Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Love who you will, but should interracial marriages produce kids?

So there is this picture going around the internet that brings up a good point, but is totally off the real issues.

For one thing, I for one am not "mad" about what skin color a person may have. Anymore then I am mad every time I see a mule.  . .Believe me, I am not thinking "Oh no, it's a half horse, half donkey!!" Nor does the thought cross my mind to be mad at a poor kid who has no say in the matter. . .

Many would say that it is stupid and racist to even have a post that brings up such a hot topic (especially with such blurry lines of race in "the melting pot of the world"), but hear me out, there are some seriously good reasons to STOP THE MIXING! 

I would never say who you should love or live with, or even legally marry! I heard a message at my Unitarian church about gays being allowed to legally marry leads some to say "What is next, polygamy, incest, bestiality?!" Truthfully, I think the government should butt out, and I spoke up to say so in the open mic time afterwards! Marry your cat if you want to! 

That said, reproducing is a huge privilege and responsibility, and it should be something others have some input in, considering it is our world and future as well! I would love to see people asking input from friends and family, who would be able to anonymously vote about whether you should have any or more kids, or not. The truth may hurt sometimes, but there are a lot of people in the world that should not have had kids in retrospect. . .it seems even those middle class whites who have had trouble conceiving naturally are in my experience awful parents, as they are child run homes. (But that's another story.)

It should be presumed that if you are a dependent on others for your life, you should not be having kids at all, or at least until you become independent. (As in the case of minors or welfare and foodstamps recipients)

My post: parasites of dying civilizations showed stats on state dependence by race, and there is little question that per capita, the minorities in general, and the blacks in specific are by far the biggest burden on society. 

 Also if you are not in a stable relationship, you should not have kids either. According even to many astute blacks, that means that at least 3/4th of Black mothers should "cool it" and not be having kids. About 3/4th of the black babies are born out of wedlock, to young single mothers. The rate has gone down dramatically though over the years as more are getting abortions. 1 in 4 black babies are aborted by choice, and no, the white man has nothing to do with it, other then helping them have it safely!)

Sadly, the divorce rate of the married blacks shows it makes no difference whether they get married, or not, as 70% of them will still end up divorced.  More stats on mixed marriage success or failure will come in my next post. . .

Many black men are coming down hard on black woman being the "destruction of America". We can't forget the fact that only sometimes it is a poor mothers fault. . .it takes two to tango, and many times rape (which as stated in my post here, and the chart here, is ridiculously high in dark races) is to blame for teenage unwed pregnancies. Rape is unpunished in Africa, and in fact a smart move in their "culture", which is one reason they call it a "rape culture". Rape is just what evolution has shown them works.

Until Obamacare, abortion was not covered either I have heard. So what option did a young girl with no money have when she saw that she would not be supported by the predominantly poor "deadbeat Dad" coming from the black community?! If it weren't for welfare, it would be the same as in Africa, an unsafe abortion. "In Africa, approximately 4 million unsafe abortions occur per year. About 40% of the women who undergo an abortion die as a result of the complications." Abortion in this country has been called a "black genocide", yet it is the salvation of Black mothers. Thy would do what they are doing in Africa today if we didn't intervene to save the mother. It is certainly not white supremacy to save 40% of black mothers having abortions, and giving them their own choice, as well as provide it free after counseling!

So forget interracial marriages producing kids, if you are black, you should seriously have all your ducks in a row before considering reproducing! Even the mixed couples, or couples who are both mixed, who have enough money, and support, should opt to adopt or foster instead of procreating though. . .

This being because there are numerous (and little known) differences between blacks and whites that cause common problems for mothers or kids. Things like:

  •  The recessive or uneven melanin distribution as in Vitiligo. Or freckles. Both only seem to be in those of mixed ancestry.
  • Different sized babies, as well as heads. . .and the ability to birth them.
  • The white woman's pelvis has space for a large, big brained baby's head, unlike the black woman. So a black woman will be prone to birth traumas and needing emergency c-sections if the head measures like a white baby. Which give a kid a bad start in life in many ways . . .
"White women have a wider pelvic inlet, wider outlet, and shallower anteroposterior outlet than African-American women. . . These differences may contribute to observed racial differences in obstetric outcomes and to the development of pelvic floor disorders."Source

