This is how Jews do geneaology:
“Reuben was the firstborn of Israel. The children of Reuben were: of Hanoch, the family of the Hanochites; of Pallu, the family of the Palluites; of Hezron, the family of the Hezronites; of Carmi, the family of the Carmites. These are the families of the Reubenites: those who were numbered of them were forty-three thousand seven hundred and thirty. And the son of Pallu was Eliab. The sons of Eliab were Nemuel, Dathan, and Abiram. … The sons of Simeon according to their families were: of Nemuel, the family of the Nemuelites; of Jamin, the family of the Jaminites; of Jachin, the family of the Jachinites; of Zerah, the family of the Zarhites; of Shaul, the family of the Shaulites. These are the families of the Simeonites: twenty-two thousand two hundred. The sons of Gad according to their families were: of Zephon, the family of the Zephonites; of Haggi, the family of the Haggites; of Shuni, the family of the Shunites; of Ozni, the family of the Oznites; of Eri, the family of the Erites; of Arod, the family of the Arodites; of Areli, the family of the Arelites. These are the families of the sons of Gad according to those who were numbered of them: forty thousand five hundred. The sons of Judah were Er and Onan; and Er and Onan died in the land of Canaan. And the sons of Judah according to their families were: of Shelah, the family of the Shelanites; of Perez, the family of the Parzites; of Zerah, the family of the Zarhites. And the sons of Perez were: of Hezron, the family of the Hezronites; of Hamul, the family of the Hamulites. These are the families of Judah according to those who were numbered of them: seventy-six thousand five hundred. The sons of Issachar according to their families were: of Tola, the family of the Tolaites; of Puah, the family of the Punites; of Jashub, the family of the Jashubites; of Shimron, the family of the Shimronites. These are the families of Issachar according to those who were numbered of them: sixty-four thousand three hundred. The sons of Zebulun according to their families were: of Sered, the family of the Sardites; of Elon, the family of the Elonites; of Jahleel, the family of the Jahleelites. These are the families of the Zebulunites according to those who were numbered of them: sixty thousand five hundred. The sons of Joseph according to their families, by Manasseh and Ephraim, were: The sons of Manasseh: of Machir, the family of the Machirites; and Machir begot Gilead; of Gilead, the family of the Gileadites. These are the sons of Gilead: of Jeezer, the family of the Jeezerites; of Helek, the family of the Helekites; of Asriel, the family of the Asrielites; of Shechem, the family of the Shechemites; of Shemida, the family of the Shemidaites; of Hepher, the family of the Hepherites. Now Zelophehad the son of Hepher had no sons, but daughters; and the names of the daughters of Zelophehad were Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. These are the families of Manasseh; and those who were numbered of them were fifty-two thousand seven hundred. These are the sons of Ephraim according to their families: of Shuthelah, the family of the Shuthalhites; of Becher, the family of the Bachrites; of Tahan, the family of the Tahanites. And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran, the family of the Eranites. These are the families of the sons of Ephraim according to those who were numbered of them: thirty-two thousand five hundred. These are the sons of Joseph according to their families. The sons of Benjamin according to their families were: of Bela, the family of the Belaites; of Ashbel, the family of the Ashbelites; of Ahiram, the family of the Ahiramites; of Shupham, the family of the Shuphamites; of Hupham, the family of the Huphamites. And the sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman: of Ard, the family of the Ardites; of Naaman, the family of the Naamites. These are the sons of Benjamin according to their families; and those who were numbered of them were forty-five thousand six hundred. These are the sons of Dan according to their families: of Shuham, the family of the Shuhamites. All the families of the Shuhamites, according to those who were numbered of them, were sixty-four thousand four hundred. The sons of Asher according to their families were: of Jimna, the family of the Jimnites; of Jesui, the family of the Jesuites; of Beriah, the family of the Beriites. Of the sons of Beriah: of Heber, the family of the Heberites; of Malchiel, the family of the Malchielites. And the name of the daughter of Asher was Serah. These are the families of the sons of Asher according to those who were numbered of them: fifty-three thousand four hundred. The sons of Naphtali according to their families were: of Jahzeel, the family of the Jahzeelites; of Guni, the family of the Gunites; of Jezer, the family of the Jezerites; of Shillem, the family of the Shillemites. These are the families of Naphtali according to their families; and those who were numbered of them were forty-five thousand four hundred. These are those who were numbered of the children of Israel: six hundred and one thousand seven hundred and thirty.” - Tanakh
This is how Aryans do geneaology:
“If they say to You: ‘Where did You come from?’, say to them: ‘We came from the light, the place where the light came into being of itself, established itself and revealed itself in their image.’” - Jesus
Which is cooler?
