Majorityrights.com supressed the debate also.....


Majority rights.com is a white nationalist blog which attracts some hight quality thinkers. I thought I would take my research on racialism and femininity there. My posts are under the name “Italian Stallion”.


http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/early_evidence_that_immigration_may_be_a_major_cause_of_autism/

My research was as well received there as stormfront. However just at the point I was gagged, I got quite an intelligent response by “Rnl”. I’ll post my reply to that here.

By Rnl…

“In other words, in a peaceful society in which women are free to choose mates according to their own inclinations, most will choose men on the basis of some physical resemblance to their fathers. Their choices will therefore be racialist in effect, though not always in intent. For example, they’ll be more likely to choose other Whites as mates and less likely to choose Blacks. On the other hand, in a society in which these natural mates have been removed (killed, perhaps) women will be compelled to accept mates who don’t resemble their fathers. The latter situation is, in your opinion, preferable to the former. Women will no longer have the reproductive upper hand, and that’s good.”

This point is neither good nor bad to me. These are the realities of human systems. I’m only interested in researching that racialism based on appearance and genetic lineage is a feminine trait. Even if it’s men that are promoting it.

Rnl wrote

“Is that a fair summary of your argument? If it is, you must explain how the bad effects of what you regard as the non-optimal mating pattern come about. Why is it bad if women choose their mates according to their own inclinations? By what mechanism are the allegedly bad effects of their ability to choose transmitted to their racial group? Why should I be worried that women, if they are allowed to act on their own inclinations, will choose mates who in some way resemble their fathers?
A program of mass interracial rape would, it’s worth observing, produce the state of sexual politics that the Stallion considers optimal: “When their natural mates are removed through conflict the female is more likely to be dominated and are losing the reproductive hand to the male” (Stallion). “

An example of how white nationalists love to dramatise and twist sanguine research. As a researcher of systems it would be clearly counterproductive, if I had a problem with female behaviour.

Rnl wrote..

Quoting me “If you pursue racialism based on observable genetic qualities the result is an increasing convergence towards a group which exhibits female dominance. “
Again, you have to specify how this occurs. You appear merely to be saying (a) that women are more likely than men to choose mates on the basis of observable genetic qualities and (b) because racialism values observable genetic qualities, just as women do, racialism is feminine, which is bad. If that’s what you’re saying, it can’t be taken seriously. You are invoking “feminine” as though it were stigmatized as a negative cultural trait and then attaching it to racial attitudes that you want Whites to reject, relying on the mistaken assumption that male racialists will repudiate any “feminine” set of political beliefs as a threat to their masculinity. I don’t see how you could mean anything more substantive, because you have provided no explanation that I can discern for how (bad) feminine traits are physically spread throughout a racial group to bring about (bad) feminine effects.”

I’ll address how this feminization occurs clearly at a later stage. Again the point is being twisted. Femininity isn’t bad. I’ll requote some sections of my posts on that thread.

“The male biological system (when it has the upper hand) will tend to dilute, override and diverge from it’s genetic inheritability factor, in spite of all modifications we try to impose by religion, groupthink, racialism, ethnocentrism or whatever. When testosterone is high during child development, it increases right brain dominance. Illness aside, this remains all ones life. Right brain dominance is creative, restless and divergent. As a result its non racial as a human system high in testosterone will spread outwards. Right brain dominance is higher as the testosterone level within the population increases. Put simply Type r populations are right brain dominant. Type K left brain dominant. This is the focus of my research in the area of human systems. Type K population are biased towards femininity. As the K factor increases the femininity increases. Rebound strength decreases. Male fertility decreases, Creativity decreases.”

Following from that I wrote

“the formation of white nationalism has nothing to do with how the white european gene pool succeeded and that the preservation of that, by natural laws of physics is not only impossible but counterproductive. CReative progress cannot be preserved. Preservation destroys male creativity, which occurs by the existence of freedom, conflict, dynamism, promotion of the masculine and mess basically.”

This is the crux of my debate. Not about femininity but that white nationalism prizes it’s creativity over jews and orientals. The most racial groups on the planet. Racialism based on genetic lineage and appearance suppresses masculinity, eventually killing male creativity.



Rnl finished by writing

“At any rate, none of this theorizing of yours has much contact with the real world. In the real world White racialists oppose Third World immigration. We do so for a variety of reasons. Some prefer cultural arguments, others prefer genetic arguments. But the most obvious and by far the most popular argument (really just a fact) is that Third World immigration causes bad effects to Whites as a group. We’re worse off as a result of it. In Europe Muslims blow up trains and demand the imposition of medieval sharia law. In the United States non-Whites are massively overrepresented in crime statistics and both demand and receive racial preferences that penalize Whites. Because the importation of non-Whites causes and exacerbates these (and many other) bad effects, White racialists oppose the importation of non-Whites.
Let’s implausibly stipulate that our opposition to non-White immigration is feminine. Your task, as an advocate of multiracialism, is to prove why we’re wrong, not how we’re feminine.”

White nationalism pre-exists these problems. The rhetoric, the blame finding get replaced over the centuries with whatever ills the world. The racialism is the only thing which stays the same. Not that the issues brought up by white nationalists are real. Just that they are also superficial. They can be dealt with by conventional governments. Racialism leads to race.

Finally more nonsensical accusations from white nationalists. Now I’m an advocate of multiculturism. Well I’m not so I don’t need to answer the challenge posed.

I’ll repeat my point. Racialism leads to femininity which results in the curbing of male creativity. This creativity began and progressed Europe to the prize that they say they can protect.

It’s of no doubt white nationalists are a concerned lot. However the whole idea about preserving their creativity is wrong. I’ll repost more quotes from the post I put on that thread.

Genetic interests are what femininity is about. Note how the Y chromosome is devoid of all genes except for unique focussed mutation mechanisms which preserve male fertility. The male genetic system consists of nothing but an abstract expansion which explodes within the pre-existing female one


“the formation of white nationalism has nothing to do with how the white european gene pool succeeded and that the preservation of that, by natural laws of physics is not only impossible but counterproductive. CReative progress cannot be preserved. Preservation destroys male creativity, which occurs by the existence of freedom, conflict, dynamism, promotion of the masculine and mess basically.”