Multi Racial Society - The Biggest Stressor Of Them All?

[Peachy]

Dr Peat talking about how precarious race is when he was mistaken for a non-white. Ray sees race bias as cultural, based on experience, rather than biological.

I agree! The neighborhood where I grew up was about 50% white, 40% black, 10% Hispanic or Asian. (I’m white.) We formed friendships based on interests and personality. Totally mixed race groups. I guess I was fortunate that way! I had a lot of black teachers - actually three teachers who influenced me the most were black. I had a mega crush on a black boy in 3rd grade.

There were bad kids who were white and bad kids who were black. I was wary of people if they had a glint in their eye not a certain skin color. Incidents I can recall were mostly white kids causing trouble. A girl bullying us on the playground by lining us up and slamming a soccer ball on our heads (lol), a couple boys stealing bikes off the porch. Maybe people tended to cause trouble within their own race group?

I still had some racist ideas about certain people groups as I got older. Ones with whom I wasn’t familiar. But thankfully talking to them and learning from them works every time. Food is a good topic. Something about food just connects people.

 

[JamesGatz]

Oh, wow. No, I was there on a research grant. It wasn't Africa. Take a look at my original comment below and notice how friendly it is. Personal attacks like this are why I've stopped using this forum.

MY BAD LUANN - I THOUGHT you could take a joke since you were making jokes on here, but apparently not

 

[Whichway?]

Funny how you decry globalism and then boast about Europe becoming more globalist

I wasn’t boasting about Europe becoming more globalist. I was boasting about how they had better standards, less corruption and were better organised than other nations.

Why did you respond to my statement about BRICS nations being more homogenous than the West with an all caps reply? Is it because you don’t see your home country India as having a homogenous population. I‘m aware of India‘s history and the small nation states which the British forced together. I just mean in the sense that it doesn’t have immigration from many different cultures into it.

 

[michael94]

I think racism is natural and a instinct that was beneficial to us back before the modern times. I think we have a natural instinct to be weary or fear people different from us. In a time with no laws and at a time were someone could just kill you or a waring tribe could just come in and take out a whole village.

So that is why being part of group is so essential to humans we also needed groups to protect us from dangers from the environment, animals and dangers from other people.

So not only do we see color of skin and dress we also see language as mechanisms to think are they a friend or potentially foe.

I was watching this WWII documentary and there was this German spy that infiltrated the us army pretending to be a US soldier and they said he spoke perfect English.

So how they were able to find out he was spy. it was because one day he asked were they stored the petrol and in America we called it gas. So this raised alarms in their minds of the us soldiers and with just one word they look into it and we’re able to find out he was German spy.

So the problem with a multi-racial society or multi-cultural society and many wars and many problems in a society happens just because people had different cultures or religions even though the skin color was the same.

So when encounter people of different cultures or skin color and especially if you grew and around people mostly just like you. You could get a serotonin, adrenaline and cortisol response telling you to fight, flee or freeze even though in your logical mind think is just regular person in modern time going about there day , you could still have this subconscious response in you saying this could be potential danger. And you may be right. But statistical you were probably wrong 99.9% percent of the time.

But if you were wrong that point one percent you could be seriously harmed or killed. And we see these point one percent of horrible things that happen to people all the time in the news and it makes us more prone to think the odds of it happening are a lot higher in these modern times. And without these laws and structured societies that are better in certain areas then others would happen a lot more then they do.

I think a lot of racism isn’t hate but just a sense subconsciously you don’t want to feel that serotonin, cortisol and adrenaline response and it’s really your body trying to protect you in more of caveman sense.

And then you have the people that get the higher cortisol and serotonin response that get is more of we need to get them or get rid of them before they get us. Which in prehistoric times with neighboring tribes they could potentially do harm to your tribe. It could lead to the survival of your tribe if you took them out before they could take you out.