This time we will be visiting the Tigris-Euphrates basin:
http://aryanism.net/culture/aryan-race/aryan-diffusion-part-4/
Again I have failed to find skull comparison pictures (though at least this time there is a written description of the skulls) and am requesting some from anyone (JJ?) who happens to have any, including any pertaining to the point outlined in the written description:
http://aryanism.net/wp-content/uploads/problem.jpg
I can’t count the number of times (and I think SolAryan is quite familiar with this also) some BS Israelite-wannabe has tried to convince me that they are the real Israelites. This page answers most of their rubbish. Nevertheless, I still recommend the approach that whoever claims to be an Israelite, we should believe them. If you call yourself an Israelite, fine, we will treat you like one.
On the other hand, if you are from this region and have Aryan blood memory, please contact us:
Great work, as always! This part is especially important because it explains the very origins of Aryans and Jews. If I find someone having a confused understanding of this topic (as I had before reading this series) I will just link them to this page.
Hopefully this will shut up those who claim that only the Khazars are evil while the “true Jews” are the good guys.
Also, thank you for touching on the subject of PIE-language, I understand it better now.
The text and previous pages describe Aryan and Turanian skull shapes. I wonder, what is it about these lifestyles that would select for dolichocephalic and brachycephalic skulls respectively?
Also, while many Jews certainly have this Turanian “demonic” phenotype, I have seen many with a much more primitive look. A good example is Ron Perlman, who looks a lot like a modern Neanderthal. There’s a book called “Chosen People of the Caucasus” which claims that the Jews are the direct descendants of Neanderthals. This is obviously not true and I think that the Jewish author wants to stir up racism against Arabs by claiming that they are also Neanderthals but could there be at least some truth behind it? Could it be that Jews have some Neanderthal DNA, perhaps more so than other populations?
I’m not sure the goal of the author of Chosen People of the Caucus is to demonise Arabs. He has a rather naive open letter to George Bush on his website suggesting that he turn his attention towards preventing Israeli expansion rather than attacking Arab countries.
http://www.michaelbradley.info/articles/tobush.html
Having said that, he is against Arabs and also says ‘However, the Arabs of Syria, Iraq and Iran share the same Neanderthal genetic penchant for aggression, although probably not quite so strongly because of their history of intermarriage throughout the Arab world from Indonesia to West Africa.’ He’s one of the few people who actually deserve the title ‘antisemite.’ He also promotes marriages between Jews and non-Jews to dilute Jewish blood in that letter, which is a terrible idea.
Great new article. The quotes in this blog post about sum it up, the Jews are just a family-run mafia. Also, now I know why I never liked the supposed “masterpiece” of cinema called “The Godfather.” Mafia-mentally is just Jewish.
Interestingly, LOTR mentions family lines, however, there is much more merit-based leadership and relations (both political and personal): Aragorn is accepted based on his family lines, but more on his demonstrated skill as a leader. Family is only part of it, one must live up to the title first. Also, Aragorn and Arwen “race mix” - yeah they’re both “white” (white looking, rather) but the book clearly states one is human the other elf, different races, so WPWW golems can fuck off on this one. Faramir and Eowyn come from different groups, yet they pair up based on compassion. And, the big one, Frodo, a small town farmer, is invited by the elves, as is Gandalf (a wizard, yet another different race) to board the boat at the Grey Havens, he earned his title of Arhat.
I was introduced to Christianity through the 4 Canonical Gospels when I was a small kid and became an ardent Christian. However, reading the rest of the Bible made me abandon the Christian faith.
Hearing a Judeo-Christian praising stuff like “The Book of Job” in church made me sick. I assume that a Judeo-Christian has to master Doublethink if he doesn’t want to live with doubt and contradiction.
I will start to read more about Gnostic Christianity when I have free time.
@Victor
“I wonder, what is it about these lifestyles that would select for dolichocephalic and brachycephalic skulls respectively?”
The selection might not have been for cephalic index in itself; what is more likely is that selection occurred for a general physiology which produced adaptive traits for survival in that lifestyle and ALSO produced a certain tendency in cephalic index. We must always distinguish between correlation and causation (JJ can probably explain this much better than I can).
