You could read this essay, or you could read the article The scope of racial disparities in test scores in the United States, especially the last section “Across parental socioeconomic levels (individual measures)”, as well as The Bell Curve by Charles Murray (if you read it, it becomes obvious how deranged the slandering of this book is by the msm) and after a decade of internalizing the implications you would have the same opinion as me.

I write this article because 1) A goal of this website is to address apostasy within religion, and I have seen religions promulgate false information about race as if it is religious doctrine; and 2) somehow race has become a topic of some dreams of mine, so this article is a reference.

The views I will express here are sort of a contradiction to this website. Surely, my target audience is everyone, not just white people; my goal is to bring everyone to Christ regardless of race or ethnicity. So, it doesn’t really make sense for me criticize nonwhite people (which is what I will do here). Therefore, this essay isn’t really necessary for you to read – it more is just a resource that I can cite if necessary.

Honestly, I’m kind of afraid that writing this essay is a big mistake and my salvation status will be hurt for writing it. But also, I don’t think this essay is untrue…. Please forgive me Lord if writing this was wrong.

Preface

Because I know my words may be turned against me, let me just include this disclaimer:

Firstly, yes, we should be kind, serviceable, compassionate, loving, etc. towards all peoples regardless of their ethnicity or race (Galatians 3:28, Colossians 3:11, Acts 10:34–35, 2 Nephi 26:33). Indeed, this essay is not a statement of ill-will towards any group (I wish goodness upon all races and creeds of planet earth), but rather a statement of fact regarding the universe. And obviously, there are exceptions – many African Americans are smarter than many white people. Indeed all my arguments are based on statistics, which can only speak for averages – so let me emphasize, literally nothing in this essay is a “hard rule representative of literally everyone in a group”, and only represents group averages.

And secondly, just to emphasize, the only relevance race has to me is with regard to mass migration and the great replacement. So, I am not advocating here for discrimination, or killing nonwhite people, or saying racial slurs, or any other type of mean behavior. All I am advocating for is 1) stop blaming white people for problems of nonwhite people and stop advocating for reparations because racial differences are actually due to inherent genetic differences; 2) stop blaming social inequality on capitalism because the rise in income inequality is exclusively due to a rise in minority populations who again have genetic inequalities; 3) please stop mass immigration.

And finally, I really wish people could just digest that with regard to immigration, genes are way more important than culture/education because genes have a more lasting impact: If an immigrant has bad genes, then his kids, and grand kids, and great grand kids through all time will inherit his genes – thus, the decision to allow him to immigrate here has a permanently negative impact on America for all eternity. Conversely, if an immigrant simply has a bad culture (he has low education, etc.), that can be fixed via assimilation in a singular generation. Thus, allowing in immigrants with bad genes is like hundreds of thousands of times worse than letting in immigrants who might not speak English very well (though to note: on an individual level, your worth is definitely not determined by your genes since there are many more important variables in a person’s life than his genes, I am only speaking here through the lens of immigration policy).

It’s also worth noting that the group in America who benefits the most from my policies, which is that illegal immigrants should be deported, ironically is African Americans – since they compete with illegal immigrants in the labor force more than white people. And if you are among the illegal immigrants, all I can say is: I don’t think you should be deported directly because of your skin color, but rather because you broke the law and the actions that your group commits on average make our country worse; indeed, if Hispanics had way better statistics than white people (on crime, education, etc.), then I would be against any deportations (obviously).

Another thing worth noting is: everyone has bad genes in some way, including myself. So, I hope to separate the idea that you are “condemned” because your genes aren’t perfect from the idea that we want to foster a society where on average its members genes are improving (not getting worse – as is the case in our society – since as studies show low IQ people tend to have more kids, and the average IQ in America has been decreasing for decades). In other words, just because you think your genes aren’t perfect doesn’t mean you can’t agree with what I’m saying – indeed, the response should be, I’m annoyed my genes aren’t that great, so that motivates me to support the idea that people with good genes should have more kids, so that future generations don’t have the same problems I experienced (sadly, this message likely won’t reach many people, since for generations Americans have been trained to be immensely offended if anyone talks critically about genes).

So, on an individual level, your worth is definitely not determined by your genes or ancestry. What I care about is not your individual genes, but your vision, which is for a society where genes are steadily improving not going down.

