[In this 13 minute video VertigoPolitix discusses Frank Salter’s article in a peer reviewed journal titled “Estimating Ethnic Genetic Interests – Is it Adaptive to Resist Replacement Migration?” Salter answers, obviously, yes, and gives his sound reasons.
Although not discussed, I would make the following observations.
Organized jewry, the true “deep state” behind the curtain and facade of “democracy“, are carrying this genocide out primarily through mass non-White invasion (labeled as “migration”) but also through the promotion of feminism, miscegenation, abortion, homosexuality, gender dysphoria, etc.
In addition, to facilitate the effects of such dysgenic factors, Organized jewry has subjected Whites to — over generations now — psychological warfare, through their control over the media, education, etc., to induce White guilt and self-hate.
The ultimate aim of these programs is to bring about a Jew World Order ruling over former White countries, that will have been turned into multi-racial brown skinned, dysfunctional societies, no longer able to resist jewish tyranny.
NOTE: This video is longer available at the VertigoPolitix channel, but is available at the YouTube channel below.
On the Ethnic Genetic Interests of Europeans
Jul 5, 2020
Click here for the video:
Re-published on Jul 5, 2020 by:
VertigoPolitix – On the Ethnic Genetic Interests of Europeans
Jul 5, 2020
Racially conscious Whites are often frustrated that people of European descent do not understand a simple fact that others take for granted. That it is normal for an ethnic group, or race, to want to survive and to avoid displacement by others. Unlike people of other races Whites seem to demand some kind of objective, rather than subjective, reason for survival.
Activists have long hoped a respected academic would offer an objective, scientific justification, for the defense by Whites of their own ethno-racial interests. One such academic publication however was written almost two decades ago.
Dr Frank Salter of the Max Planck Society published in a peer-reviewed journal called Population and Environment, in volume 24, number to, November 2002, a tour de force article entitled Estimating Ethnic Genetic Interests – Is it Adaptive to Resist Replacement Migration? And it is the single most important intellectual contribution to ethno-racial studies available today.
Mainstream discussions about immigration usually consider only secondary questions such as economics, crime, culture, etc. They ignore the ultimate interest of a people, genetic continuity. Which is the focus of Dr Salter’s paper.
In the very first sentence he asks the central question:
“Does ethnic competition over territory pay off in terms of reproductive fitness.”
From an evolutionary standpoint fitness means reproductive fitness, or the propagation of distinctive genes from one generation to the next. Living organisms can be seen as the vehicles by which this propagation occurs. Thus as Dr Salter explains, adaptive behavior maintains, or increases the frequency of one’s distinctive genes in the population. Family, or kin, share many of the same distinctive genes. So a person’s fitness is increased by the survival and reproductive success of his kin.
This is also true for ethnic groups, or ethnies, which is the term Dr Salter prefers. Like families ethnic have more distinctive genes in common with each other than they do with other populations. The same can be said of members of the same race. Although the genetic kinship of ethnic members is more diluted than that of family members, ethnies are large reservoirs of genetic interests for the members therefore just as a person has a great genetic interest in the well-being of his family, so does a German have for Germans, an Italian for Italians, etc.
In this sense it can be as adaptive to support one’s ethno-racial group, as to support one’s family. A defined territory is crucial for the survival of ethnony according to Dr Salter. The special quality of a defended territory is that it insulates a population from the vicissitudes of demographic disturbance. Acquisition and defensive territory are therefore an integral part of the tribal strategy of humans.
The passionate relationship between a people and it’s homeland has been constant throughout history. And as Dr Salter points out a people can suffer many setbacks, but as long as it retains it’s own territorial space, it can recover.
In the long run only territory ensures survival. And human history is largely a record of groups expanding and contracting, conquering, or being conquered, migrating, or being displaced by migrants. The loss of territory whether by military defeat, or displacement by alien groups, brings ethnic diminishment, or destruction. Precisely what is happening in the multicultural West today.