"Race is not just a social construct. How we interpret biological differences, such as pelvis size, skin color, etc. are not socially constructed but real observations, made from quantiative analysis. There are distinct anatomical, genetic, even behavioral differences that are not derived solely from stereotypes."
  • Different sized jaws. (Causing problems with the wisdom teeth erupting in the shorter jawed whites, where there isn't any with the Blacks of Sub Sahara Africa.) "Wisdom teeth problems are more common among European whites compared to Orientals and blacks. This conclusion is supported by research on dental problems and race that concluded that racial differences exist ‘ … in the contemporary human races with regard to occlusion, tooth size, and tooth shape … interbreeding would exacerbate malocclusion and increase the number of impactions."
  • Different sized nipples, to accommodate the jaw size of their babies. . .this is based on my own observations and studies with breastfeeding moms, and talking to a lactation consultant I know, but I haven't found anything official, or looked at porn to verify it. ;) Maybe someone can help me out here.
  • Different incisor teeth that have a "scooped out" appearance on the tongue side. This pattern is characteristics of dark Populations today. It was also common among the Homo erectus, who's DNA is only found in the Blacks.
  • Different vitamin D needs, Blacks need more then they get in America or Europe.
  • Different personalities, according to the very high IQ people in the orient. 
Those associated with the Africans use to be B blooded (until they are mixed then AB or O is likely). . .but see if it fits the black stereotype to you.

General personality of people who have type B blood
—Like to go their own way
—Do what they want without considering other people’s feelings, rules and customs
—Happy-go-lucky and masters of breaking rules
—Friendly and open their heart to anybody
—Not pretentious
—Afraid of being alone
—Don’t chase a dream much
—Like to play
—Love festivals and parties
—Have been in love many times
—Don’t get heart-broken over lost love
Then there's the bloodtype that is associated with the Neanderthal, and all related to them (through the European). . .not the Sub Saharan African: Bloodtype O
General personality of people who have type O blood
—Good at developing economic concepts
—Vigorous at earning a living
—Strong in face of adversity
—Dream of getting rich quick, but actually take a steady approach
—Go straight toward their goal
—Have leadership ability and often take care of younger people and people below them
—Very cautious
—Don’t care about small things, taking a wider perspective instead
—Devoted, but with a strong desire to monopolize

It is easier to see who is pure African, in order to tell the original differences another way though, checking for a blood antigen, because obviously Blacks would have no antigen to their own blood. All the rest of the world has an allergic reaction to their blood though, called the Duffy antigen. So those who are white, or mixed white will have it, as if they were just barely exposed to an foreign body, and are now allergic to it. . .pure blacks that is.

Seen on this map of Africa as dark red, and striped is where nearly everyone has no Duffy antigen to blacks blood, so is a pure black.

Characteristics of the Duffy negativity phenotype in Africa.
If you will note that the only areas that are white, with less Duffy blood are the white, or intermixed with whites areas of Africa. (And are civilized.)

 Those white areas took from the dark areas in the slave trade. Those pure black areas are those that were the origin of all the slaves that made it to America. The leaders that were only part black wanted to segregate from the pure blacks, but had no ability to house all the prisoners they got in "tribal warfare" with them. . .so they shipped them to America. 

Unfortunately being evolved from a different place, they also have a different way of thinking. Showing up in a Different IQ. This has been shown in books like "The Bell Curve", "Erectus among us", and "IQ and global inequality", as well as numerous other studies that have causes scientists to put together maps like this, that have never been debunked.)

This difference is not to say blacks are inferior. Some even say the IQ test doesn't work on blacks, as they don't think that way. All the more reason they should not be schooled the same way either! Detroit schools scores are the lowest in the nation, with a population now of mostly blacks. It is so abismal that they say the scores show the kids were just all guessing!

Another sign of what IQ means is it's effect on civilization. One rather obvious thing is what happens to the civilization when a population changes from a group with low to high IQ. We have the indigenous population of Australia having a very low IQ (as seen in the source), then being replaced by a high IQ when the whites went there. Not surprisingly, civilization followed. While when the 90% white areas of America, like Detroit, had their population swap to almost 90% black now, we have the destruction of civilization the whites built. 

A high (110+) IQ doesn't mean everything though, nor does it guarantee a good job. It also will not make you fit in, or be a leader, nor is there any obvious benefit past 100. (Pretty much if you are very smart, you aren't going to be seen as dumb, but will not always be appreciated for your intelligence, because few can compare what genius looks like. . .)

Simply put, IQ helps a person see connections of actions to reactions, and relationships. Work ethic, follow through, impulse control, and good choices are a sign of a higher IQ. Jails are filled with those with a low IQ. To give a comparison point though, with an IQ of 70, Americans deem someone mentally handicapped, and unable to fit into civilized society. . .not surprisingly, 70 or lower is the average IQ in Sub Sahara Africa, and there is no civilized society.