But in todays time we have a lot more in common then we have different, but the elites know that creating fear of the others and then pretending to be the the savior, that will able them to keep people infighting and obtain power.

And truth is we will never be able to take on the elites if we let them exploit the minor differences we have and make a minor difference seem like threat to your life and well being.

We fear what we don’t know or fully understand.

And I come to realize racism isn’t hate, it’s fear. And peoples racism will only stop is if you have empathy for them and not make them out to be a villain and try to help them come to an understanding. But the elites do not want that. Because that is threat to their power. And it is not just about race we just saw how they were able to make people who didn’t get the vaccine as a threat to everybody. But as more people spoke out and more knowledge about the vaccine and covid a lot of that fear and hate of the unvaccinated went away for a majority of the population. You still have some of those covidians out there. But it’s a lot smaller now and they are being seen as the crazy ones more and more each day.

And look at the native Americans that were killed by small pox. So other humans posed a threat because of a virus they had even though the could have been a friend. Just look at the black plague in Europe. So there over reaction they had about Covid was a protective mechanism because they lacked the knowledge. We fear what we don’t understand.

At the end of the day we are all trying to make it in these modern times with our caveman brain.

Race isn't just skin color and "skin color" isn't only a superficial trait either. Ray Peat was mistaken about the nature of Race and it's importance in human affairs. He was basically an environmental determinist, completely disregarding how fundamental actual people and their natures are in creating those environments in the first place.

 

[Peatress]

I agree! The neighborhood where I grew up was about 50% white, 40% black, 10% Hispanic or Asian. (I’m white.) We formed friendships based on interests and personality. Totally mixed race groups. I guess I was fortunate that way! I had a lot of black teachers - actually three teachers who influenced me the most were black. I had a mega crush on a black boy in 3rd grade.

There were bad kids who were white and bad kids who were black. I was wary of people if they had a glint in their eye not a certain skin color. Incidents I can recall were mostly white kids causing trouble. A girl bullying us on the playground by lining us up and slamming a soccer ball on our heads (lol), a couple boys stealing bikes off the porch. Maybe people tended to cause trouble within their own race group?

I still had some racist ideas about certain people groups as I got older. Ones with whom I wasn’t familiar. But thankfully talking to them and learning from them works every time. Food is a good topic. Something about food just connects people.

This is a typical experience of a lot of people who grow up in big cities. Once people leave school they tend not to mix if they don't want to. London, for instance, is multicultural but most people don't necessarily mix socially. This is fine. I've known people from different parts of the world and I'm yet to find one that didn't share the same emotions as me.

 

[Peatress]

Race isn't just skin color and "skin color" isn't only a superficial trait either. Ray Peat was mistaken about the nature of Race and it's importance in human affairs. He was basically an environmental determinist, completely disregarding how fundamental actual people and their natures are in creating those environments in the first place.

How would you decide what someone's nature is based on their skin colour?

If Ray is wrong about this why would you trust anything he says?

 

[lvysaur]

Why did you respond to my statement about BRICS nations being more homogenous than the West with an all caps reply?

Because all of those nations have far more diversity than the US, especially in positions of power.

India - self explanatory, even more diverse than Europe
Brazil - also self explanatory, recent colonial mixing which still hasn't evened out
Russia - many different ethnicities, including visible minorities, huge republics like Sakha, Tuva, Buryatia, where governments are staffed by indigenous Siberian people
China - 90% Han, but the huge provinces of Tibet and Xinjiang are governed by Uyghurs and Tibetans

contrast this to Native American reservations which, while governed by their own people, are tiny and completely surrounded by the states within which they reside

the US was (and more or less still is) a blanket British-German ethnocontinent with a 10% Black slave population. "Flooding" it with immigrants "from many cultures" using the 1965 Hart Cellar act did nothing bad, and only good. Asians are only 6% of the population (and pay an outsized share of taxes and commit less crime than whites). The only real change is Mexican immigration, and most of that was illegal

 

[SonOfEurope]

eye colour correlates with facial features


composite of brown and blue eyed europeans posted earlier in the thread


View attachment 49188

That is obsolete.

