TEST

Shaun W. | Biological Origin of Racism

Racism is generally regarded by the non-racist as simply an outdated ideal which has no biological basis and therefore it has to be done away with. When confronting a racist, the Egalitarian often states that the racist is only a racist because he or she was raised to be racist. This argument had a lot of merit back in the sixties, when practically everybody was a racist of varying degrees. However, nowadays, White youths without any parental inducement are becoming racist, also while the society around them, on the surface, is adamantly anti-racist. Of all the racists I know, I'd estimate roughly half of them came from a non- racial upbringing. So, how is it that these people are becoming racist?

In the recent past, the media used the term 'bigoted' in reference to racists. 'Bigot' means a person that is extremely intolerant of another's creed, belief or opinion. This is a perfect description of the Egalitarians. The media also used 'prejudiced' in reference to racists. This misused word actually is defined as any pre-conceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable. To want to preserve ones' race is to be a separatist. Prejudices can and are a part of everyone in a variety of ways, regardless of their racial feelings. Neither of these two words seem to invoke the desired alienation, so the media labelling of 'racist' evolved into 'hater' or 'hate monger.' This is much more the expected media induced distortion, as it is 180 degrees from what motivates a racist. With this said, as most of you already know, let's get on to what is a racist and what motivates a racist into being a racist.

Racism is defined as a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that ones' own race is superior. A racist is a person who believes in racism. However, this still fails to define what it is that motivates a racist into being a racist. The media loves to say that racists are driven by narrow-mindedness. Narrow- minded simply means, "if you don't believe what I just told you, then you are narrow-minded." The other word used to discredit a racist is by calling him or her 'ignorant.' In this respect, it doesn't matter if one has a university degree or is an inventor or college professor. If you dissent from the 'we be equal' dogma, then you'll be labeled 'ignorant.' How ignorance of anything ever motivated anyone to do anything is still left unanswered. However, this is just one more part of the joy of being ruled by the Jew. This brings me right to the root of the matter. What is it that motivates one to be a racist?

Let's take this question a bit farther. What is it which motivates anything to do anything? At the atomic level there are many different forces that always exist, as best we know. Be this hydrogen-hydrogen interaction or Van der Waals' forces, the ideal is the same; it is just a physical phenomena which exists, such as gravity. These forces and many others start to combine atoms together to form molecules. These molecules then form into macro-molecules and begin a process of interaction with one another and their various surroundings. Through a very long and complex process, these molecules form into organic substances; so, in essence, all living matter is one massive collection of chemical reactions, which are also coupled with a regulation system to maintain form and function. This regulation system has to be efficient and close to flawless. Of course, no organism is flawless. An example within humans is multiple sclerosis, which is an auto-immune response that attacks the Schwann cells. For some reason, the immune system loses a sense of 'self' from 'non-self.' Then, it attacks the Schwann cells, which are necessary insulators of the nervous system for conduction of the electrical impulses in our nerves. This is just one failure of proper self- regulation on the internal level. Could racism be an external self- regulation mechanism?

To validate this hypothesis, I use other externally stimulated occurrences which correspond with the concept of self-regulation. An obvious example is when one is threatened with bodily harm. When these situations arise, a number of things occur. Let me use the example of falling boulders descending upon a person. The person sees and hears the massive rocks, and before he or she has time to 'think' about the situation in the cerebral cortex (higher processing center), the signal is sent to the thalamus in the top part of the brain stem. These signals are processed quickly and induce a chemical response in the hypothalamus, which is just below the thalamus. The hypothalamus controls the endocrine system (hormones). In this particular response, the hypothalamus releases a hormone (Corticaltropin-RH), which goes to the anterior pituitary, which in turn releases a hormone (ACTH), which goes to the adrenal gland, which, in the adrenal medulla releases epinephrine, which is better known as adrenaline. This stimulates what is referred to as the 'fight or flight' condition. In a healthy person this takes place in a fraction of a second and the person moves out of the way. This situation clearly illustrates an external stimulus which is perceived as danger and the body responds properly.

This same situation can be taken a step further in regards to children. A healthy person identifies their children as 'self,' an even more important self than that individual's own life. When those same rocks are falling down towards ones' children, the same response occurs, even though the individual in question is not in harm's way. In this scenario, the 'fight or flight' response, in a healthy individual, is to fight, and he or she risks their life to save the child, which is a part of self, the future. Although these two individuals, parent and child, are two separate entities, they are, in a way, as one. This is the case with many mammals, where the organic entity of 'self' is multi-bodied, which is the case with humans.