Of course there are singular exceptions both in parts of Africa, or other parts of the world of mixed blacks. Some will recessively take after the whites in their IQ, even while looking black. Thus, they would be the out-layers in the IQ charts like this for instance. 

Even when taking account of supposed unfairness like income disparity, whites score an average of 15 points higher on the IQ tests then blacks who are 10 times wealthier then them. Again though, this is not to insinuate that the blacks are inferior, but the way they think is different.

My IQ is supposedly 15 points lower then my husbands, and I use to feel inferior about that, as he would be the one with the 4.0 GPA, and the top of his class awards and all. . .but then I realized how he was not focused like me, didn't retain knowledge like me, and wasn't nearly as curious as me. Nor does he see the big picture like me, while being able to handle details of things I am passionate about. He has even told me he needs my kind of smart, and that I am just as smart as he is. (I have an IQ of 106. . .give or take a few points, as I always had a crying baby interrupt me taking a test.)

Someone with a higher IQ is able to do math, see connections, relationships and make wise choices in life. Someone with a lower IQ then the average 100, is more impulsive, naive, childlike, worse at math and book work in general, but may be well suited to less "brainy" work. Sadly, if you are looking for equal wage opportunity, unfortunately most white collar jobs in management are not likely with a low IQ. If this was not true we would not see the same pattern of low IQ with low paying blue collar jobs around the world. Check out this map.

This is something I have spoken of in my post: The parasites of dying civilizations, as well as
The origin of miscegenation is cultural Marxism. . .and it will be the ruin of America. Whether good or bad, made for whites or not, the IQ test has accurately predicted a person's ability to live and work in a civilized society. (And stay out of jail.)

 IQ disparity explains the racial differences in income, and being desired for a mate, or hired for a job, much better then just pulling the "race card". The belief in inequality in lifestyles being the fault of the whites has its origin in cultural Marxism. White guilt is totally inappropriate, and is a doctrine being taught only to gain power for a few white elitists in the Democratic party. Sadly, those giving them their power (the voters) are too foolish to see they are being played for fools. Demographics of the Democrats are now mostly women, gays, and poor minorities. (90% of them)

Other differences that make interbreeding bad on the health of your body include:
  • Different iron baselines, causing confusion with who actually has anemia. (Whites need less)
  • Differences in how we digest calcium, which ties into the vitamin D needs.
  • Different baseline body PH Source
  • Different baseline body temperatures. Whites classically have low temperatures. While this is true,  they don't feel colder then others, actually red heads (when healthy) are well known to feel hot because they are colder inside. This is one reason redheads can actually handle a cold water pain test much better then others, while generally being more sensitive to pain. Dentists know this, and doctors often too. Pain medication and numbing isn't as effective, thus they will avoid dentists and doctors because of painful traumas. Red heads are also known to bleed easier, and have more chance of passing out in childbirth even with less blood loss Midwives will tell you.
  • Different baseline blood pressure. Those with white in their blood classically have low blood pressure. Source
  • Different gestational periods. Pure black tends to be two weeks early when healthy, while mixed races are on time at 40 weeks and whites are two weeks late when healthy. Source 
  • Different puberty times. " On average, African American girls show signs of puberty (with breast development and chemical changes in their bodies) almost two years sooner than white girls. . ." Source   (There is also a clear link between speed of puberty and intelligence/IQ. . .Source)
  • Different diets. Neanderthals who started the RH- whites, with red hair, white skin and blue eyes, were into cooking meat, (probably) soaking and definitely cooking grains like oatmeal and having dairy products, just like the original elite class of the Sumerians, Egyptians and all their European kin of the O or RH- bloodline. While the primate line were almost exclusively vegetarian or bug eating hunter gatherers. (Other then cannibalism, or the rare meat they found.) Of course this is evidenced by the diet "Eat right for your type, and the fact that scientists say that:  "As humans moved into less hospitable environments [believed to be out of Africa], the animal content of their diet increased." Even though we have proved now that there was nothing less hospitable, and there was plenty of food in both environments.  Source Source
  • Not eating the traditional diet of the primate has no doubt led to or encouraged a high obesity rate in blacks, and traditional naps in all the third world nations, to help digestion after the wrong sort of meals. (Called "siestas") 

There are many more pesky differences as well, like in the voice. . .which when pure, is obvious what race we are.1

A friend of mine once told me, "There are physical differences in all species but their basic DNA allows them to be considered part of the same species. Meaning they can breed together and those traits will not cause one or the other to change the basic molecular make up of the off spring."

I'm sorry, but I have not seen this to be the case.