Finally, if you think I am just “too obsessed” with race, then all I can think is: How dare you. You know nothing about me, or what my interests are. In other words, I assure you that my “interests” are actually far stupider than “researching race”, and mostly revolve around watching low-IQ entertaining YouTube videos for eleven-year-olds.

Sadly, no matter how many disclaimers I have and no matter how many studies I show that prove that even after controlling for socio economic status of parents, there still are racial differences, there still will be people who think they refute me by saying something dumb like, “well, culture explains racial differences, and we shouldn’t make generalizations because there are many African Americans who are not like what you are saying, so you probably just hate African Americans” – which is sad because basically this entire essay is devoted to disproving that sentence.

This quote further explains my view:

“Disclaimer: This is not intended to be against anyone of any kind, but rather to discuss details of what has happened, and is happening. When it comes to racial purists out there, as even I myself am a mixed race individual, there is nothing in it for me.

It does appear these days that they are clearly targeting the white and asian cultures when it comes to the depopulation agenda, and women are clearly put on pedestals while men are kicked to the curb. Hopefully after you have read this segment you will have a deeper understanding why. As much as we scream ‘equality’, while surely the soul contained within is equal, the vessels we have been placed in avatar-style for this life test most definitely are *not* equal in any way… and that is a good thing. While the following are all utensils: a spoon is not a fork, a fork is not a spoon, a knife is neither of them. What are you eating? If you’re eating soup you better hope you got a spoon, if you’re eating a salad you’re gonna want a fork, and if you’re eating a steak you probably would want a knife, and if you’re anything like me you will say that chopsticks rule them all lol.. and that’s all ok. In the same way, men, women, and yes, even races have their roles – and this is actually not a bad thing because they each have a specific “tool for the job” role to play that are unique to them – and that is ok. Take a deep breath, and let’s keep going, and yes this will all make sense soon, hopefully.

I’m sorry but it *is* a fact that there are indeed certain countries that people have a desire to visit or vacation to – whilst other countries people would visit more so for humanitarian reasons but not necessarily to have a good time.. It doesn’t take a genius to see this. Now I know that there are black people way smarter than me, geniuses do of course exist of every race so this is nothing about me verses any race in any way – but rather to mention the general tendency of said people groups, or a certain gender, and why these certain groups generally tend to have a perceived-oppression-by-others complex. It is clear today which races you can make fun of, and which one you cannot. The very same thing can be said of the male vs female arena.. Which gender needs constant affirmation and which one almost gets none? I would assume the answers are obvious.”
– For the curious, this author has a deeper discussion about race within the scriptures which is interesting

The Facts

The world teaches that differences among races are due to upbringing – other races are poor because of racism (or chance), and their poverty prevents them from giving their children a descent environment, leading to their children also being poor, perpetuating the cycle.

This view is just extremely false, so let me destroy it with the facts:

Genes are hugely more important than our environment

Having two key genes increases violent behavior by a factor of 13
Heritability estimates of general intelligence in adulthood generally range from 75 to 85%, with shared environment having no impact.
Crime is 55% heritable, shared environment has zero impact
Sociopathic traits are 60-70% heritable (study 1, study 2), and has a near zero shared environment impact.
Lifetime earnings are about 50% heritable, with shared environment being negligible
Heritability of political affiliation over 50%, shared environment has no impact (study 1, study 2)
Personality is about 50% heritable (study 1), and shared environment has no impact.
Bribery and corruption are highly heritable, with shared environment having no impact.
Facial attractiveness is highly correlated with intelligence in men but not women (source 1, source 2).

Parental Income Doesn’t Matter Very Much

Studies find no racism regarding crime

African American crime suspects are more likely to be shot by African American cops than by white cops
African American NYPD Officers 3.1x More Likely to Shoot People Than non-African American NYPD Officers at the Same Crime Scene
Study finds that during the daylight – when the race of drivers is visible to cops – African American drivers are less likely to be stopped than during nighttime, when race cannot be seen. This shows traffic stops are not racist, rather African Americans are stopped more because they genuinely drive more suspiciously (as expected, given their homicide rate is 11.6 times higher than white people).
Studies show no racial bias in arrests: study 1, study 2, study 3, study 4, study 5 (Excerpt from this supplement of a study showing no racial bias in police shootings: “[African Americans] under-arrested given their rate of reported crime.”)
This is less related, but African Americans have on average about 10X higher rates of STDS than white people (in some cases higher) – a number that seems far higher than could be accounted for by income differences – thus implying that there really are intrinsic differences between white people and African Americans (on average), which are not accounted for by simply growing up in poorer homes.

