Racism through the eyes of science.

We generally conclude someone is racist through such reasoning as seen in this chart. . .


I would suggest we look a little deeper.
 For one thing, let's analyze intent. . .your intent.
Why are you reading this post right now? Think about it, what is your motive? Are you trying to justify why you are already feeling racist? Are you trying to understand why someone you know could "hate" others? Do you believe it must be all in a person's imagination, or due to programming? 

(Well you are actually on the right track with the last. . .)

Let's first deal with those who believe they are above racism. There are good reasons why you may believe you do not hate other races. . .as I also do not hate other races.

 I am personally not into hating anything or anyone. (Not as an individual, "race" or species!) "Racism" is often equated with "hate groups", but even the most notorious white supremacist group has denounced the label of "hate group". Check out the KKK in their explanation of their stance.

Those in KKK forums and similar groups like American Renaissance are generally very nice people in their debates online, who don't tolerate violence and hate in their ranks. What they denounce is not just hate of others, but hate of yourself and your race. . .if you are white. This elitist or exclusive nationalism is immediately deemed as "racist" by liberals, but if it is a black guy saying the exact same things about their race, it is "Black pride". (And good.)


Those who are "above racism" have some things in common I have found:

• like those of the KKK, they are also mainly good people
• they are very out of touch with themselves and reality. . .living in a dream world of wishful thinking.
• They spend much time doing things for others.
• They live their life to please others, yet hoping to please everyone, they rarely choose sides and end up pleasing no one! 
• They will never step on toes, or judge anyone, out-loud. (They will loudly correct those who do though, coming across as "holier then thou".)
• They are politically correct and politer then average.
• They are too sensitive to like to debate. As a matter of fact when they do debate and get "owned", their classic comeback is "racist." (Political correctness is #39 of many dishonest debate tactics.)

• Most importantly though, those who believe they are above racism have an unhealthy self esteem, and believe they should be a martyr to be accepted. Doing this gives them purpose and makes them feel a little better about themselves, even better then everyone else! 

They will thus mock themselves and/or their people to gain favor and status with others. (Not realizing that it simply makes them look like "sell outs" as the Blacks would say. In the black community being a sellout is the best way to get beat up or killed. . .yet whites rarely say anything to the white who defends the blacks over ones in their own race.)

This often humorous self mocking is generally used by the baby of the family in order to gain approval or a higher status.
(Watch Jim Carrey, youngest of 4 siblings, trash the white race here.) It is typical birth order behavior as the baby of the family has often been the butt of jokes of older siblings and found that making fun of himself worked to get attention.

Two styles of humor that can utilize this self mocking are Affiliative humor, and self defeating humor. "Affiliative humor promotes social bonds and puts others at ease through telling jokes, saying funny things, and not taking oneself too seriously." There is nothing wrong with this kind of humor, as it is humble and carefree. I use it often myself.

  "Self-defeating humor amuses others at one’s own expense through making oneself the “butt” of jokes and laughing with others after being disparaged. . ." 

"Self-deprecating humor has also been used by politicians, who recognize its ability to acknowledge controversial issues and steal the punch of criticism. For example, when Abraham Lincoln was accused of being two-faced he replied, "If I had two faces, do you think this is the one I'd be wearing?".

Source Source

This self defeating humor is a sign of a either taught shame (white guilt) subconscious or intentional denial or poor self esteem. It is mainly trying to get approval and avoid criticism from all sides in a feeble attempt for peace and compromise.

 IMO it is unhealthy, and it is more likely to have others disrespect you as a "sell out."

Mocking of others (often as a form of correction and positive peer pressure) is a more classic and even beneficial form of humor many believe. Humbling those who may need it.  Kind of like this picture maybe? 

 While those who self mock are perceived as humble by many, what this really is though is false humility and manipulation. If this might be you, then check out the above video on the psychology of white self hate. 

It is not the opposite of racist to mock your people, nor is it being "racist" to respect yourself or your people.

People need to understand what racist actually means before repeating the liberal propaganda, as if it means something bad. 

 Back to the point of this post though; let's get down to the science.