Now because of much inbreeding in America and the world, as a whole, we are all much more of a hybrid of two separate races, who have stemmed originally I believe from two distinct species, homo erectus and the Neanderthal. 

We still see these differences in those who are pure like (30% of African Americans, and in Sub Saharan Africa), but less so with the mixed ones. And thus a lot of the confusion that seems to debunk previous studies. Like as soon as you only count the educated and rich blacks or minorities, suddenly the differences of head or brain size is negligible between the races. 

How do we reconcile all these differences in the races with our worldview? If we all evolved out of Africa from the monkey, or if we all came from Adam and Eve with creation, neither really make sense to most people. . .but I have a theory you need to consider.

I am not religious, but I think mythology, when understood in it's proper context, is historical, and enlightening, bringing with it a proper understanding of the races, and their origins. When you see  creation myths as all converging at the first civilization, from Sumerian mythology. . . then you can see there is good evidence that they are somewhat historical, but mistranslated, exaggerated and misunderstood.

Ironically though, they who would benefit from understanding the history of one race of man (those in "God's image") in the story of creation, have mainly discounted it all as myth (and the Biblical version is a good part evolved myth), while those who have no cause to pay attention to it are claiming it as their history, which it obviously is not! Check out my posts: The story of creation as seen by an Atheist. and
Proof that we did not just evolve naturally, but that "man" was intelligently designed! Part 4 for more info on that.

To understand the shorthand Hebrew (in the Bible), let's go back to it's intended meaning from the long hand Sumerian. The original creation story is much more detailed, and religious scholars who study the Sumerian agree it is the origin of the Biblical creation story.

In the Sumerian text "ATRA HASIS", it gives the account of when human kind was created. Humans (as understood now), were created in batches. The first batch (of the god's creation), according to the text were called "THE BLACK HEADED ONES", THESE WERE CREATED BASICALLY TO BE SLAVES TO THE ANUNNAKI GODS.

They were, from all I can tell, genetically manipulated to have language to understand the gods, and were given primitive knowledge, like of fire or about plants. Prometheus got in trouble with the other gods for giving them knowledge of fire. . . in the greek mythology, which is also tied to the Sumerian text.

Giving the slaves knowledge of fire was something the other gods very wisely did not approve of. As we see all the arson the blacks are responsible for in Detroit now, we might understand their wisdom. . . The fire fighters have almost given up saving most of the houses the blacks light on fire, as the effort is further bankrupting the city of now predominantly blacks.
(BTW, the testing scores of the blacks in Detroit also show a more clear evidence of the IQ differences that led to the enslavement of the blacks by the Annanaki.)

After mining gold for hundreds of thousands of years with the slaves (something there is much evidence of in South Africa, thanks to the finds and research of author and presidential candidate Michael Tellinger) the god's decided to make a creation "in his image", as numerous religions attest to. The God's of all ancient history were originally depicted as physical, blond or red headed, and with white skin. (Unlike the Christian version that evolved into an invisible spirit and thus couldn't have an "image", or be heard "walking" in the garden of Eden.)

On the father's side, all the whites can trace their ancestry to start to the time and location of the middle east (where the Biblical and Sumerian creation story happened). The first blond and blue eyed woman can also be traced to around that time. If the Bible and Sumerian text was right, the only logical explanation is that if the gods were white, their children would be too. Which I discussed more in detail here.

The mother's side of whites is a little more complicated, as scientists unfortunately trace the mother side only through the mitochondria, instead of the nucleus of the egg. This made the "out of Africa theory" seem right. . . It is now evident that the mitochondria came from a donor egg, from the homo erectus. Who is not present in the pure white man, but is in the blacks. Just as the Neanderthal is not in the pure black. The ability to gene splice from 3 parents has only recently been reinvented, but it is basically the process the Sumerian text describes in the creation of the children of God!

This origin of whites coming from black's mitochondria, through the mothers side, is proven in many ways, but if this were true from being born of them and bred with them in the natural sense, whites would have gained something from their ancestors other then the mitochondria. . .could the ancient Sumerian text describing genetic manipulation be evidenced in our genes being spliced? The "Gods" were apparently highly advanced. . .and though they may have looked just like us, they were at the time, technically. . .

More proof of this is that only a few whites can trace back to anyone in Africa. (While most blacks have 22% white ancestry now. . .) If we all came out of Africa, something would link us together, like coloring (Blacks are dominant over whites), bone structure, teeth, genes, gut parasites, bloodtypes, RH factor, etc.