Studies find no racism regarding income

After controlling for occupation factors, payscale found that African Americans make 98 cents for every dollar whites make – a miniscule difference.
Within companies, after controlling for factors, the majority of companies have no measurable wage gap whatsoever, though a few have a wage gap of 1%, which is tiny.
After controlling for IQ, African Americans are twice as likely to enter high iq occupations than whites.
After controlling for IQ, there is virtually no wage gap.
At Harvard, an Asian candidate in the eighth highest academic decile had 5.1% chance of admittance, compared to 7.5% for white, 22.9% for Hispanic, and 44.5% for African American applicants

Crime

33% of Adult Male African Americans Have Felony Convictions
Significant racial disparities in crime even after controlling for parental socio economic status (this second source controls for more factors).
Homicide rate of white people in America matches European countries, and African Americans matches African countries.
African Americans have approximately a 11.6 times higher homicide rate than non hispanic white people, which is actually higher than gender differences in homicide rate – men have a 7.5 times higher homicide rate than women.
US Arrest Records Classify 93% of Hispanics as “White”… Because of Bureaucracy.
According to this one study (here), even after accounting for socio-economic status of parents, African American children still have over a ten times higher homicide rate than white children.

Income

Test Scores

Significant racial disparities in iq and test scores even after controlling for parental income and education – especially see the last section “Across parental socioeconomic levels (individual measures)”
African Americans on average attend schools with a higher funding per student than whites.

Bonus Studies

Hispanics do not every assimilate across generations – meaning the third generation is no better than the second, and even after controlling for income of parents, Hispanic children still do much worse than white children (source 1, source 2).
Poor African Americans have more kids than rich African Americans, while the opposite is true for white people – rich white people have more kids than poor white people (source).

Random Studies on Colonialism

The Scriptures

People in my church often teach that not being racist is sort of a Christlike attribute. But I don’t find any scriptures which say this, instead I find sort of the opposite:

2 Nephi 5:21-24, Alma 3:6–9 – The Lamanites are cursed with black skin and being idle because of their disobedience to God. This was to prevent the Nephites from mixing with them. Similar: Deuteronomy 7:3–4, Ezra 9–10, Nehemiah 13:23–27.

3 Nephi 2:14–16 – This curse of the Lamanites is taken away and their skin becomes white after they choose to follow Christ.

Moses 7:22-23
22 And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them.
23 And after that Zion was taken up into heaven, Enoch beheld, and lo, all the nations of the earth were before him;

Reasoning

In our society, I’ve seen is a sort of puritanical disgust towards “caring” about race; this view dictates that while group differences may exist, they don’t matter because we should look at people as individuals not groups. Hence, people who care too much about race go against western values and should be ostracized.

Thus, many Americans have inherently contradictory views on race: Though the majority understand that there are inherent racial differences, the majority still also believe that it is evil to proclaim that there are racial differences. In my view, this is why homeschoolers (of whom I am one) are more racist – we are exposed to less propaganda and therefore are less willing to maintain contradictory beliefs.

But let me address this philosophy:

1) This view is destructive

People with this viewpoint are responsible for the mass migration which threatens doom upon society (through crime, poverty, and a culture shift to not care about limited government). This already has somewhat ruined the area of California my family is from. Call me racist, but my racist views haven’t ruined your home, while your anti racist views actually have ruined my home. And the racist views of my ancestors actually ended up making the world far better – if America hadn’t been colonized by white people it would still be full of warring tribes and be like Papua New Guinea.

Because older generations decided to allow mass migration to “not be racist”, my generation is now put in a difficult position: We either decide to be virtuous and not racist, or we try to stop immigration, but we can’t do both. Without said immigration, people like me would likely have no racist attitudes and be colorblind because there would be no looming demographic problems to worry about. Hence, the antiracism of past generations somewhat forced the intelligent people of my generation who actually care about our country’s future to become racist.

Thus, a truly color-blind society can only last for a single generation.