Not the way you guys think they do, I am of Spanish (Catalan) French and North Italian ancestry, within my family there are members with lighter eyes who are cranio-facially almost identical to me.

This isn't about me... an argument could be made of "Southern Europe " vs "northern Europe" (BtW: where exactly do you place the border and what about alpines and eastern europeans,?

Point is eye colour has no more correlationn to craneo-facial structure (in Europe) than height or hair colour....

Look, most white european children myself included are born with light eyes and blonde hair (which in my case was grey eyes and gold at the top) that over the next 6 years gradually darkened (as it darkens, to different degrees, in practically all Europeans) because all Europeans are, to varying degrees the mixture of the old Nordic inhabitants of the continent with the near eastern admixture present mostly in the South- but all over the continent to some extent, dolicocephalic and with fine facial features. the alpines and slavs are the ones who express higher brachicepahly and central Asian nomadic pastor admixture.

I will repeat this for the last time, most Europeans are born with and at infancy exhibit the grey or deep blue eyes and ash blonde or reddish hair of old European inhabitants which, from Andalucia to Scotland tends to darken as the person grows older, craneo-facial features are an unimaginably distinctive subject involving much, much more genetic variation.

And remember what I said, people with green or amber eyes have Brown eyes as well that have been just slightly de-pigmented by a grey or blue eyes ancestor, in the trait that regards eye colour we are all mixed but it matters not because it is an insignificant characteristic. I can find you tens of examples of people in each European nation who would look like twins from front to the cephalic index with completely different eye colours.

We must look deeper than that.

 

[akgrrrl]

Are you sure that this is truly because they are "scared"? I can think of other reasons.

1) US citizens own 20x more guns than Russians do. Non-white people have even more reason to be scared here too, yet it seems like the US is much worse off than Russia in multiracial stability.

2) non-whites, in the context of a global racial struggle, will naturally see Russians as less offensive than Westerners, as the former has always been on the receiving end of the latter--indeed to the extent that it is politically not part of Europe, and even geographically was only begrudgingly allowed to be part of the European "continent" (because they needed the justification of the Urals).

3) Russians lack the fervor of Westerners, particularly of Anglos. I have talked to many Russians, Europeans, and of course I live in the US. Russian people, even Slavic white nationalist types, seem more reasonable and cool-headed than Anglos. Even with the white nationalists, Russians seem to just want to be "left alone", while Westerners want to "conquer what's left"

I think that the west and especially Anglos have a cultural "emotional fervor" that Russia has less of. This "fervor" manifests itself both via white supremacy AND leftism/SJWism, and it makes the right more violent and the left more unconditionally loving.

Just so to add from an Alaska perspective, everything you wrote here about Russians is not true in this huge place. Russians have their own closed communities. They do not marry outside them. They are fierce and dispassionate, calculating and very business oriented. They buy up land and expand their stakes in fishing industries, farming and small biz. They are formidable to confront and do not tolerate any contact with AK tribes, black or asians. Even their wives and children in the grocery stores rarely smile or make eye contact with other humans.

 

[akgrrrl]

However, after reading this entire amazing thread, does anyone find it remarkable that not one post mentioned the IQ measurements of the different races? Ever since the Civil War, physicians were measuring craniums, brain weight and folds, compiling data. The Asians always come out on top at about 110+ as an average. Interestingly as mentioned here, they maintain societies with strong cultural and historically non-diverse long-running civilizations ie Japan, Korea, China etc.

 

[lvysaur]

Point is eye colour has no more correlationn to craneo-facial structure (in Europe) than height or hair colour.