The original children of the gods (The Neanderthals) had RH- blood (O-), seen as alien to the planet. Unlike the blacks who were born of the homo erectus (and to this day are the only ones who have them in their ancestry) the Neanderthals were never exposed in their womb to the primate RH+ blood, but were implanted in a goddess, with only the mitochondria taken from the donor homo erectus. . .(like the "3 parent baby").

Already having the mitochondria from the blacks, you can see why we can interbreed, but with dire consequences. . .From what I have read, I believe the "original sin" in the Bible was the interbreeding of "god's children" with the dark indigenous race. This interbreeding of "races" should actually be called "species" because of their genetic separation, as spoken of in numerous posts before like here. Probably for this reason, only recently has interbreeding of our species became legal and acceptable. . . This is unfortunately because the history for the apparent "racism" was lost.  

Racism is null and void in my mind in light of specieism.

The RH- and RH+ blood found in the original whites and blacks (I believe) were not only incompatible, but interbreeding caused and still causes infertility often after the first child (if blood mixes), at least for that couple. RH- couples never have issues with infertility, and RH+ couples never have issues. This incompatibility is a leading cause of infertility in the world with all the mixes of mixes. . .as I spoke of more in this post here.

 RH+ from the primate line of the blacks is considered an impurity, just like A or B blood. . .where if the pure comes in contact with the impure, it will usually carry it on dominantly, with few exceptions.  

Similarly gut bacteria, parasites, tropical diseases, pests and STD's all came from Africa, or were carried on those who had symbiotic relationships with them. Whites are not evolved to handle African environments (including the sun), and the blacks have an inferior immunity to white diseases and have vitamin D deficiencies living in the environments whites are in. You will want to check it out in my posts about this, if you haven't already. (Start off here and also here.)

There seems to be little benefit to mixing genes, but especially for the whites. Even those who come from mixed heritages say there are no advantages. 

Analyzing the data here is what they found:

1) Mixed-race kids grow up in households that are similar along many dimensions to those in which black children grow up: similar incomes, the father is much less likely to be around than in white households, etc.

2) In terms of academic performance, mixed-race kids fall in between blacks and whites.

3) Mixed-race kids do have one advantage over white and black kids: the mixed-race kids are much more attractive then blacks, on average.

4) Mixed-race kids manage to be as bad as whites on the white behaviors and as bad as blacks on the black behaviors. Mixed-race kids act out in almost every way measured in the data set.

Technically, mixing only benefits the academics (IQ) and looks of the blacks, while it inevitably brings down the white IQ and attractiveness. . .although it may improve your strength and sports performance and give you an aggressive edge as a CEO to have higher testosterone I have read. 

Whether a person sides with White or Black supremacy by only claiming one parent's side, a mixed person needs to know that it is an evolutionary and natural behavior to prefer your own pure species, so you will rightfully never feel fully accepted as a mix! This denial of origins and continual mixing hurts everyone!!

 Sadly, mixing doesn't make for a better country economically, with more equality, less crime, more peace or anything positive. . .all it does is give the pure whites more power, money and bring more inequality and cause even more crime. (Look to Brazil to see how mixing has failed.)

This is what happens to the rich and middle class with mixing with the poor minorities. . .

This is the same story all over America. . .and all over the world. The elite rich will get richer, as they stay pure, and the majority will keep mixing, and keep giving the money to those who don't mix. Inequality grows the more we mix. This is due to IQ, and is completely unavoidable!

If you are considering "hooking up" with someone of another race, whether you love your race, are a "sellout" and love theirs or love them both as I do, please do us all a favor and use a reliable long term birth control! 

If you are a product of a thoughtless parent and are already mixed (most of the world) please stop the madness with you. . .For the love of the future generations of both species, we need to get back to pure whites and blacks, and allow nature to select the most fit species for each location, naturally. Or selection and evolution of millions of years was in vain.

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

The origin of miscegenation is cultural Marxism. . .and it will be the ruin of America.

 Let me tell you about Cultural Marxism
"Cultural Marxists have taken over the institutions of the media, [watch the new commercial "celebrate different"] education, mainstream Christianity (conservative and liberal), law, and finance. Their goal is the annihilation of Western Civilization in general and white people in particular." 

Press pandering to the NAACP.

You are programmed to be a  Cultural Marxist, whether you know it or not. What is cultural marxism? It is "An offshoot of Marxism that gave birth to political correctness, multiculturalism and "anti-racism." Unlike traditional Marxism that focuses on economics, Cultural Marxism focuses on culture and maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture."

Some other terms that you should understand though are: 

Genophilia: The love of one's own race. A natural instinct that Cultural Marxists want to deny (at least for whites).