(Or at least this is what I keep telling myself because I am worried I will go to hell for being racist; what is more important – being a good person or making the world better?)

And just to emphasize – if you understand there are racial differences but don’t ever tell others or your kids about them, that isn’t you being virtuous. This actually is you being a coward – you are failing to transmit vital information necessary for our democracy to have a sensical immigration policy – and as said the failure to perpetuate this information promises the brazilification of our society as we know it.

2) Why race must be discussed

As said, my goals here are to: 1) stop people from blaming white people for nonwhite people’s problems and advocating for reparations; 2) help people to realize that rising social inequalities are due to race, not a failure in capitalism; and 3) stop mass migration. I don’t think it is possible to adequately address these three points without discussing racial differences in a realistic way.

I have seen conservative apologists (i.e. Thomas Sowell) try to explain that the income gap between white people and black people is not due to racism using factors that don’t relate to genes. And frankly, I think the reasons they use are dumb and insufficient; if I wasn’t aware of genetic differences, I’m certain such reasoning wouldn’t convince me and I would still fall in the camp of people who blame black people’s problems on racism; thus, I don’t think I should use said reasoning on other people.

In other words, a lot of conservatives have manipulative personalities, and on the inside, they know racial differences are due to genetics, but out of the spirit of dishonesty/manipulation they use alternate reasons when arguing with others. They think they are being “smart” by not talking about genes, but actually they are just making themselves buffoons. And the complete failure of the conservative elite to stop mass migration (before Trump came – who they at first vehemently opposed) proves I am right and such reasoning is inadequate.

I’ve also seen people claim that we don’t need to discuss race with regard to the question of stopping mass migration because there are other non-genetic related reasons to be against immigration. Again, I don’t think such reasoning is adequate. Most of this reasoning boils down to two things: 1) mass migration too quickly is destabilizing, and 2) mass migration is a fiscal burden. These reasons are not sufficient because: A) normies consider themselves selfless and so are willing to sacrifice money to help people in third world countries; B) they think immigrants will assimilate and so are OK with lots of immigrants; and C) will just simply shift their opinion to still be in favor of immigration but that said immigration shouldn’t be too rapid; which is insufficient of course because the goal is not to simply slow down the great replacement, but to completely stop it.

Ultimately, it really is a great tragedy to deport any person in the USA and simply saying you do it because of their fiscal burden or because you aren’t willing to wait for them to assimilate seems heartless. In my view, the tragedy of deporting a person is so grand that the only adequate argument in favor of doing so is that their presence doesn’t just hurt our country in this lifetime, but rather for all eternity, because their kids and grand kids will inherit their genes; if the adverse effects of letting them stay were only temporary or finite, then you would be against deportation.

3) Logically, why is it virtuous to be color blind?

Putting aside facts, politics, and history, I don’t see why being “color blind” actually makes you a better person.

Deciding to be more suspicious of nonwhite people doesn’t mean you are forever condemning them or putting a “ceiling” capping their success. All it means is that you are requiring them to display greater evidence in order to gain your trust – which seems reasonable to protect your own safety and the welfare of your society.

Moreover, in being more suspicious of nonwhite people, you allow yourself to not need to have a blanket level of suspicion towards normal people. Here are a few examples: in airports, if we had discriminated against Muslim or semitic looking people by requiring them to go through extra security, then we could just take away all security for white people (which is more fair, not less fair). Likewise, in insurance and loan making, there are strict requirements to not be racist against certain groups (despite for example African Americans having a three times higher rate of defaulting on student loans). However, if we lifted such requirements then yes – there would be a higher standard for African Americans to meet to gain loans and insurance – but on average you could actually hugely lower the requirements for normal people to gain loans. Or to be more direct, white people are paying unfairly high interest rates, they should have lower interest rates because they have a minimal risk of defaulting on loans, while African American borrowers are paying lower interest rates than they should pay given their degree of risk. But since banks aren’t allowed to know whether a loan applicant is white or African American, white borrowers end up to some extent subsidizing African American borrowers – again this isn’t “fair” rather this is “unfair”.

So, to the people who think that allowing race to be used in decision making calculus is unfair – I think you are just totally wrong. In my view “fair” means that the assigned risk to a person is as close as possible to the actual risk that person represents. Thus, from a statistical point of view, when corporations are allowed to use race in their models, since race actually has predictive power, their models will become more accurate. Thus, the way people are treated will become more representative of how risky they actually are, and society will be more fair, not less.