"The amygdala is a brain area that is involved in negative emotions. Studies have found stronger activation of the amygdala when coming in contact with a person from a different group as compared with coming in contact with a person from the own group. Studies have also found that persons that deny that they are prejudiced show subconscious activation in the amygdala and in areas that suppress subconscious processes."

In other words, those who deny they are prejudice or "racist" are lying or in denial. Furthermore, the rest of the body is "racist" too!
In stem cell transplants scientists have found out that

• the human body will not accept the cells from someone of another ethnic background. 
• The human body will not accept liver transplants from someone of another ethnic background.
•  The human body will not accept bone marrow from someone of another ethnic background.
• The human body will not accept blood transfusions from someone of another ethnic background.
• The pure white woman's body will not accept babies from someone who is pure black either. . .like when a donkey and horse mate, the one with the monkey gene and without will create sterility.

Originally all white from the line of the Neanderthal, mating with the RH+ fathers, originally all black from the line of the Rhesus monkey, would create an allergy to the first baby who's blood mixed with hers, all consequent babies would be rejected by her own body as an alien germ. (The baby would also be further apart genetically from the mother, or the father, then one from their own race.)

Considering all the biological and impractical disadvantages of mating much less having children with another race (as discussed more here) it would be shocking if there was an attraction there at all. In fact, there is statistically little attraction to blacks, unless the black is a mix already, or the white is. Most pairings are with the poor, desperate rejected whites and are very dysfunctional. I blogged on the stats and studies about mixed marriages here, and here, but to say the least, there is little attraction of whites to any darker skin. While there is a big attraction to whites from all others.

Why is everyone more attracted to those with white skin?

1.We trust them more for one thing. Both blacks and whites trust whites more then blacks, which while explaining the attraction of both blacks and whites to be marrying light, wouldn't prove it is evolutionary, but a learned response.
Source

No doubt the lack of trust for blacks, by even their own is partly due to the riotous behavior of the dark community, which stems from their higher level of testosterone.  Testosterone makes everything (between males especially) a competition and challenge to them. Testosterone makes a man have low impulse control, being unpredictable and volatile. Testosterone also increases the sexual desire towards woman (or men). It is linked with all violent criminal behavior.
Source

Trust is also linked with Oxytocin levels. "The hormone and neurotransmitter oxytocin has been described as a "bonding hormone" and as being involved in behaviors such as trust, attachment between individuals, pair bonding, and maternal behaviors. It has also been argued to have an important role regarding group attitudes and group behaviors related to ethnic nepotism. Administration of oxytocin increases positive attitudes/altruism towards the in-group and to a lesser extent decreases this towards the out-group." Whites have higher levels of Oxytocin than blacks.
Source

 Famous blacks have commented that when they hear footsteps behind them on the street, and they nervously look behind them, they let out a sigh of relief when they find out that it's a white man.

2. We like the smell of our people more then another race.

"Every race has their own smell, but as most are a mix, I believe there were basically two different smelling people groups. "to light-skinned people, dark-skinned people emulate a muskier smell than our own whereas to dark-skinned people, light-skinned people smell a lot like a wet, plucked chicken."

"With globalization, most races & cultures are now inter-marrying & expanding their diet, thus homogenizing their body odor somewhat. Regardless of how pure or mixed your ethnicity, everyone’s body odor is more agreeable because of the global fusion & diversity of the foods the majority of us now eat."
Source

3. It's in our hormones to avoid mixed unions. Our hormones are racist.

Oxytocin (as stated in the above video) is the bonding hormone, and bonds the nursing mother to her baby, the man to his wife, the family to their family, and a race to their race. . .it is not connected in any way to a different people group, or to Blacks in general . . .

 Ovulating woman (likely because of this or another hormone Cortisol) have been studied to avoid dark men at an increased rate at this time. Presumably they are more fearful of them, as cortisol increases the flight response. Scientists believe this is an evolutionary response to keep the species pure. I agree! It's a self defense mechanism for the most vulnerable.

"This shows that despite all the propaganda to the contrary, White women retain defensive attitudes — both consciously and unconsciously — about Blacks as potential rapists. [Could it be that we have read stats on who rapes whom? Black on white rape being 90-200 times the white on black rate. . .Or could it be that we woman sense the high testosterone and desperation of these males for sex?]

