar to a Russian. So the people who are most vigilant about white genocide would likely be the least likely to consider a 1/16 or 1/32 non-white population, non-white. The use of Brazil as a metaphor for white genocide stems from ignorance about Brazil’s demographic history. (This ignorance, in turn, has grown out of an intentional propaganda campaign to portray Brazil as some sort of post-racial bacchanalia.)
Further reading on Brazil genetic structure. The NIH has many other studies of Brazil, which I believe are all open-access. “Ricardo” on the EUpedia forums has a thought-provoking analysis which clarifies the magnitude of different contributions to the growth of Brazil’s white population, but caveat lector: he says nothing about his methods and sources, so treat his numbers as a thought experiment.
India. There is, however, a society that does seem to bear out the warning about mixed societies: Vedic India. The Aryan invaders of India were descended (via the Andronovo people) from a proto-Indo-European people who were genetically very similar to the inhabitants of northern Europe today. There are signs that the Aryan invaders were extremely genetically successful everywhere in India, but there are no white people, even in the Brahmin castes. So here we have evidence not just of the decline of the white population in a mixed society, but of its actual elimination. So not only was the average level of white genes low (in other words, the Aryans didn’t achieve the same level of genetic dominance in South Asia that the Portuguese achieved in Brazil), but pure whites failed to keep these genes concentrated in a single population. How did this happen? There is no one scenario that could explain the disappearance of whites from India by itself, but here are some hypotheses. Some of them amount to saying that the caste system was applied with insufficient rigor; the sexual-selection hypothesis, on the other hand, implies the caste system itself created a serious dysgenic problem.
(a) The old theory pushed by academic ⋘historians⋙ was that caste was an artificial construct pushed by British colonial administrators on an egalitarian society. This was always ridiculous, and recent genetics research shows that Indian castes have been endogamous for a very long time.
(b) A superficially appealing hypothesis: natural selection pushed the children of the conquerors back towards the old pre-Aryan phenotype. But even assuming that 2,500-3,000 years would have been sufficient for this degree of selection, the fretting about the disappearance of classical Brahmin traits began quite early. Chopei quotes examples of this on p. 131 of Grains of Gold. (I have not investigated the accuracy of his translations.)
(c) A more realistic theory is sexual selection. Under Vedic law, a Brahmin who was willing to take wives of a lower caste could have four times as many wives (and presumably, four times as many offspring) as one who only wanted a Brahmin woman. Acquiring, and having large families with, four women is no easy task; those with a stronger attraction to non-Aryan women were presumably the most energetic polygamists and had the most children. This would spread attraction to non-Aryan physical traits widely in the Indian population, which would then lead to positive sexual selection for those traits. The weakness of this theory is that there is no notable preference for these lower-caste traits in India today. It also only account for the disappearance of physical traits; but perhaps “white” psychological traits are far more recent than the Indo-Europeans.
(d) Another possibility is that Vedic caste law amounted to closing the barn door after the cow was gone. If the original population of invaders was sufficiently small and no systematic purity rules were followed until after the Aryan phenotype was already endangered, its eventual disappearance is predictable.
(e) A third likely component is the interaction of polygamy with the need for male heirs. I do not know precisely what Vedic law dictates on this subject, but I doubt any upper-caste male with no surviving adult sons by his upper-caste wife would refuse to make a son by a lower-caste wife his heir, if he had any way to bend legal and religious laws to that end. That heir would need to be promoted in caste to take on his father’s religious/political role. So you can imagine introduction of non-Aryans into the upper castes at approximately the same rate that Europe’s patrilineal aristocratic houses died out… which is to say, rather quickly.
(f) It seems likely that where the Indo-Europeans went, they extended the privilege enjoyed by their own elite castes to the religious and military elites of native allies. In Roman history, when the Sabines were incorporated into the Roman republic their priestly families were recognized as patricians, and went on to give Rome some of its most distinguished aristocrats. Thus some Dravidian priestly and royal families may have been created upper-caste ex nihilo, with privileges of intermarriage that diluted Aryan traits.
However it happened, the case of India is conclusive: even assuming it has supreme social and political power, a healthy birthrate, and a social framework tailor-made to promote genetic purity, it’s possible for a small white minority in a non-white country to disappear completely. We twenty-first century whites will be lucky to have any one of those three!
Historically obscure cases. I’m not trying to offer any kind of inductive case for the likelihood of white genocide, but this is a good place to mention some other lost white societies. The Ārśi-kuśiññe (often referred to, misleadingly, as the Tocharians) were a Indo-European people, probably to be identified with Afanasievo culture, who passed on vocabulary related to chariot warfare to the ancient Chinese and later controlled the Tarim Basin, where the only written records of their language have been found. The most common theory on the disappearance of the Ārśi-kuśiññe people is that they were defeated militarily by Turks and Mongols in the ninth century and then ethnically cleansed by the victors. But it is also possible that phenotypically white Ārśi-kuśiññe had already nearly disappeared long before, and the invasion was only a decapitating blow. The Tassili herders are a mysterious group known only from cave paintings and their outsized genetic impact on Central Africa. Their characteristic branch of Y-haplogroup R suggest they came from inner Eurasia; their domesticated cattle suggest they were Mesopotamian; their physical features are Caucasian, which is overall a good compromise. Given their technological advantages and the quick spread of the associated Y-haplogroup, presumably they remained powerful in Central Africa and disappeared from continuous intermarriage with their indigenous negroid neighbors. Greenland had a small community of Norsemen for 500 years, but they dropped out of contact with Iceland and disappeared under unknown circumstances. One theory is that the Norse starved to death all on their own; a second is that the aggressive expansion of the Thule/Inuit culture defeated the Norse, just as they had earlier defeated the Dorset people; but the theory that the Norse merged into Inuit culture is at least as good.
Dodos and Amalekites. Note that I began all this by asking whether there was any real danger of the white race disappearing while whites held significant political power. I take it that it goes without saying that, if whites lose political power (as they did from North Africa to Anatolia in the Middle Ages and as they recently have in Rhodesia and South Africa) then the victors can hack them to pieces, drive them out of their homes, and/or slowly squeeze their populations to death. But whites are not Tutsis! If we were, no one would be asking whether white genocide was possible, only whether it was likely that beasts with machetes would gain power in white countries. White genocide is implemented through policies that could not be implemented without the support of many whites, who do not recognize that the policies are a form of genocide because they do not believe white genocide is possible while white support is politically necessary. (Yes, that’s a complex sentence, read it again.)
Stay tuned… My current plan is for the second post in this series to cover semantic issues. I may also summarize Darwinian Reactionary’s extremely interesting series on genocide. Then I will look at demographic, social, and biological aspects of white genocide. But I may put this series on hold while I address some questions about the Alt-Right that have arisen in the wake of Hillary’s speech.