A straightforward guess would be something to do with adaptivity to differing nutrition. Another possibility is something to do with miscarriages during pregnancy, which selects more strongly among nomads than in villages where pregnant women can stay put. There is so much going on at the same time that it is hard to attribute it to a single cause.
@Anthony
“Having said that, he is against Arabs and also says ‘However, the Arabs of Syria, Iraq and Iran share the same Neanderthal genetic penchant for aggression”
When most people in the West think “Arabs”, the stereotype that appears in their minds is what should actually be called “Bedouins” who are indeed known for being aggressive. But there is a whole other type of “Arabs” that is virtually absent from popular Western consciousness (but are the ones whom Hitler was praising when he spoke positively of Andalus-era Spain):
http://www.filaha.org/introduction.html
On top of this, most Syrians, Iraqis and Iranians aren’t Arabs in the first place!
@Miecz
I never liked the supposed “masterpiece” of cinema called “The Godfather.”
I liked the movies, but of course without considering the characters to be rolemodels! To be fair, I don’t believe the filmmakers were trying to glorify mafia life so much as to just portray it, and I’d say they succeeded in portraying it convincingly.
@LOZ
Good luck! Remember to read this essay (linked from main site) if you haven’t already:
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p335_Whisker.html
“The contemporary confusion between the racial term “Aryan” and the linguistic term “PIE” (“proto-Indo-European”) was entirely created by late 18th century Western academia, and is even worse than that between the racial term “Jew” and the linguistic term “Semite”.”
It is interesting to note here that the one chiefly responsible for the corruption of the term “Aryan” in a white supremacist sense, Arthur de Gobineau, was a judeophile.
@AS - You don’t have to try to sell the merits of Arabic culture to me. I already have a deep interest and admiration of it! One of the things I dislike about Bradley is that one of his criticisms of Jews is that they are territorial in time (see his book ‘The Chronos Complex’) and he says this is true of other Semitic peoples too. But I do not think this is a bad thing. I admire the longing for something eternal as opposed to the general apathy towards the fact that everything in this world withers away, fades and dies, and the attitude of the people who take nothing seriously and have no sincere emotional investment in anything, enjoying one fleeting sensation then forgetting about it and seeking out new ones.
Having said that, I do think there is a lot of Jewish blood in the Arab genepool, and this is where the negative aspects of Islam come from. The demonic look is noticeable in a lot of Arab women:
http://www.aplicap.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Top-arab-female-singers1.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-P1l7XHAu0Ao/TmOPE3ytfZI/AAAAAAAARag/RNwfV1GdOLk/s1600/beautiful+arabic+women+1.jpg
http://earabgirls.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Jeny_Asber4-600×611.jpg
But it also has a lot of Aryan blood too, and that is the aspect that interests me. Here is an Aryan-looking Arab:
http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/x/arab-woman-piercing-5093795.jpg
I usually read the Aryan Diffusion articles at least twice before posting, but something caught my eye this time:
“Jews in Persia did not waste the opportunity to further twist Avestan religion by nonchalantly offering it the Abrahamic fallacy: since Mazda was the creator of everything good, and since free will is surely good, Mazda must have created Ahriman who then used his free will to create evil (ie. evil is good).”
A similar thing is going on with monism. Gnostic monism is directed towards reunion with the Absolute (I speak figuratively), and views plurality as an illusion. Other monists would say that “good” and “evil” don’t really have any meaning because, after all, everything is one thing, and if one thing is either good or evil, then so is everything else. Realistically, this translates as “everything is good”. Now, I will admit that the concept of “good” and “evil” are practical terms and do not “concern the heavens”; however, in opposition the relativistic monists, I believe this because in the heavens, evil does not exist anymore: evil is the illusion of plurality. I wonder how much Jews have had to do with this relativistic view. (Spinoza comes to mind.)
@Miecz,
“Also, Aragorn and Arwen “race mix” – yeah they’re both “white” (white looking, rather) but the book clearly states one is human the other elf, different races, so WPWW golems can fuck off on this one.”
The WNs also noticed this. I remember seeing a thread on stormfront on how the story of Aragorn and Arwen is a warning about race mixing. Having read this about two years ago, I don’t remember the details, but the essence of the thread is survivalist (just like WN itself): had Arwen not gotten involved with Aragorn, she could have left with the other elves. I’m not exactly sure how you would reach that conclusion except by twisting the story in order to make Aragorn a villain…
“…had Arwen not gotten involved with Aragorn, she could have left with the other elves.”