Identitarian Religion: An older form of religion that stresses ancestral obligations. Adamantly opposed by Christian Cultural Marxists (at least for whites). Throughout nearly all human history, identitarian religion (aka, ethno-religion), has been the norm.

Nation: The very word 'nation' (from Latin 'nasci') implies link by blood. The traditional (non-Marxist) understanding of nation implies racial homogeneity. (Until very recently Europe has always been racially homogenous and USA, in 1960 census, was 90% white.) "The very essence of Cultural Marxism is the support of mass immigration / open borders."

Darwin supported the differences in race (those I spoke of in my most popular post called differences in our blood and what they mean) because he studied them. Those who don't are supporting a warped belief in creation as seen in the Bible. . .not the earlier original Sumerian text.

"Since the fall of communism discredited socialism this pseudo-religion has merely mutated and repackaged itself invading many other secular/liberal causes like a virus. All forms of . . .Marxism must have a victim class and an exploiter class in order to grow and organize. The cultural divide between the conservative white majority versus leftwing white minority means that minority must seek non-whites to build its power base. Class warfare doesn't sell, but racism does.. . people whose only identify is within their own narrow racial or social group can be more easily manipulated and controlled."

The blacks fall for this in masses, with 90% voting Democratic! Even Blacks will admit to this as a problem and even claim blacks only vote if they see someone of their own color running. Seen in the last presidential election, where more blacks then whites came out to vote!
"This is why the Democratic Party follows economic and social policies that have destroyed the black family [highly debatable, as they follow the same patterns left on their own in Africa] ,while getting 90 percent of their vote year after year. The big craze now is Hispanics as the next legion of useful idiots mostly voting for the Leftists."
Source Source

Democrats are by no means all idiots though, a small group of them are very educated. Frankly, I think a good part of them are the Unitarian Universalists, the Atheists and humanitarians. The Democrats don't even try to cater to the white middle or low class though.
"All pretense of trying to win a majority of the white working class has been effectively jettisoned in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment - professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists - and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic."
Why the disparity? This wealthy, left-wing professional class needs to gain the support of those whose economic interests they control in order to hold power  . . .they resort to the "race card" and target working-class whites and conservative whites as the cause of the their problems. They say "Give us your vote and through 'redistributive change' we will make the world a better place and hand out some of that 'Obama money'." It goes back to spite of the white working class, and demonizes the white conservatives as all religious, racist and idiot zealots.

The only way they get away with cultural Marxism IMO is miscegenation causing confusion and exceptions of the stereotypes.
We have seen a huge rise in miscegenation in the last few generations in America! Some would believe you racist if you didn't want to date people of other colors even. (Though stats on dating sites as well as studies of those who claim they are not racist all agree that Blacks are avoided more then any other race by far.)

Media and liberal groups have seriously pushed the glorification of mixing of races (also called miscegenation) in the last few generations. Why? The more mixed whites there are, the more the white elites will be in control. (For reasons I will get into later. . .)

Of course mixing makes inconsistent results, which makes some who are dark act black, while some act basically white inside now! 

Examples of the latter being like Obama or Bill Cosby, who have been quite down on the bad black mothers, and absentee fathers of the blacks. These mixed folks are instantly pegged as "sellouts" by the black community, and are told they "are acting white" if they get an education and hang out with whites. There's a high chance these blacks will suffer more violence at the hands of blacks then whites do. . .crime stats already show most crime is black on black, but I wonder if the victims may be those who are acting white, in a black neighborhood? I know of one like that, and she is under pressure to change and lower herself constantly! Some, like Oprah survive to tell the story, but I'm afraid many don't. (I'll get into the effects to the children of mixed marriages in a future post though.)

Knowing about this abuse from those they look like, it seem incredible that mixed blacks almost always identify as black?

A person with only 1/16th black ancestry will still , based on "the one-drop rule", call themselves black. They will most often have very visible black characteristics, so that is one obvious reason why most mixed blacks (mulattoes) identify as black. . . Mulattoes then reintegrate into the black gene pool, as they often can't marry whites. (Although they have a better chance of marrying a white with being a mix according to stats from dating sites.)

If blacks are so proud of their black looks and blood, as self reported studies on attractiveness studies say they unrealistically do. . . (and we know based on the dating stats, that whites are proud of theirs. . .) who's idea was it to integrate?
On "miscegenation" from the book erectus among us:
"The push behind integration has been blacks wanting to be around whites, not whites wanting to be around blacks. Mulattos resent the fact that they can never be “white,” and must accept a lower status as a “black.” They become hostile towards whites, who are the higher status group, even though they would have an even lower status if they were not partly white. Thus, whites who have mulatto children create enemies of whites, including themselves, another reason for whites to oppose miscegenation." 