Both do, but it depends on the ethnicity--the facial morph posted earlier comes from Slavs

A few obvious color correlations in Europeans:
- the bluest eyed rarely or even never have platinum blonde hair. The bluest eyes usually have dark brown hair, and the blondest people always have slightly dark eyes (though technically sometimes blue, but not very clear vibrant blue). This correlates well with color genes of WHG and ANE populations (respectively light eye dark hairs and dark eye light hairs)

- only westerners can get this vibrant blue color. Slavs can only achieve a pale blue

- blonde people in the east are more likely to be platinum blonde and have very fine hair texture, with pseudo-Asian facial features

- people with very "dolichocephalic" and "Middle Eastern" features are overrepresented among tall people. long faces, convex noses. Convex noses are also linked to a "thinner" body frame.

There's many more but many traits are obviously correlated and correspond with each other.
As for light eyes to craniofacial feature, that is definitely the case for Slavs. In others the traits could be correlated differently. I think it would be different for British descent

 

[michael94]

No lol, I didn't mean anything about phenotype. I literally meant "pure genetic heritage".

All the stuff in my last comment, about differentiating Brits and Finns and Syrians, was only to debunk that common Lewontin's fallacy you mentioned. But it doesn't even matter, because "British" isn't even a race in the genetic sense. "White" isn't a race genetically either.

"European" is a genetic race, and it ceased to exist in its pure form 5,000 years ago. All "whites" are part European, but none of them are fully European. Some whites (Italian, Greek, Iberian) are actually more Middle Eastern than they are European. Some whites (Russians, Finns) are 1/8 East Asian.

A race can only be pure with respect to a certain date, because all humans are ultimately mixes of other humans, and it's been going on long enough that nobody has been left totally untouched.

For instance, 9,000 years ago we see West European Hunter Gatherers (WHG) who were genetically pure. Run an admixture test on them and they don't come up as a result of two separate populations mixing. This is because whatever mixed to produced them, happened so long ago, or has had so much genetic selection since, that the mixed group has now evolved its own genetic uniqueness.

This genetic uniqueness does not exist in modern Europeans, or Mexicans, or modern Indians or most moderns. That is why I consider them mixed.

There are some modern mixed populations that have evolved genetic uniqueness. The Kalash of Pakistan are one such example, they come up as a separate grouping on genetic tests, but if you filter out their endogamous isolation-based evolution, they are identical to other Pakistanis. Hence you can say the Kalash are a "race" because they've been isolated from the rest of Pakistan for about 5000 years, and their small population size has made their DNA evolve quickly.

 

[ursidae]

-only westerners can get this vibrant blue color. Slavs can only achieve a pale blue

Vladimir Korenev

 

[Peatress]

However, after reading this entire amazing thread, does anyone find it remarkable that not one post mentioned the IQ measurements of the different races? Ever since the Civil War, physicians were measuring craniums, brain weight and folds, compiling data. The Asians always come out on top at about 110+ as an average. Interestingly as mentioned here, they maintain societies with strong cultural and historically non-diverse long-running civilizations ie Japan, Korea, China etc.

I don't know much about IQ measurements as I haven't investigated it personally. I know it's controversial so I was interested in what Peat had to say about it

Ray Peat on IQ Tests

From the transcript of the interview Politics Science - On The Origin of Life.


CALLER: What I’ve been seeing, at least on the level of the popular media and the way the idea of genetics is presented, is a kind of genetic determinism, in which the public at large is being led to believe that a gene is sort of individual, almost like an organism itself, the selfish gene and all that sort of thing, which then is responsible for a specific quality or characteristic appearing. And as far as I know, no one has ever proved that genes do anything except organize the synthesis of protein.