I address this issue directly in part II of my LOTR essay. She chose to be with Aragorn specifically for compassionate reasons and not for reasons of mere self-preservation. She clearly struggles with this issue throughout the books, and comes to the conclusion she thought best. Aragorn is even surprised to see her at MInis Tirith, thinking that she had left. At that point even Elrond supports her, and he was initially wary of Aragorn.
@Miecz, I read the essay and enjoyed it.
My use of the word “you” in the final sentence was misleading. I should have said “one”, because I was arguing for your point, not against it. Twist it as they like, the WNs cannot understand LOTR with their mindset.
Also important is that Arwen dies shortly after Aragorn. Yes, her life may have been shorter, but it was passionate, not long and senseless.
@Anthony
“You don’t have to try to sell the merits of Arabic culture to me. I already have a deep interest and admiration of it!”
I know; the link was put there for visitors! (For the record, I don’t admire mainstream Arabian culture in an absolute sense, I’m just saying it’s NO WORSE THAN other ancient cultures in general.) The main point is that we should ascribe ignobility in Arabic culture to Bedouin influence and nobility to Sabaean influence (see Part 5). This even applies to physical appearance; we should think of a Bedouin type (your second link) and a Sabaean type (your fourth link), just as we have already established Jomon/Yayoi types, Huaxia/Yue types, Harappan/Vedic types, etc..
What we are doing with this series is providing regional names that can be used to describe Aryan-leaning and non-Aryan-leaning in every part of the world, thereby ending ethnocentrism and replacing it with racial idealism.
By the way, here are some Turanian-leaning types (what we call Scythian) from Iran:
http://dl.patoghestan.com/patoghestan/abbas/ax/actor-women/yekta-naser/Yekta-Naser2.jpg
http://onefblog.persiangig.com/Arayesh%20SoRat%20(2).jpg
http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/11152721/homepage/name/homepage.jpg?type=sn
And of course an Aryan-leaning type:
http://cinemapars.persiangig.com/Persian%20Actress/21%20Mahtab%20Keramati/Mahtab_Keramati03.JPG
(By the way, is it just me or do Mahnaz Afshar and Zhao Wei (both Turanian-leaning types) look like they could be twins? Seriously, Google their pictures yourselves!)
@Decebal
“A similar thing is going on with monism. Gnostic monism is directed towards reunion with the Absolute (I speak figuratively), and views plurality as an illusion. Other monists would say that “good” and “evil” don’t really have any meaning because, after all, everything is one thing, and if one thing is either good or evil, then so is everything else. Realistically, this translates as “everything is good”.”
Yes, monism easily becomes an excuse for avoiding struggle. In theory, the belief in plurality as illusion is perfectly acceptable, so long as the motivation is to destroy the illusion. The problem begins when people start thinking that because it is illusion, it doesn’t have to be destroyed - rather, merely being AWARE that it is illusion somehow suffices. This attitude is also common in corrupted versions of Buddhism. It is foppery. I have even heard ludicrous applications; for example, one non-vegan (I’m being serious here) said that it was correct for ME to be vegan because I believe the animals are real, but it is OK for HIM to be non-vegan because he understands that none of it is real anyway. The only way to deal with people like this is to put them on the receiving end of whatever they are willing to do to others. Why should they complain? According to them, none of it is real!
Everything will continue to be subverted as long as there is inferior blood in the world. The inferior will continue to mix its tribal outlook with noble religions as long as it fits its selfish needs.
@ AS
Thanks for the link. I started to read the “Myth of the 20th century”.
Corrupted versions of Buddhism are heavily mixed with Brahmanism, Animism etc. From experience, feel-good believers can also chant in Pali without investigating the real meaning of the words.
Superb article AS.
With regards to Lucifer. I’ve always been under the assumption that he was a evil figure, before anyone jumps to his defence. I’ve probably been brain-washed by the Judeo-Christian church, media, Zionism or whatnot. But I continue to do what I’ve always done, research and investigate until I ‘feel’ what is right in my kernel. For years I despised Hitler, when I was young because I’ve always been for what is right and just. The time was ripe for change when I discovered and FELT the Truth. It may happen further, it may not. I see my life as a constant evolution of thought and ideas, even though the ideals have always remained constant, no matter what guise they wear.