Interracial marriages do not bring together different or warring races. Unlike in fairy tales like Romeo and Juliet, reality is (even more) harsh. You can literally look to the past to prove that mixing causes enemies, not friends (in probably every case of the first interracial marriages at least). 

When the children choose to inevitably side with the darker skinned parent (as the dark is dominant), when the parents would divorce (as is highly likely that they would, just as they do now) the dark parent would be left destitute and bitter in a white man's world. (Although the rare black woman to marry above her status may have been or even today is secretly proud to have improved her children's chances.) Sometimes the destitute parent would spread their bitterness and anger on to their dark children. This is the case with a very famous warrior. You might have heard of him, his name is Genghis khan, (below) whom 1 in 200 people in the world can trace their ancestry to
Genghis Khan
After his white leader father died, his mother (who was taken from a trail in the jungle) and mixed siblings were rejected by the fathers people, and found they didn't fit in with the mothers' people either. Raised in the jungle by his mother, fighting his own family for scraps of food (one kid was killed over food) he became very bitter over being different and unaccepted by his fathers people.

Being smarter and eventually idolized by the nomadic primitive folks of his mother's side, he found it easy to gain support to overtake those he knew were looking down on him as a half breed. (A similar story is in the Bible.)

He came to power by uniting many of the nomadic tribes of northeast Asia. After founding the Mongol Empire, he started the Mongol invasions that resulted in the conquest of most of Eurasia. These campaigns were often accompanied by massacres of the civilized populations. Areas he conquered and slaughtered the people in or mixed his mongols with are modern-day China, Korea, Central Asian countries, and substantial portions of modern Eastern Europe, Russia and the Middle East.

The great wall of China was built to keep out the mongols he led, as they were constantly raiding, raping and pillaging the wealthy ruling class whites. 

 "Perhaps both the strongest and the weakest argument against miscegenation [mixed marriages] is that it can destroy an existing civilization. . . the decline of a civilization is often slow, over hundreds of years, so that people may not even realize it is happening. However, there is good evidence that a lowering of IQ individually or nationally will lower living standards as less intelligent people are less productive and consumption cannot be maintained without production (though if you borrow or steal, it can be someone else’s production)."

From what I have read this mixing of races has been the death of a number of great civilizations from Egypt to Rome, Brazil/ Latin America/Mexico and now Detroit and Miami. This isn't just because of the Blacks being here as is obvious they are in huge amounts. . .it is because whites have given over power to them because of white guilt. And also simply because of the increased intelligence of the few smart mixed blacks (the ones whites generally mix with) causing whites to naively give them unfair advantage by pushing "equal rights" for all blacks.

(As long as we were separate, and knew our roles, our different races had no wars. Egypt was a good example of this for a very long time. There was no competition. The original royal whites, like up to King Tut (DNA proven to be European, with a whopping half of European men coming from him) had their role of leading (as their bloodline always has), while the blacks were content to be dependent on and supported by them. They worked under them, with good evidence of a fair system. They were like children doing chores that they were capable of doing, to help the family. . .otherwise known as slavery, yes. This compliance in the age of the gods in particular might have had something to do with the disparity in size also though. . .something I got into more in real evidence of God. Part 3)

When civilizations die Democrats (a majority now minorities) and liberals (because of an agenda of cultural marxism) will blame the poverty and crime in places like Detroit and Brazil on the economy and lack of jobs, saying it is because of "racism". While it is true that there are a lack of loans being offered to the hopeful (black) small business men or woman, yet plenty of white entrepreneurs have gone in there trying to resurrect the dead. . . As stated in my below post on this though, it is directly to do with behavior and IQ of the minorities that they have such "bad luck" getting trusted by whites. It's not something they can be schooled out of, or change with jail time or religion either. Tax payers are simply throwing money away trying to make them "act white" or "Godly". This is something honest teachers will admit to behind closed doors, as will those who work in correction facilities, or social services. Check out my links if you don't believe me.
Source Source

While giving over white control of the country to the blacks and mixed minorities (because of guilt), we continue to lie about the effects of the loss, and the mixing.
 Numerous flourishing European countries suffered a blow in increased poverty as well as lowered IQ as a direct result of importing and breeding with the black slaves. 

The percentage of blacks in an area translate to the IQ, and national average wage being high, or low in an area. Look below.