And for you dumb people out there – this is not going hurt nonwhite people more than they deserve given their risk. In a capitalist society, if nonwhite people are being discriminated against more than they deserve, then there inevitably will arise an entrepreneur who hires and provides services to a much greater degree to nonwhite people and thus makes a whole lot of money while at the same time rectifies the unfairness.

4) Account for children of migrants

You can’t ignore group characteristics when accepting immigrants because children tend to revert towards the mean of their group. In concrete terms, this means that if the parents have an IQ of 100 and their races IQ is on average 100, then the children’s IQ will on average also be 100. But if the parents have an IQ of 100, but their races IQ is on average 85, then the children on average will have an IQ lower than 100 – though probably still higher than 85) [example: Charles Murray shows that A) the IQ of African American children is still lower than white children even after controlling for parental IQ (pg. 418), and the IQ of African American children is also lower even after controlling for parental income (pg. 352)][statistically speaking it makes sense to me that if an individual appears to be highly intelligent, this would be more likely due to luck than genes if he comes from a population which on average has poor genes].

Therefore, if you have two candidates with equal IQs and resumes competing to migrate to the USA, you should prefer the candidate whose home country is successful over the candidate whose home country is terrible [this reasoning might explain why immigrants to the US from Europe are more successful than those from Asia and other regions].

5) Politics

The fact is, nonwhite people are more likely to vote for stupid political ideas, and thus even if a nonwhite immigration candidate has equal intelligence and merit to a white candidate, it still makes sense to give preferential treatment to the white candidate.

Since at least 1976, republicans would have won every single presidential election if only white people voted.

I imagine people will say this is the democrat’s fault, and the real enemies are the democrats – however nonwhite people actually have more extreme political views than the democrats:

Therefore, I would prefer a random democrat to be in charge over a random nonwhite person.

And people might say that nonwhite people are going assimilate, however that simply is not true: Even after controlling for political party of parents, nonwhite children are still more likely to be democrat than white children (source). Indeed, this is how equilibriums work – if at equilibrium 85% of African Americans are democrat, mathematically (see Markov Chains) it must be that children of African American republicans are more likely to switch to be democrat than children of white republicans, or vice versa – children of African American democrats are more likely to stay democrat than children of white democrats.

Why might this be?

1) Family history – people tend to support the causes of their groups and ancestors. Thus, African Americans will forever complain about slavery, even though they obviously are far better off living in America than Africa. And (on average) nonwhite people will forever be angry about colonialism, even though all of the numbers show that the benefits of the technological diffusion from colonialism immensely outweigh any atrocities committed during this period (the section Random Studies on Colonialism discussed this). Naturally these factors lead people to have stupid political ideas, such as the following:

2) Intelligence – people with lower IQs are less likely to support free speech. And as noted adult intelligence is 75% to 85% heritable, and shared environment has no impact – meaning the environment and teachings your parents provide on average don’t influence your intelligence.

Indeed, genetic studies show that white people on average have greater frequencies of alleles that lead to intelligence (source 1, source 2) – though YES I KNOW THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS WITHIN INDIVIDUALS. This of course aligns with the vast amount of studies showing that African Americans on average have an IQ of 84 (pg. 338 – The Bell Curve), and the scriptures I found about race. This should have been obvious – there have only ever been 3 Black chess grandmasters worldwide out of 2,113 Grandmaster titles awarded, compared to how African Americans comprise 50% of American football players.

3) Genes – firstly, it seems likely that genes would play a role given that the heritability of political affiliation is over 50%, while shared environment has no impact (study 1, study 2). And again, this means that what parents teach about politics has no influence on children’s political affiliation at all – children only have similar affiliations to their parents due to genetics.

Of the huge number of genes which likely influence political affiliation, the gene 5-HTTLPR is interesting. It is associated with collectivism across societies and this gene appears to be caused by evolution in response to disease and therefore is more prevalent in tropical environments (source). This gene appears to broadly influence collectivist behavior (source), and voting behavior (source). To me it seems likely the presence of this gene within nonwhite populations could lead to their voting for democrats. This especially makes sense given that people who are more distracted by images of others faces are far more likely to be democrat – indicating a relationship between collectivist attitudes and partisanship.