@Victor
People with brachycephalic skulls are typically short and stocky, which makes them ‘wider’ and have a better frame for muscles. Shorter arms also have better leverage (maybe that’s better for archery and spear throwing?), and this body type usually has high sexual dimorphism (women are ‘voluptuous’ while men are muscular). It is also beneficial for cooler climates (especially ones too cold to support decent agriculture).
Herders are usually very brachycephalic, but their body types vary and I am not well-acquainted with them.
People with doliocephalic skulls tend to have longer limbs (which would include the neck and skull) and a shorter torso since they don’t need to have a wide ‘frame’ for their muscles. This is beneficial in a temperate or warm climate because there is a greater surface area to allow heat transfer. It also gives the arms a larger range, and I would imagine some mechanical advantage, when it comes to farming, sewing seeds, hoeing, etc. There are undoubtedly many more factors than these that I don’t know as much about.
I don’t think any “Neanderthal” theories have much merit. Even if a certain group did have enough ‘Neanderthal DNA’ to be measurable, the specializations they’ve acquired in the past tens of thousands of years as Homo sapiens would be much more significant.
@ Anthony
It might not be his goal but like you said, his ideas are counterproductive. Declaring whole non-Jewish populations as Neanderthals doesn’t help in uniting anti-Zionists against Israel. And Gentiles like John de Nugent have already adopted these theories to justify their racism against Arabs.
@ John Johnson
The traits for brachycephalic people would be equally beneficial for hunters, right? AS mentioned nutrition as another factor. Dolichocephalic skulls have smaller jaws, maybe because the food produced in agriculture is easier to chew than the foods of hunters and herders.
And you are probably right about the Neanderthal theories. I was just wondering where these “Neanderthal-like” skulls some Jews have come from.
Another question concerning Turanians: from what I understand the original Mongolian tribes were Turanians. This is mentioned in part 1 and 2 of this series. Although Genghis Khan lived much later, I think the majority of the Mongols still engaged in a Turanian lifestyle in his time (correct me if I’m wrong). Many of them still do today. Yet you classify him as a Gentile on the main site. Why?
@JJ
“People with brachycephalic skulls are typically short and stocky, which makes them ‘wider’ and have a better frame for muscles. Shorter arms also have better leverage (maybe that’s better for archery and spear throwing?)”
Here are some pictures of Olympic archers (notice the face shape):
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/61950000/jpg/_61950755_61950754.jpg
http://www.wired.com/playbook/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/brady-ellison.jpg
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/61877000/jpg/_61877090_mensteamarcwin.jpg
http://english.china.com/zh_cn/Olympic/other/11068324/20080811/images/15021187_2008081118252182820300.jpg
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/62023000/jpg/_62023259_archery.jpg
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/olympics/wills416.jpg
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-08/15/xin_19208051518124371759829.jpg
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2012/8/1/1343832058328/Sherab-Zam-008.jpg
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/0KX1VGvBcTR/Olympics+Day+2+Archery/1SXRCp5uQkF/Kaori+Kawanaka
http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Markiyan+Ivashko/Olympics+Day+1+Archery/qa58s-6Oe_P
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/bAj8jIot4-A/Olympics+Day+4+Archery/H3mKsLtj7pi/Ren+Hayakawa
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/s2sX2gOKzJV/Olympics+Day+3+Archery/QZ3cDbQJhj7/Elisa+Barnard
http://www.archeryedinburgh.co.uk/simon-terry.jpg
I swear I did not pre-select these; these are all top results from a Google Images search for “olympic archery”. Not even I expected the correlation to be so powerful. My jaw is on my desk right now. JJ, I don’t know what I’d do without you.
@Victor
If you want to discuss Parts 1 and 2, please use these two topics:
http://aryanism.net/blog/aryan-sanctuary/who-we-are/
http://aryanism.net/blog/aryan-sanctuary/a-different-way-to-refer-to-geography/
Thanks.
“from what I understand the original Mongolian tribes were Turanians.”
They had Turanian blood, but surely mixed with indigenous Mongolian blood (probably some pre-Fuxishi line, since Gentiles living far enough north would have avoided the first flood). That’s why the text only says “Turanian INFLUENCE”. It would be a mistake to imagine that they were pure Sethites!
“Although Genghis Khan lived much later, I think the majority of the Mongols still engaged in a Turanian lifestyle in his time (correct me if I’m wrong). Many of them still do today. Yet you classify him as a Gentile on the main site. Why?”
