There is No “Human Race” - Edenic Blogging Redux - Genetic Haplotypes, Evolutionary Pressures and implications for conventional paleoanthropology
This is a post recycle that comments on evidence of a lack of an “Out of Africa” common ancestor and puts forward the source in support of the last Edenic post.
Incidentally, I would like to suggest to my Edenic followers that the My Little Pony Mane 6 are a close-knit tribe of neanderthal females. We know this because although they are very socially competent, they are all introverted to some degree and all expressive of their own internal feelings first and foremost. They are soulful - Something which comes only with the neanderthal genetic component in modern European populations (with a few Asian outliers).
The below is fairly lengthy and makes the case for the lack of a common ancestor. This is heavily relevant because:
Only a university academic, for example, could believe that humanity was around for 150,000 years (if one is to believe the geneticists), and doing nothing but “hunting and gathering,” and then all of a sudden, and for no explicable reason, decided to invent civilizations such as Sumer (and all its Mesopotamian offshoots) and Egypt out of whole cloth, undertake monumental ziggurat or pyramid construction, invent calendars, agriculture, wheels, writing, mathematics, music, astronomy, banking, and maybe even electricity, as evidenced by the Baghdad Battery.”
- Joseph Farrell (Kudos to Zerogate and thehandsong).
Further thoughts below.
8:32 pm • 25 September 2012 • 4 notes
Edenic Blogging: No Common Ancestor
But with CT, you can capture the whole shape of a specimen, of course. You can look at the internal cranial morphology, the sinuses, the inner ear bones of Neanderthals, which we now know are differently shaped from our own.
4:03 pm • 23 September 2012 • 4 notes
mylifewithsocialanxiety asked: Whether or not we're all equal has to do, in a large part, with one's way of looking at society. If one looks at society with an "I'm superior to you" attitude, then of course one isn't going to think that everyone is equal. But if one looks at society with an "I'm going to love and respect every single person I meet, since everyone is fighting a difficult battle," then it'll be a lot easier to think of everyone as being equal. So why not just change your attitude?
I’ve been arguing with this person for a while now and I’m done with it. I hold this up as proof that libtard scum are unable to tell the difference between subjective feelings - I’m superior! You’re inferior!! - And realistic assessments about treating people who are completely different as if they are somehow magically exactly the same.
Tell me, do you know what an amygdala is?
In the lab, animals that have their amygdalas burned out experimentally with surgery or chemicals act exactly like leftists. They don’t live their lives in fear either. They don’t demonstrate anything like healthy organic natural responses. They seem insane. They rut wildly, neglect their offspring and abandon them to starve, approach their deadly enemies without any kind of caution and in general act like they are rabidly crazy.
I bet you’re one of these crazy motherfuckers who attend Occupy Wall Street rallies and ends up getting gang raped by some knife wielding psychos they implicitly trusted as being “Occupiers.”
4:48 pm • 21 September 2012 • 5 notes
Published here because I don’t have enough to say on this subject to warrant a fulltime blog to it. Deals with melonheads, ‘thals and cro-mag genetics.
2:13 pm • 21 September 2012
Jappleack Accidentally a Whole Traditionalism
I’ve been reading Ask-Jappleack for a little while now, on and off. It’s a neat little webcomic written and drawn by the guy responsible for the darkly humorous Pony.mov parody series. Originally Ask-Jappleack was the same sort of thing, but by accident or design Ask-Jappleack grown a larger plot (hurhur, plot) and become about Jappleack being a sort of chosen-one to defeat a cosmic apple monster, or something.
Anyway, I thought it was worth talking about this as when the comic starts, JA is a directionless angsty redneck, but over the course of the plot she’s transformed into a saintly and likeable character. Her God Hates Fags attitude has given way to a genuine religiosity and manic insecurity to humility.
The latest “Ask” section of Jappleack’s posts, there are gems like:
do you miss your home jappleack?i feel sorry
I do, but please don’t feel sorry for me. My life has a purpose now and I’m very thankful for that.
Why do you like apples?
They grow, you eat them, they grow again, year after year, century after century..
It’s all very wholesome and traditionalist, all of a sudden.
Coincidentally, I am currently putting my meagre artistic skills to the test by doing a Applejack poster that will appeal to the alt-right of my readers, something I’ve mentioned previously to specific people. It is happening and I will not bail like I’ve had to do on earlier projects, so that’s nice.
If this post has a point, it’s that the universe begins and ends with apples, so yeah, I’m gonna go stew some local grown ones I got from my grocer. Later folks.
6:54 am • 19 September 2012 • 9 notes
Trotting along the noble path
Only narcissists care about being indivijool. And they end up like Gilda the Griffin, preening, image-obsessed, entirely alike. Only the lowest of the low live to be popular. They are damaged goods, made of selfish smiles and air; They will leave nothing worthwhile behind and be left behind by the worthwhile. In the end they are Satan’s imps, born to rage against those who care not about their own feelings, but about nurturing what is good in life.
The ponies of Ponyville recognise that they are the manifestation of those who have come before, and they will be manifest in those who will come after them. Applejack and Big Macintosh know all too well that they are given the blessing of life not in order to help themselves, but to serve the world and the goodness in it.
And all the others.
All of them.
1:27 pm • 17 September 2012 • 6 notes
MY NATIONALIST PONY: Applejack Again.