"White women’s evolutionary psychology is making them behave adaptively based on the stereotype that Blacks are more likely to rape. It works by making them avoid Black men, especially if they are ovulating and especially if they are in a situation where there is a danger of rape. And it is making them more conscious of the real threats posed by Black men and less likely to suppress these attitudes in order to be socially acceptable."
Source

4. Or maybe we think blacks act like a monkey, specifically a chimp, something their genes prove. Maybe they act more like the chimp too in their genes to fight, not "flight" as a Bonobo would do. (Bonobos being closer to the whites as seen in the first link.) I mean have you ever heard of white flight? (Blogged on that happening around the globe here.) While blacks riot and fight over anything, whites run away in stressful situations because of their cortisol rising in stress, not their testosterone. As the articles above prove, it is simply in the blood to either fight or flight. The more black in you, the more likely you will fight.

"Human males usually experience an increase in cortisol before many types of competition in a similar way as seen in the bonobos.

However, if men have what is called a ""high power motive,"" or a strong desire to achieve high status, they experience an increase in testosterone before a competition."

5. Maybe we compare them to monkeys, but mostly unknowingly. . .as a scientist proved we all do.

"In a series of six different studies, Goff and his fellow researchers subjected hundreds of participants to an array of image- and word-association tests."

"The participants were "primed" with one of three sets of images: 50 photographs of black male faces, 50 photos of white male faces or an abstract line drawing. As is standard practice on such tests, the images were flashed onto their computer screens too rapidly for them to consciously register."

"The students then watched short films of animals, which were obscured in such a way that it was difficult at first to make out exactly what species they were seeing. Gradually, the image became clearer, so the animal could be identified."

"The disturbing result: Participants who had been primed with black male faces required fewer frames to identify the animal in question as an ape. In contrast, those primed with white male faces required more frames to make the identification than those who saw the racially neutral line drawing."

"The effects were quite large -- distressingly large," Goff said. "There was a decent amount of variance, but there weren't a whole lot of folks that didn't demonstrate the effect."

"The difference between when the black face was primed and when the white face was primed was about six frames, which was about three full seconds. In cognitive terms, where you're staring at a screen you're just a few inches from and trying to tell what an object is, three seconds is a profound difference!"

"Because the results from each of Goff's six studies show that racist connections between black people and primates are anything but a thing of the past, they have deep and immediate social implications."
Source

6. Maybe we know or sense that (generally) dark people are less intelligent. . . something black school test scores, and average IQ by continents confirm. The most liberally biased scientists have had to admit that IQ is around 80% heritable, and can only (temporarily) be raised in childhood with a better environment, culture, food, etc. (As we are mainly now a mix there will be likely a lot of exceptions in stereotypical IQ for the race we may be registered as in a test based on color, as according to the DNA studies I have done, color is a poor indicator of genes anyways.)

7. Maybe we woman are selecting more for brains then strength now. Selection for strong testosterone driven males drives primates and apparently still some blacks, who because of testosterone are more dominant. "In low-development countries, women preferred higher-testosterone faces. In these societies, Women may find high-testosterone men more appealing in countries where survival is tougher." "Women who liked these macho faces were also more likely to rate high-cortisol faces as attractive. In high-development countries, such as the United States, women preferred less testosterone and less cortisol." Woman prefer a man not always fighting or always running away from the fight, but being more peaceful apparently.

As woman drive selection, it is just evolution for a person to want to improve their children. In fact a black euphemism says "marry light, improve the race." And in desperation to survive, blacks marry light more then any other race.

So it seems obvious that all white people are subconsciously "racist" and favoring their own race. It seems in nearly every case, our bodies are driven by things we have little to no control over though. Preference for our own is just natural, not mean. Now neuroscience is showing that truth, as well as studies with babies.


It is a case of incompatibility that we are "racist". As one of my favorite movies says, "A bird may love a fish. . . but where would they live?"

Considering all the reasons whites naturally and subconsciously reject blacks, if you add to that how horrible mixing is for the children of mixed unions, physically or emotionally. . .you can see that being "racist" is both natural and if anything good!!