Because he is an honest tribalist, which is the definition of Gentile. The Gentile/Jew/Aryan classification for historical-era individuals refers to their behaviour, not to their lifestyle, or else individuals with urban occupations would need hundreds of completely new categories of their own just to match all their occupations, which misses the point of the entire exercise. Genghis was a herder for economic sustenance, but he still retained Gentile traits from his hunter ancestors, which emerges in his political style. Genghis also often hunted recreationally, which is evidence of Gentile blood memory. Judaism itself take this into account: Esau and Jacob were both herders for economic sustenance, but Esau hunted recreationally, therefore he still had Gentile blood memory and was considered to be Gentile, whereas Jacob did not hunt recreationally and therefore was considered fully Israelite.
Similarly, a majority of people in the river valley civilizations were farmers, but that does not mean they were magically transformed into Aryans - they were just Gentiles who had learned to farm! Gentile traits did not disappear just because they stopped hunting for economic sustenance and took up farming instead; that’s the exact reason why the Yayoi and the Shennongshi and the Suryvansha and the Dilmun all failed.
“…a majority of people in the river valley civilizations were farmers, but that does not mean they were magically transformed into Aryans – they were just Gentiles who had learned to farm! Gentile traits did not disappear just because they stopped hunting for economic sustenance and took up farming instead…”
Economically and in every which way mass-vegan agrarian practice makes sense today given the every mounting consequences of the modern animal based food industry, thus it’s the ultimate testament to the innate nature of non-Aryans that they’re keeping their practices and finding clever ways to try to make this modern mess ‘sustainable’.
Thus I don’t believe any gentile group would - for any extended period of time - farm, eat or live plant based, WILLFULLY for ANY reason. Jews might today for political or religious purposes advocate a pacified veganism in order to nullify radicalism. Gentiles generally lack this sort of cunning to even conceive of such a notion. Even when they have the opportunity to EASILY go vegan they ardently choose against it, and hunt for fun! so I do not believe that there could possibly have been gentile populations in the past that - for economic reasons - chose to farm and live - incidentally - as Aryans lived. There had to have been hunting and/or herding activities thrown in the mix to satisfy their inherent barbarism.
*ever mounting…
Sorry, AS. My response is more general so I’m going to post it here. I’ll use the other topics if I have any more specific questions.
To what extend did the Sethites mix with natives when they entered the Turanian steppe? Are we talking about predominantly Gentile populations who had learned herding and had some Turanian blood?
Also, thanks for the explanation. But is his political style necessarily a result of Gentile blood? To my understanding the Turanians also openly fought their enemies when they were powerful enough to do so. Their advantage over Gentiles was their cunning nature, which allowed them to control their victims by manipulation and the deceit when necessary (like the Vedics did in India). I’d imagine today’s Jews wouldn’t hesitate to subdue non-Jews directly if they had the power.
@Victor
“To what extend did the Sethites mix with natives when they entered the Turanian steppe? Are we talking about predominantly Gentile populations who had learned herding and had some Turanian blood?”
Your guess is as good as mine. It wasn’t a single event; there would probably have been several waves of expansion, so it’s not clear at all. There is also a different theory (which will be mentioned in Part 6) that there were pre-Sethite REINDEER herders from further north who merely adapted to herding sheep, etc. later, so if this is true (I have no idea whether it is true or not) and they were in the Turanian steppe also, then it becomes even more complicated.
“But is his political style necessarily a result of Gentile blood?”
This is a matter of interpretation. Individuals are affected by many variables, both inherited and environmental, so it’s hard to be sure what accounts for each event of their behaviour.
“I’d imagine today’s Jews wouldn’t hesitate to subdue non-Jews directly if they had the power.”
This is why we have said that the difference between Jews and Gentiles is becoming smaller in recent times, and if this trend continues, in the future we will not be talking about “Jews” and “Gentiles” any more, but will simply refer to both as “non-Aryans”.
@Victor, Yes, good for hunters too. ‘Strongmen’ are great examples of this body type adapted for being alpha-male hunters. Especially note how natural their muscles look. They don’t look like artificial steroid-junky balloon men who use insane training programs, that’s for sure!
http://deviloftheday.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/2642426809_e27a6588f0_o12.jpeg
http://deviloftheday.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/screen-shot-2012-01-22-at-6-25-23-pm.png
http://deviloftheday.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/4071077.jpg
And yes, the difference in food sources would be my guess for the different shape of the jaws as well.