So just to emphasize: if you have two candidates for immigration who are both super right wing, but one is white and the other is African American (say the other is candace owns) – you should still prefer the white candidate because in the long run the African American candidate’s children and grandchildren will on average revert back to being democrat.

6) Crime

The fact is, even after controlling for IQ, education, income, etc. nonwhite people are still far more likely to commit crimes.

Even after controlling for education, African Americans still have far higher incarceration rates (example: African American college graduates are incarcerated 10X more than white college graduates).
Charles Murray shows that even after controlling for IQ, African Americans still have far higher crime (pg. 421 – archive).
As shown earlier, after controlling for socioeconomic status, African Americans still have far higher homicide rates (source) and crime (source 1, source 2).
Variations in allele frequency of the MAO-A gene between white people and African Americans likely accounts for much of the crime discrepancies (source).

These facts should have been obvious from simply looking at any map of perceived government corruption across the world (such as here) – the best and brightest leaders of nonwhite countries tend to steal from the government once they are in charge, unlike the best and brightest leaders of Scandinavian countries. And no, they don’t assimilate into America – African American cops receive disciplinary action at a far higher rate than white cops.

Therefore, if you have two candidates for immigration, one white and one nonwhite, and they both appear to have equal intelligence and merit, you should still be more suspicious of the nonwhite candidate. If you try to maintain colorblindness, you are simply putting your citizens at a far greater risk of being kidnapped / raped / murdered, etc.

Speaking More Philosophically

Colorblind Attitudes are Destructive

Hopefully this essay illustrates why group membership matters (whether you like it or not) and that it is unwise to be strictly “color blind” when making important decisions especially regarding immigration. As said, our society’s obsession with becoming “color blind” is what lead to this great immigration crisis in the first place – thus in my eyes everyone who considers themselves “color blind” should be embarrassed for what they have done and should reconsider their ideology.

Nation Ownership Determined by Creation

I suspect the previous rants may make the reader apprehensive – how can I advocate for an immigration system that gives preferential treatment to people from western countries when not everyone in America is white?

The answer is simple: America belongs to the actual groups who made America great. All statistics available indicate that African Americans have made America worse, and it should be obvious that if America been settled by Mexicans, America would be like Mexico – which is to say not great. Therefore, I don’t care how many millions of voters the democrats import here – America will always belong to white protestants because it is this group who made America great.

Democracy Doesn’t Even Work with Immigration

Oh wait, that already is happening. Now because we have enfranchised too many people who have stupid values our government is ruined with massive waste, corruption, and deficits. Thus, we now see the rise of people who think democracy is a failure and we need to go back to authoritarianism (see Curtis Yarvin). Which of course just brings us full cycle back to the monarchy state before the revolutionary war. To me it’s obvious that democracy isn’t bound to fail, rather democracy full of nonwhite people usually fails (this is just the brutal reality; search any map of perceived government corruption such as here; the below map from here also has other interesting maps).

Stop it to spread Light

I’ve often seen people think that we need immigration because America is a “light bearer”, bringing civilization to the world – so we need to allow people to immigrate here, so that our civilization can spread to them. However, the lived experience of immigration is the opposite: the peoples who come here don’t acquire our “light” – they remain having high crime and poverty and they adopt evil political ideas – in many ways more extreme than either of our two political parties – and all available statistics show that they never assimilate even to the third generation. The outcome is that the “light” that is within America is fading. And thus, immigration has had the exact opposite – rather than allowing us to spread light to others – it is actually killing off the single greatest ambassador of light and goodness that the world has ever had. Pretty soon America will be no different from the rest of the world – it will have equally corrupt political leaders who lead the government into debt and don’t care about the bill of rights. Thus, if you truly believe in the idea of spreading “light” to the world, you must be against immigration.

* I have statistics substantiating these claims in Democrats Import Voters.

Moral Quandary

And I will admit, I think there is something morally wrong with being xenophobic – after all we shouldn’t judge people on immutable characteristics. However, this is a matter of choosing the lesser evil – I think allowing the world’s light to die is a greater evil.