A large part of Dr Salter’s work in this paper is a quantitative analysis of this negative genetic impact. The analysis is based on two concepts. Carrying capacity and genetic kinship. Carrying capacity is the maximum population that can live in a given territory. Although technology and increased economic efficiency can increase carrying capacity there is a practical limit above which further population growth is simply not possible.
Many ecologists believe we are approaching, or have surpassed the practical carrying capacity of the earth. Even if these ecologists are wrong about the earth as a whole, it is clear that carrying capacity has already been exceeded in those areas where overpopulation has badly damaged the environment, or depleted natural resources.
Immigration undermines the interests of native populations, even if their territory has not reached it’s carrying capacity. For example, the carrying capacity of the United States is probably significantly greater than it’s current population.
However, one day it’s carrying capacity will be reached. And if at that point part of the country is filled with the descendants of today’s immigrants, heritage Americans will have no room into which they can expand. In other words, even if the carrying capacity of the US is as high as 600 million, or more, if that population figure is ever reached, some portion will be the descendants of genetically alien immigrants.
The presence of millions of non-Whites will make the parts of the US they occupy unavailable to Whites. And we may reach this carrying capacity sooner than later, as America, as is the rest of the globe is a closed system.
Dr Salter notes that immigrants can change the caring capacity of their new nation. Intelligent, hard-working immigrants, could in theory raise the carrying capacity by increasing the efficiency at which resources are used, or incompetent immigrants can drain on resources and lower the carrying capacity. Obviously the latter is occurring in all countries in the West.
The other concept central to Dr Salter’s paper is genetic kinship. Even though all humans share many genes, kinship is a measure of the genetic similarities and differences above and beyond this general gene sharing. It measures the relative frequencies of ethnically distinctive genes. Kinship values can be either positive, or negative.
If individuals, or groups share more genes than is typical of a population then the kinship is positive. If they share fewer genes than average kinship is negative.
Genetic kinship can be mathematically derived from studies of the genetic variation, or distance between populations.
The genetic data that form the basis of Dr Salter’s quantitative analysis are from the work of Luigi Luca Cavalli Sforza’s 1994 book, The History And Geography Of Human Genes, which examine the frequencies of genetic variations in a broad range of human populations. In general the data are sound. And they can be used to measure the extent of the damage alien immigration does to the genetic interests of native populations.
It is important to note that Dr Salter treats the arrival of immigrants not as a simple addition to the population. But as a one-for-one displacement of natives. This is methodologically correct, because when a nation reaches it’s carrying capacity it is the presence of immigrants and their descendants that make it impossible for natives to increase their numbers.
What may not appear to be one for one displacement today, will, in retrospect, be seen to be precisely that in future.
Dr Salter expresses the loss of genetic ethnic interest in units, he calls “child equivalence”. In other words, for any given member of the native population, what is the number of lost children that would equal the loss of his ethnic genetic interests caused by the arrival of a certain number of aliens.
Note that we are not talking about actual children. But the gene equivalents put into the form of a genetic parent-child relationship.
Put differently the arrival of immigrants from other ethnics will change the genetic character of a population and make it more alien to every member of the native ethny. The amount of genetic change from the point of view of any given member of the native ethny can be calculated as the equivalent of the number of children not born to that person.
An example will make this clearer. Dr Salter begins by considering the English as the native population and examines the effects of the immigration of ten thousand Danes an ethny that is genetically very close to the English. Replacing ten thousand Englishmen with ten thousand Danes, changes the genetic characteristics of the population so much that the resulting post-displacement population differs from the undisturbed population by the equivalent of an Englishman, or woman, not having had 167 children. Again we are not talking about actual children, but of the genetic equivalent.
Let us consider another example. What if the immigrants were Bantus, a population very genetically distant from the English, rather than Danes. Here the genetic cost to any given Englishman of the arrival of ten thousand Bantu’s, is the equivalent of ten thousand eight hundred and fifty four lost children.
Clearly the extent of the genetic transformation of a population depends on the genetic distance between the native and immigrant populations. And what if the level of immigration were larger, and more in keeping with the massive displacement of Western peoples we see today?