RAY PEAT: Yeah. I have – because I guess I have been interested in the subject for more than 50 years, and so I’ve noticed the things going on and tried to find out where they came from. The – in some of my newsletters, I’ll be talking about related issues, but the motivation for a lot of these ideas, around 1910 to 1920, were to stop immigration of Eastern Europeans and Southern Europeans to the United States. So they created IQ tests and showed that Russians and Jews and the various people that they didn’t want to immigrate that 85% of them were feeble minded, naturally they gave the tests in English. But these tests were very explicitly designed for racist exclusionary purposes. And many of these people have persisted in universities, the Bell Curve, for example, a real idiot at Harvard was one of the last hangers on. And these people had great success in getting published in science, the leading American science magazine. When I sent a tiny letter criticizing one of these genetic determination of intelligence, I think it was an 8 or 10 page article, I sent about a two-sentence letter. They sent me pages of anonymous referees, one of them – the only evidence that was cited for not publishing my little letter critical of the conclusions – I just said that conclusions have nothing what so ever to do with the text of the article. These cases of anonymous referees rejecting my comment. The only data cited was from Hitler’s racial hygiene [inaudible]got me interested in studying what was going on there And I saw that by studying that period, I saw that Konrad Lorenz was the architect of the racial hygiene, but he created the rationale based on American IQ racism. He created the rationale for exterminating inferior people. Konrad Lorenz was a Nazi. I think it was his last book. He repeated exactly the arguments of his 1942 and the founding papers of genocide. He repeated the exact arguments except he replaced exterminate with some slightly mild translation, but he never repented from this idea of eliminating genetic inferiority and…

CALLER: Well, I think the ideology has survived apparently, but it’s been shorn of certain terms. One, for instance, never hears the word eugenics anymore.

RAY PEAT: Yeah. I went to a lecture in the 70s and all the professors from my biology department were there, nodding happily as Gunther Stent, who was a Jewish refugee from Hitler – as Gunther Stent presented Konrad Lorenz’s arguments for genocide as the ultimate in understanding the brain genetically and all of my professors were there happily agreeing that this was wonderful stuff. And when my friend and I pointed out some of the logical irrationalities such as he was saying that a person’s life and work are a genetically determined unit, suddenly they said, are you saying the fact that he was a Nazi had anything to do with the validity of these ideas. And the whole point of the lecture was that every cultural feature is genetically determined.

CALLER: Sort of interesting [inaudible] is that in the Indian tradition there were the so-called the Laws of Manu which were – basically governed the questions of occupation, heredity, and the creation of a caste system based on certain ideas about that. And my understanding was originally the caste system was not hereditary, but it was rather simply the recognition that certain people had certain proclivities or natural abilities or interest or capacities and that they could be best sorted out according to those in various occupational groups and so forth, but that it was possible to move from one to the other. And then, gradually, it became ossified into a hereditary system in which if your father was a leather worker or something, you would be one, or if he was a farmer, you would be one. And there was no mobility and no possibility of actually assimilating anything new, so to speak.

RAY PEAT: I think one of the driving forces of the caste system was the – 3,500 years ago, the Nordics, the Indo-Europeans invaded and enslaved the dark native people and I think that was the racial caste difference became the power that stayed in force and tended to rigidify the occupational system.

JOHN BURKHAUSEN: So do you think this whole caste system and emphasis on genetics has been the setting stone basis for your status and life?

RAY PEAT: Yeah.

JOHN BURKHAUSEN: Do you think people are just justifying survival of the fittest?

RAY PEAT: No. The whole idea of survival of the fittest is basically saying that whoever is in power is the fittest.

JOHN BURKHAUSEN: Right.

RAY PEAT: And whoever is able to say with most force is the fittest. And if you object and they can kill you, they are the fittest.

JOHN BURKHAUSEN: Right.

RAY PEAT: And it basically is tending to create, well, a ruling case of inferiors if they keep their status only on the basis of saying things like, if you are so smart, why aren’t you rich like me. Pretty soon the ruling class becomes degenerate.

RAY PEAT: Yeah.

CALLER: What you do think of the misappropriation – it seems like the modern – the official ideology, you might call it, of the ruling classes in this country is compounded off misinterpretations of Darwin and Adam Smith basically.