"In evolutionary terms, one could argue that mixed-race marriages are maladaptive in that they reduce a person's overall genetic fitness. In a multiracial marriage or relationship, one is showing altruism toward a partner who shares fewer genes than a co-ethnic would share. A parent will also share fewer genes with a multiracial child than with a same-race child. It's natural for someone to prefer a partner of the same race, as this increases a person's Darwinian fitness."
Source

Forcing integration of different root races, or multiculturalism brings only troubles, which generally ends in white flight, or a white genocide.

While supporting mixed marriages producing children (hey, love who you will!) is simply race hating, and as unnatural as intentionally breeding mutts out of a long line of purebreds. (Thus destroying diversity, not creating it!)



I copied an interesting forum discussion on this below.

"I dug up this rubbish book as just one example of how well funded pseudo-science is. It is being taken as fact in a society of self-depreciating liberal White idiots." 

http://www.amazon.com/Breeding-Between-Lines-Interracial-Attractive/dp/1569803064 

Some of the most attractive people on earth are bi-racial.

Ahh the rationalizations of a Jew-indoctrinated weakling.

-Too big of an insecure loser to pull women of his own race and have children who look like him. 
-Goes to Asia or anywhere he can exploit being exotic or wealthy to bag a wife.
-Gets yellow/jungle/latina/white fever to convince himself he's in control and picking up "dime pieces" when actually they're his only option.
-Claims his butt ugly mongrel children (which will actually suffer greatly both psychologically and in practical terms for their father's sin) are smarter and more beautiful than the superior pure breads.

I might go more in depth about this later. In a better time, children were taught lessons and had a sense of moral responsibility about certain things. Nowadays people aren't taught shit, and on top of that they're encouraged to be as degenerate and short-sighted as possible.

odbo wrote:

As far as how this relates to most members on this forum, typically it boils down to something like this. You are using your White or Nigger privilege (which you have as a result of globalization or the media glorifying and turning you into a desired object) to get into the pants of some Asian/Latina/White women. However instead of enjoying their company, then parting ways to do your duty and have a wife and 2.1 children of your own race, you are committing two sins.

#1 You're doing a disservice to your own race by not fulfilling the responsibility you have to your ancestors, who survived through much tougher times and kept themselves [relatively] pure for tens of thousands of years, all for you to spoil it in a time of decadence and moral corruption. And you're letting the dumbest crackers/niggers of your race, (who live in trailer parks off government subsidies and such), do the breeding for you. So your lack of positive action all but ensures your nieces and nephews will be ever shrinking minorities, part of a demoralized and declining race.

#2 You're diluting another race. If you love Asian or White women so much, why are you ensuring there will be less of them in the future, while increasing the amount of insecure mongrels desperate to breed "back" into the race? In this case your negative action complicates things for future generations, when you could have simply not had children or adopted.

The race mixer is above all selfish, and possesses a character which in a better time, in a healthier society, would get him beaten up by his peers.......

FREEDOM1 wrote:

What you are saying is really closed minded and a bunch of opinionated bullshit if i can be frank

So I'm close minded because I love diversity, dislike unattractive and culture-less mongrels, and hate the civilization destroying phenomenon known as miscegenation? What I said was not harmful, on the contrary unlike the rest of the comments here it has the potential to make a positive difference. There are no shortage of mongrels being born, and there are many who have been born to men/members of this forum. And lets cut through the bullshit, those men thought of no one but themselves when they miscegenated. 

So I am not the asshole. You are entitled to your own conclusions but don't expect the rest of us to sit here and agree with blatant lies like 'mixed race children are more beautiful'. Sorry to snap you out of your disassociation, but actions do have consequences. Learn to deal with your guilt in manner that does not involve propagandizing others to commit the same act you did.

FREEDOM1 wrote:

You sound like a white feminist mangina to be honest, trying to slander men who find

women who are non-white attractive, really goes against everything this website is about

This site is about truth, not blindly conforming as the unthinking masses do and forming beliefs based on emotional appeals and political correctness. Sorry if the truth is unpleasant for you, but accepting it is part of being an adult and a good person.