This example shows a natural internal motivation for self- preservation in regards to an environmental danger, but can be just as valid if the danger were a living organism, such as a lion. In this regard, the variable for danger could be any living organism, right down to a virus, which is actually not classified as 'living.' However, this does not, by itself, explain the internal motivation for racism. When a person of another race is the impeding danger variable, then there would be the natural distinction of self from non-self, but when the situation is changed to one of non-impeding danger, this example fails to explain racism. However, when an organism that is clearly non-self is contained, let's say in a zoo, then the threat there is also removed and in the case of a lion, people can, without fear, look at and admire the lion. This situation changes slightly with different races in the same living space. Both compete on the same level, for the same resources, and when neither of the races are clearly dominating (controlling) the other, then the possibility of one gaining control over the other exists. This, in itself, presents the danger.

When one race is colonizing in another races' pre-existing territory, which is simply the natural drive of expansion, then this is a definable threat; whether it be from Mestizos flooding into Los Angeles or White pioneers pressing west of the Mississippi River, the scenario is identical.

With regards to economics, it is a little different, however, it's still who is controlling the economic factors which define ones' natural perception of danger. In breeding, it's the most blatant, in that this not only sets off the warning signal about one impeding race moving into another races' territory, but now the self is being literally torn in half. Of all the previously presented scenarios, none invoke such a physical response greater than the inter-breeding of the races. This, in itself, is another good argument for self and non-self, in regards to the various races.

During the past Ice Age, the White race was split by geographic glacial separation. These pockets of people formed into what are now called tribes, from its original meaning, which does denote slight biologically unique features for each group. However, this time period, of about 10,000 years, was not long enough to change the different groups enough to be classified as different races, only as sub-races; the three sub-races being Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean. When brought together, these groups interbred, with virtually no regard to physical distinctions, only cultural. This is quite different with regards to a Negro and a White. When this situation is encountered, a racist undergoes a physical sensation which is commonly referred to as 'a rush of disgust.' This sensation is very similar to the same sensation that one gets when confronted with a situation such as child molestation, incest, or homosexuality. Healthy people have a natural barrier between sexual attraction to their parents and to their siblings. This distinction seems to be lost with regards to cousins, so a cultural barrier is imposed to stop the genetic degradation. Homosexuality, when witnessed by healthy persons, does not only invoke a rush of disgust, but, in the case of male- to-male homosexuality, it invokes anger and motivates violence towards this activity. This unhealthy behavior has been isolated genetically in rats and it is proven to be a mutation, but a fairly simple mutation, which means it will continue to be a naturally occurring mutation.

In regards to the genetic location on the chromosome or multiple chromosomes of the gene or genes that code for racism, it is still not yet isolated, and most likely won't be for some time for a variety of reasons. The main reason is the Human Genome Project is perhaps 10 years from completion. Secondly, the Human Genome Project is being done to find all the genes, it is not being conducted for what those genes code for. They only isolate the operator region of the gene on the DNA and that is what is used to count the number of genes. There are other researchers who are isolating various genes and finding out what protein(s) it codes for. I personally believe it will be found to be related to the same gene(s) that code for territorialism.

Since the invoked response by the visual stimulus of inter-racial coupling generates such a clear physical sensation ('rush of disgust'), this would lead me to believe that racism has got to be part of the endocrine system. The way that one feels when sexually aroused or violently stressed is purely a stimulus from hormones. Recently, the hormone which triggered obesity was discovered, which works against the sociologists' argument that parents requiring their children to "eat all of the food on their plate," was the cause of obesity, and aids in the racists' argument that genetics rules us all. Whatever the response which invokes racism, it is indeed coupled by a hormonal release, if it is not, in itself, the hormonal release.

I would therefore like to unambiguously state my hypothesis on the origin which stimulate racism. "Racism is the natural response to any perceived threat to the 'self' race from any human from the 'non-self' race by which the physical sensation and mental response is internally generated by human physiology." The main problem here lies in getting the funding from ZOG to do the research to isolate which hormones are responsible. This would also, most likely, indicate that there are people who lack this gene(s), or that it is mutated, which would explain the behavior of race-mixers. In this regard, it may be an evolutionary adaptation in the making to produce only true-breeding racists. A pedigree of Nazi of sorts. This conclusion also defines racism as natural and positive, a trait to be promoted and bred for. Racism is not just a belief, an ideal, a value system, or even a religion. Racism is a natural biological trait.

Alle Inhalte dieser Seite dürfen frei kopiert und verwertet werden.