If you look at IQ averages in races, with different percentages of Sub Saharan black in them, you will see a very obvious pattern though.

More evidence is seen here, but there is worldwide DNA evidence as well.

Basically, wherever the Atlantic slave trade took the blacks, and the higher the amount of them, the lower the IQ, and the higher the poverty (and crime) that followed.

Richard Lynn in his 2006 book Race Differences in Intelligence reviewed the literature on worldwide IQ testing and calculated the average IQs for different races, here is a sampling:
  • Bushmen: In Southwest Africa 54.
  • Sub-Saharan Africans: In Africa 67.
  • Aborigines: In Australia 62.. 
  • Pacific Islander: In Pacific Islands 85. 
  • Native Americans. In North America 86
  • Southeast Asians: In Southeast Asia 87.
  • Arctic People: In North America 91.
  • Europeans: In Europe 99. Outside Europe 99.

The oldest African (free from the Neanderthal genes, who started the Europeans from all I can tell) being the San or Bushman, and a more generic term for those in their area being the Sub Saharan Africans, have the lowest scores by far. Though all of Africa has an IQ of around 70. . . the cut off of mental retardation for the rest of the world. This is seen in the schools of Detroit, dominated by the relatively pure sub saharan blacks. Check out this news report stating that the kids are getting scores as if they were guessing! Showing the sad state of the education system, and the reason why whites are leaving in droves to homeschool. And there is another one saying how lower IQ shows up in lower morals too. No shocker for those who have been exposed to black neighborhoods.

There is no doubt, knowing the DNA of some of African tribes the average IQ of even Africa being 70 is brought up by the ancient mixing in Africa, and all blacks that are unmixed may have as low as 54 even in America. (Maybe environment helps some though.)

On the other hand, the purest Europeans IMO (the original Jews, the Ashkenazi Jews) are not on the list here, but have been tested to have an average of 115. The royals and presidents of their pure bloodline average around 135! Those said to have "the divine right to rule", all being from the royal bloodlines of Europe, are the smartest in the world!
Other large studies have been done, and other books put out, like the popular "Bell curve", yet the media will not let it get out, or seek to only use stats from the 80% mixed African Americans, who have a much higher IQ thanks to their European genes. Check out the American charts, a small group is even above average intelligence. (The movie stars, comedians, scientists, dentists, doctors. . .made out to be the normal blacks by the media.)

Because of the vast difference in IQ of the original Europeans of the kingly and pure line (135) and Bushmen (54). . . Interbreeding would have been originally horrendous for the whites! (And encouraged for the blacks.) In fact, Miscegenation or mixed race marriages was illegal in many states until 1967 when the U.S. Supreme Court overruled a Virginia court and declared those laws unconstitutional. "Not that long ago miscegenation was viewed as akin to bestiality."
 I would guess that interbreeding is the reason why science has now admitted that "our" brains are shrinking, as well as our sculls. Over the last 30,000 years, the human brain has decreased about 10% in size. While the biggest heads and consequently brains are found in whites, who come from the Neanderthals, the blacks who have only homo erectus in them when pure, have the smallest. Head size is strongly linked with intelligence too. Those who are a mix have medium sized heads and medium IQ's. 

Of course there are many excuses the liberals make for this de-evolution, saying we need less memory then in the past, or we have more efficient brains, or domesticated animals have smaller brains then those in the wild, but these are dishonest cop outs, as some scientists admit that no other animal has shown this pattern, and the wild ones with bigger brains ARE smarter. . . denial of race and IQ differences are common, and it can be easily explained as a pseudo-religion. . .

We need to start being honest about our different origins from different species, homo erectus (to the left)

Image result for homo erectusand the Neanderthal (to the right), and about what's happening in our world because of our many differences (like IQ). Until we stop the denial (and stop supporting the pseudo-religion of cultural Marxism) we can't start taking steps to preserve our different species futures. . .preferably segregated.

 "No dog lover would want all the breeds of dogs to interbreed, so that all dogs are mongrels. No breeder of race horses would want his thoroughbreds to breed with common riding ponies. No garden lover wants all his flowers to come in only a single color or shape, or his tomatoes or apples in only a single variety, and no oenophile would want only a single red wine and a single white wine to choose from. . .Egalitarians love diversity so much that they insist that everything – our corporations, restaurants, hotels, neighborhoods, schools, television, movies, and textbooks must all be diverse – everything, that is, except people, who must miscegenate to become the same and therefore equal. . .Many things can be done but, until people come to believe that it is desirable and morally good to preserve their own genetic heritage, nothing will be done."
From the book erectus among us, chapter 29