The English population is roughly 50 million. If 12 and a half million were replaced by an equal number of Danes, the genetic loss to the English would be the equivalent of 209,000 children not born. If the immigrants were from India, the loss would be 2.6 million children. If the immigrants were sub-Saharan African, 14 million.
These figures are not guesses, or estimates. They are objective mathematical results based on genetic data accepted by the scientific community. And you can be assured that the top brass in the liberal intellectual elite understand all of this!
While plunging birth rates may be genetically damaging for European derived peoples, the replacement by genetically alien immigrants is far worse. A falling birth rate reduces the population, but does not transform it genetically. And a future increase in birth rates can always make up for the loss.
Once immigrants have established themselves in a native territory their genes are a permanent addition. From the standpoint of genetic ethnic interest the idea that immigration makes up for low native birth rates is pathological.
And why does immigration cause such large genetic loss? Dr Salter writes, random members of an ethnic group are concentrated stores of each other’s distinctive genes, just as children and cousins are concentrated stores, some ethnies are so differently genetically that they amount to a large negative store of those distinctive genes.
Also migration has a double impact on fitness. First by reducing the potential ceiling of the native population. And secondly by replacing those lost individuals familiar genes with exotic varieties.
Dr Salter also stresses that this loss is not somehow reduced by being spread over the entire native population. The loss in terms of genetic equivalence reflects the change of population from the point of view of every member of that native populous.
It is well understood that within group charity is potentially adaptive, because it encourages the survival of kindred genes. Dr Salter explains that the self-sacrificial heroism that preserves one group genetic interest, is also a form of adaptation.
For example, Dr Salter points out that an act of charity, or heroism performed by an Englishman that prevented ten thousand Danes from replacing ten thousand Englishmen, would be worthwhile genetically, even if the Englishman sacrificed his life, and with it the potential of having up to 167 children.
Preventing replacement by Bantu’s would justify an even larger sacrifice, given the greater potential loss of genetic interest.
It is clear then that pro-White activism intended to avoid displacement is normal and adaptive, and justified by rational analysis. It is multicultural surrender that is pathological. As all peoples in all periods of history have instinctively known. Men have not had to be taught to die for their countries. The preservation of their land and people has been more important to them than life itself.
Dr Salter further observes that White Americans have, in the name of multiculturalism, engaged in a unilateral withdrawal from ethnic competition, with devastating results for their genetic interests.
The majority also suffer from minority free-riding of two kinds. Minorities that cluster at the bottom of the social scale form an underclass that increases it’s reproductive fitness by absorbing resources and welfare from the majority, making the majority pay for it’s own genetic dispossession, and loss of fitness. At the same time more competitive minorities can manipulate public policy in their ethnic favor, against the interests of the majority.
Dr Salter’s paper can be summarized as follows. Ethnies and races are large reservoirs of genetic interest for group members. Ethnic genetic interests are real and vitally important. Genetic kinship can be calculated and the harm to any persons, or groups ethnic genetic interests resulting from alien immigration can be quantified. Immigration of even closely related groups has a negative impact on genetic interests. And this detrimental influence increases rapidly with a greater genetic distance.
Putting this detrimental impact in the form of child equivalence is a particularly powerful way of demonstrating these effects. If people of European descent understood that every non-White face they see is diminishing their personal and group interests, they might begin to understand that they are being ill-served at a fundamental genetic level by non-European immigration, and the ideology of multiculturalism.
Dr Salter’s paper stands as an objective, scientifically, sound justification for the active pursuit of ethnic and racial interests. Liberals cannot deny the facts discussed here, nor can they deny that they point to the necessity of European ethno-racial nationalism. The formation of ethnic-based national states is the most efficient way of safeguarding ethnic genetic interest.
Closing off the safety valve of Third World immigration to the West should be as attractive to the sincere Left as to the racial Right.
Dr Salter’s works must be widely disseminated among thinking Whites. For the survival of our people will eventually depend on such scientific narratives.
* Total words in post = 2,655
* Total words in transcript = 2,272
* Total images = 5
* Total A4 pages = xx
Click to download a PDF of this post (x.x MB):
Version 1: Jul 28, 2022 — Published post.