RAY PEAT: Yeah.

CALLER: I personally don’t find the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution intellectually convincing at all myself. But whenever I bring this up, it’s roughly – people look at me as if I suggested that the earth is flat because it constitutes, so to speak,the very pillar of their thought about how the world is organized and operates.

RAY PEAT: Yeah. If you point out – if you start pointing out any of the 1,000 hidden assumptions or 1,000 facts that they are trying to cover up, you get to about two or three of them and then they remove you in someway from the discussion.

CALLER: Right. And, interestingly, Adam Smith’s idea interface with Darwinism very much, I think, and they are always misrepresented in economics textbooks. For instance, we all know that Adam Smith believed that self-interest was the appropriate form of being, so to speak, and acting. And if everyone pursued their own self -interest to the maximal degree, that results in the maximal degree of happiness for all. But what they leave out is that Smith believed also in benevolence as a counterpoint to self-interest, to naked self-interest, and that he – you could say his idea of benevolence was the kind of social capital, you might say. And his comment, for instance, on businessmen is “they neither are, nor ought to be the rulers of mankind,” and yethis ideas are promoted – one-half of his ideas are promoted, the other half is ignored. Similarly, Darwin, the…

RAY PEAT: It isn’t just Neo-Darwinism and Smith distorter, but it’s basically everything in our intellectual history. I’ve had a habit of reading textbooks in many different fields over the years. And they – really 99-plus -percent of them are ideological distortions,a rewriting of history, leaving out everything interesting or threatening to the established system. Every field of knowledge has been distorted.

 

[Vanset]

- only westerners can get this vibrant blue color. Slavs can only achieve a pale blue

Don't really care for the topic of this discussion overall, but this is wrong. Saying this as someone who actually lives in Poland.

 

[akgrrrl]

@Peatress i knew it would take someone like you to dig up some good material. And Peat quotes no less!

 

[Blossom]

@Peatress i knew it would take someone like you to dig up some good material. And Peat quotes no less!

Yes, she’s fantastic!

 

[Peater]

And whoever is able to say with most force is the fittest. And if you object and they can kill you, they are the fittest.

What is the message those people [The government - my interpretation] are giving us with regards to "multi racial society" at the moment?

 

[Peatress]

@Peatress i knew it would take someone like you to dig up some good material. And Peat quotes no less!

Just goes to show dead white men still have a voice.

Yes, she’s fantastic!

Thank you.

What is the message those people [The government - my interpretation] are giving us with regards to "multi racial society" at the moment?

You do know that's a quote from Peat? My government? I don't really know but I know my government mostly lies to me. Most of my government's policies disturb me.
As for multi racial society we have a situation where many people from different backgrounds already co-exist in this country. Many 2 - 3 generation born here but have different skin colour. What are they to do? Do I think the country should be flooded with new people? No. What is the alternative to a multi racial society?

Perhaps we ought to be focusing on the foreign policy that destroys third world countries and makes it impossible for those countries to prosper. When people are poor with no long term prospects they migrate. Remember what happened during the mandates. Many on this forum were considering alternative countries to run to.

 

[Peater]

What is the alternative to a multi racial society?

Logically that would be a mono racial society. Impractical and inhumane for a whole country now, of course.

Perhaps we ought to be focusing on the foreign policy that destroys third world countries and makes it impossible for those countries to prosper. When people are poor with no long term prospects they migrate.

Completely agree.

Remember what happened during the mandates. Many on this forum were considering alternative countries to run to.

Yes, that was the government again. Seems like all they excel at is creating misery. ("Stressors")

Many 2 - 3 generation born here but have different skin colour. What are they to do?

They should stay if they want to stay. I suppose that depends how heavily gov is weighting the scales. (Or, breaking up families of all colours with handouts. The same thing happened here. We must be on the 3rd generation of "professional" single mothers now)


I'm just interested in what government rhetoric gets accepted at face value, and what doesn't.