In Season 1 Episode 3, Applejack is shown working herself to exhaustion kicking trees to shake the apples out of them. In the closing moments of the episode, Twilight is shown using her magic to lift the apples out of an entire field of apple trees all at once and get them barrelled up in a few…
You are forgetting to apply basic microeconomic concepts of opportunity cost and comparative advantage. Sure Twilight Sparkle has an absolute advantage on picking apples, which is to say nothing of Applejack’s absolute advantage in raising a crop and producing other marketable commodities such as apple-derived cuisine and spirits, but Twilight Sparkle’s opportunity cost of picking apples would be not instead devoting her time and energy studying or doing another scholarly task. Twilight, over all other ponies, has the least opportunity cost in academic affairs such as researching esoteric lore, summarizing reports and other matters that may be too arcane to be accomplished by anypony other than Celestia’s protégée. Twilight Sparkle has a comparative advantage in academics and magic, and Applejack has a comparative advantage in agriculture, and, by specializing according to one’s comparative advantage and freely trading with others, everypony is able to consume beyond what their individual productive possibilities would allow. Through economic mechanics, the free market allows for economic growth and social harmony to emerge through rational self-interest and voluntary exchange; traditional values are quite irrelevant in explaining socio-economic behavior.
Buttercup Dew, I love you and your blog, but, as an anarcho-capitalist, I get turned off whenever you suggest such Luddite notions and contempt towards markets; whenever I read your posts on economics, you sound more and more like a socialist, while ignoring how laissez-faire capitalism has expanded society’s economic opportunities.
All very valid points. I would point to the opportunity cost being a result of following ones predisposition in the first place, though. I’m not going to dispute any of your economic theory, which is consistently sound; I used to be a big free marketer and an-cap myself. I shifted emphasis and direction after asking “to what ends?”
Resource misallocation and statist monopolies are bad, yes, and the free market allows for social harmony etc etc based on productive capacity and best utility; but what it fails to account for - and you make this same mistake in your reply - is that people are not motivated by economic rational self interest. They’re motivated by too many factors for any one economic system to account for, which is why ultimately the free market is only as good as what people you have in it and what they prefer to buy.
My main problem is that being an economic negation of the state, anarcho-capitalism fails to work as a structural framework for what comes after. Ancaps tend to get “stuck” at free market economics as the be all and end all of how society binds together, overlooking HBD, common consciousness (from genetics) and what motivates people in the first place. It’s been commented upon many, many times about how Homo Sapiens is eerily like a domesticated animal, and yet anarcho-capitalists want to throw the fate of the world to his economic reins?
The most common ground I have with anarcho-capitalists is that I am an omniseparatist; lets all leave the state and then squabble about what land goes to who after. I think that any sort of ancap territory would quickly form into mini-fiefdoms based on class, race, economic advantage, etc. The state is never really going to go away, it’s a question of degree; for example, parents have a “state” of a house and children suffer from the “love it or leave it” argument. These arguments tend to disappear if you disregard economics and ask questions about how self ownership is derived in the first place; I tend to think that common genetics entails an equally valid claim on ownership as self ownership does;
For example when we say X person belongs to a race, it is best to interpret this quite literally, by a matter of blood the collective has a moral claim on his person. The mind is a product of the body, so by the same logic as the self-ownership absolutists, other persons of similar genetics possess also a similar mind, and claim ownership of an otherwise atomised individual. Anarcho-capitalists view the individual as some sort of Randian entity that exists independent of others and simply has utility to “the market”, traditionalists take the more accurate view that the individual is a manifestation of a genetic continuance and is part of, and belongs to, race and nature.
Free markets are great, but they’re not everything. This is quite a tricky subject to navigate mainly because anarcho-capitalism fails not because it’s economically incorrect, but because its an economic and not a philosophical framework. What anarcho-capitalism doesn’t ask is The Conan Question; WHAT IS GOOD IN LIFE? It puts the Applecart before the pony and states that people being able to get maximum utility from the market is best, without accounting for what those people want, and why.
I could be described as an an-cap, I suppose? I’m as much an anarcho-capitalist as I think the state fucking off and leaving good ol’ whitey separatists to form their own society is a Good Thing. Like I said I don’t dispute anarcho-capitalism, but it’s such a narrow window with which to view the world that it’s restricting.
The final thing is that I don’t have contempt for markets; much the opposite, I think a truly free market would produce a deeply traditionalist society very quickly. What I have a contempt for are those who think their own feelings are more important than ideas of excellence, self betterment, etc; and support the democratic liberal consumer state to feed their vanity.
Consider the Argos store I posted a photo of - The paradox of uniform individuality, devoid of natural hierarchy and humility. Concrete plastered over landscape by committee. Not very pleasant at all, but the inevitable result of putting the individual over a greater and larger goal of adaptation to nature and working harmoniously with it. What does anarcho-capitalism have to say about that? Not a lot, really, beyond some disputes about fiat currency and regulation and whether Argos would be undercut by more local stores in Anarchyland.
Anyway, you might get a kick out of this - It’s my old OC character, before I went Maximum Buttercup and started writing My Nationalist Pony.
7:23 am • 9 September 2012 • 20 notes
In Season 1 Episode 3, Applejack is shown working herself to exhaustion kicking trees to shake the apples out of them. In the closing moments of the episode, Twilight is shown using her magic to lift the apples out of an entire field of apple trees all at once and get them barrelled up in a few moments.
So why don’t the unicorns just.. do everything in Ponyville?
Because Twilight is much better suited to research than apple overproduction, and Applejack’s pride and joy is doing what she was literally born to do by the die-hard traditionalist Apple Family. To make her obsolete would be to rob her of her identity and chance to fulfil her natural role.
Should that happen, she’d be stuck having to “express herself” through the medium of buying stuff.
Also, I’m back. For fucks sake.
7:10 pm • 6 September 2012 • 20 notes