At the very least you must admit there are two sides to this, as anything else. And the negatives are simply not being considered by most males. When you get a woman outside of your race you don't go to the patriarch and ask for his or the communities permission, do you? You sneak her out the back-door. If what you're doing is so positive for the world why do you have to steal her and close yourself off to the outside world to avoid criticism. That's because the rest of the world is "ignorant", isn't it? And you're pious and holy, right? Have any of you actually examined your delusional perspective?

Source

Maybe you believe being racist means being hateful though. . .? As opposed to how Wikipedia defines it.

As I mentioned at the start, that is not something most whites feel towards other races. (Even the KKK!) Claiming the "race card" and shouting "racist" as if it means "hateful of other people" you may believe will silence someone (thus freeing you from a discussion of what they said), but it is simply a nasty ad hominem attack. Pulling out the "race card" over information says more about you then the supposed "racist". . .it says you a dishonest debater and are loosing.


Let's just presume for a minute that the word "racist" did mean "hateful", as is often portrayed by the liberal media.  . . going on sheer opinions, what race is perceived to be more hateful to other races do you think?


According to the poll, Blacks and whites both agree that Blacks are more "racist". The worst part is, they get away with it! 

It is called "racist" if a white says something true about a black, consequently ending in being punished by losing their TV program, football team, etc. but if a black (say, like Oprah) says something actually racist/hateful they are excused, empathized with, bolstered or even praised for standing up against the bad people!

It is obvious that the media are actually the ones who are (by their silence or black bias on racial issues) actually being "racist"/hateful.  When you keep whites in the dark, while allowing blacks to get away with Afrocentric and black supremacy, you spread more hate. Knowledge is power. 

 Do we hear about Muslims being a large part blacks and Islam spreading like wildfire in jails and with Blacks all over the world. Do we hear that the Muslims in the west are 80% on welfare? Do Islam extremists get tied to naturally passionate and violent dark people, or do they make it out as all about a small group of extremists?

Do you hear about the black crime in the world, or the most dangerous neighborhoods in America all being black? Generally we do not get media coverage about the black riots (Or the white flight that follows) and the minority gangs, which make up 90% of them. Instead we hear of the white ones, and see how full of Doctors and lawyers they are when it suits the media to say how we shouldn't fear them. . .

When one black guy gets shot by a white cope there an uproar from the media, even when he is proved to be a thug! The mother will get interviewed, showing an old picture, claiming her "baby" was innocent, or a father claiming his son "respected cops" (Michael Brown), etc. Yet when one of many innocent white guys gets shot by a black cop, we hear nothing. Or if a white gut gets shot by a white cop, they were just doing their job.


How about seeing it from the cop's perspective?! What about the cops who are so scared to go into the black neighborhoods that they are asking for drones? Or military grade equipment?

“Unfortunately in America today ... it’s so violent against the police that they really do need that level of protection.” Bill Johnson, the executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations, [said] "the level of violence on American streets sometimes justifies law enforcement’s use of military-grade gear." “It’s more a function of the level of criminal activity and the potential violence associated with it than the population of the city.” In other words, mainly the minority dominated cities have the militarized equipment for violence. And they need it!
Source

 In some of those places the cops are so out numbered and over worked that they have issued warnings to out of towners to enter the black cities "at your own risk"?
Source Source

 Are they being "racist" to see the facts of black on white crime?  Of course not!

Are they (like the ovulating white woman) wired to racial profile and act on their subconscious fear of a more physically dominant natural predator? That would be an obviously yes! 

Racial profiling, like facial profiling, according to psychology today, is generally accurate, and we are physically wired to do both! We need to stop pretending we don't, or that there's anything wrong with trusting our "gut".


 It is simply self defense and statistical reality that drives scared cops of all colors to mistake a wallet being pulled out for a gun, and shoot. (This is from the lack of trust we spoke of earlier.) The militarization of cops is because they are being out numbered and out gunned by the main and untrustworthy perpetrators. . .minorities. (Who will be a majority in this country in only one generation!)

If we keep on denying nature, evolution, biology, etc. calling it racism to even mention, we will all continue to be the victims of that much praised integration, diversity and multiculturalism.