@AS, Wow, I didn’t expect that strong of a correlation either!
“In theory, the belief in plurality as illusion is perfectly acceptable, so long as the motivation is to destroy the illusion. The problem begins when people start thinking that because it is illusion, it doesn’t have to be destroyed – rather, merely being AWARE that it is illusion somehow suffices.”
Agreed. In truth, the only real recognition of the Illusion is active struggle against it (or active struggle for the Truth; two sides of the same coin). Otherwise, all claims to “awareness” are really, as you said, fopperies.
“I have even heard ludicrous applications; for example, one non-vegan (I’m being serious here) said that it was correct for ME to be vegan because I believe the animals are real, but it is OK for HIM to be non-vegan because he understands that none of it is real anyway.”
That is quite idiotic. Why is he feeding his (non-existent) body with (non-existent) food in the first place? It’s almost like he’s trying to preserve a (non-existent) something! I hate the vanity of (so-called) intellectuals, wasting others’ time in arguments which get nowhere, not arguing to get somewhere, but merely to “learn more” and be more “open-minded”, i.e. to acquire a bunch of useless information which can be flaunted to appear knowledgeable and cultured.
Here’s another question I’ve been thinking about: according to the text Aryans developed from a group of former hunters who invented agriculture and started living as sedentary farmers. I assume these hunters did not suddenly turn into Aryans the moment they switched to farming (though perhaps they already had nobler traits because the abundance of wild crops lead them to focus less on hunting?) Thus the formation of the Aryan race was probably a longer evolutionary process. How long did this take?
Also, since a farming lifestyle allows for noble traits to thrive: why didn’t this work with the Gentiles who had learned agriculture from the Aryans, considering that it had already worked before with the Natufian people?
http://bga101.blogspot.com/2012/03/eurogenes-hunter-gatherer-vs-farmer.html?m=1
Just found this.. Thought it might be of some interest.
@Victor
“according to the text Aryans developed from a group of former hunters who invented agriculture and started living as sedentary farmers.”
Where exactly does it say this?
“Also, since a farming lifestyle allows for noble traits to thrive: why didn’t this work with the Gentiles who had learned agriculture from the Aryans, considering that it had already worked before with the Natufian people?”
It would have allowed individuals who have undergone mutations for heritable nobility (ie. acquired Aryan traits) to survive where they formerly (in a hunting-dependent lifestyle) would have been eliminated. But it would not have eliminated those who lack Aryan traits, so long as they could passably imitate the behaviour demanded by the rulers. And those who lack Aryan traits reproduce more: every time a new Gentile clan learned to farm, their population exploded so that they quickly outnumbered the Aryan ruling class who had taught them to farm. The consequences are obvious. It is for this exact reason that we need National Socialism to control reproduction.
It DIDN’T work with the Natufian people. That’s the point.
@Chris
Thanks! We can get back to this after Part 6 is released.
@ mandrake
It is not obligatory to believe in the existence of Lucifer but it is mandatory to despise the Old Testament. When I did not know the truth about the Holocaust I surely disliked Hitler but I was not obsessed with him, as I am not obsessed with barbaric Genghis Khan today. It was all kinda suspicious: “Why do people always talk about the Holocaust? Ukrainians and Armenians had their genocides too”. I remember that in Italy I learned about the Holocaust in First Grade, the January after 9/11.
Zionist Eugenics are an open secret and now it just got a bit more open:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/08/18/israeli-sperm-banks-see-rise-in-demand-for-combat-semen/
How long before the far-right starts to scream that this is a good idea? They may be doing it already.
PS: that article’s author is a Jew, so it they’re not really hiding anything. The comments reveal this as well.
Years ago I saw White Supremacists urge women to use Scandinavian sperm banks to ‘purify the white race’ and for fellow White Supremacist males to donate. As ZC views have become increasingly popular, I’m sure their interest has expanded outside of Scandinavia.
Usually their motivation was the belief that this would somehow raise European birth rates, but I suppose subconsciously it is because they wish for their ignoble genes to spread. Of course, Jews are ahead of them, as they have been _consciously_ selecting for tribalist tendencies for thousands of years!
That article demonstrates why our movement is so important; as technology and knowledge related to genetics increases over the next century, racists are going to use it to strengthen their racism and reproduce more rapidly, rather than to make themselves more compassionate and noble.