To just focus on domestic matters, immigration doesn’t just pose a financial burden – it isn’t just about money – it also is about preventing evil from prevailing. In a society where most people are nonwhite, we will see 1) a one-party state where Democrats win every election. 2) There is mob rule – mobs randomly start burning down cities if they don’t like the legal process (see George Floyd riots, discussed further in Democrats are Authoritarian). 3) Store owners don’t just have to be worried about isolated criminals, but also of being robbed by mobs of people and organized crime (see the many videos of crowds of African Americans suddenly storming into stores and stealing everything). 4) The average population sufficiently empathizes with criminals to defund the police. 5) Women are not safe going outside alone at night (the rich might avoid this through gated neighborhoods). 6) and as said repeatedly, we will have a corrupt government who puts evil for good. Wanting to live in a society where evil doesn’t prevail isn’t something we should be embarrassed about.

And no, government policies like increasing the police force or better education won’t be able to fix this, because nonwhite people will vote to roll back what little institutions we have for this already. See 1) defund the police movement (as said); 2) the decline of education standards and rolling back of standardized tests in the public school system; 3) DEI; and 4) the pollution of American History – by blaming white people for everything (see the blatant lies about Christopher Columbus), or the weird obsession with disseminating lies about the “robber barons” (discussed for example here) to blame capitalism for everything. These are all ideas which have been swooned upon for over a hundred years by communist intellectuals but only were able to gain power in government after demographic change created a huge population supporting these ideas. Consequently, government action will not be able to counteract the woes of demographic change, because we are already losing control of our government due to said change.

Focusing on the matter of race through the lens of justice and mercy: I think closing the border and deporting illegals – while this obviously is racist – isn’t necessary unjust: It seems just to me for people to live on the level of society that they would be able to create if left to themselves rather than pulling down societies from people who, if left to themselves, would have created higher quality societies. Regarding mercy, deporting people obviously isn’t merciful (indeed it is a terrible thing to do). However, allowing people to stay also isn’t merciful, since it victimizes innocents, and in many ways allows evil to prevail not just in the political arena but all across society (the rich might not understand this because they have been largely sheltered in gated neighborhoods).

Thus, while deportation and racism I will admit are somewhat morally wrong, I think the far greater wrong would be to allow our country to become third world and to throw away the amazing gift that we were granted by being afforded the privilege to be born into this great nation. I wish it wasn’t the case that we have to choose one evil over the other, but if you take a long and hard view at all the numbers, trying your hardest to not be naïve or engage in wishful thinking, it just simply is not possible to preserve a western type society while simultaneously having open borders. And to be honest, I sort of resent my ancestors for putting me in a predicament of having to choose which ethical principle to break – if they hadn’t allowed mass migration, then I would be afforded the privilege of having a perfectly upright and virtuous position of not being mean towards minorities while still also preserving the fate of my nation – or in other words, I wish I didn’t have to be racist.

Exceptions

If you read to here (which would be astonishing), then you probably are thinking: “well, I don’t care about all this, because I see people as individuals, not groups”, so let me address this. And this point actually is the core of my ideology, since all the above points about IQ and crime differences and burdens are things people sort of already knew anyway.

In my view, people who have good genes but are part of groups that have bad genes will on average be subversive to our society, or their descendants be subversive. Why? Because while they seem like they should fit in, their political interests will always side against white people, because of loyalty to their own race, and thus work against the overall good. Here are some specific examples:

The purpose of laws largely is to punish criminals. However, because of genetics, nonwhite people are more likely to be criminals, and thus because of in-group loyalty nonwhite people will forever feel a force pressuring them to believe that police are evil and should be defunded. They will be unwilling to accept the reality that their group indeed is worse on average and thus instead will search for wrongdoing elsewhere.
The purpose of foreign policy is to punish bad states. However, because of genetics, nonwhite countries will always tend to be more corrupt – thus most of our interventions or disciplinary actions against countries will be against nonwhite countries. However, again because of in-group loyalty, nonwhite people will see all of these efforts as “neo-colonialism”. Hence, the antagonism we have seen recently against our kidnapping Maduro and the military action against cartels in other countries that Trump has been pushing towards.
The purpose of immigration enforcement is to deport illegal aliens – who will again disproportionately be nonwhite because nonwhite countries usually suck and people therein want to leave. However, because of ingroup loyalty, nonwhite people will on average see immigration enforcement as racist, and will seek to shut down ICE.

So, let’s just zoom into a case which most of us have seen: You have a highly educated nonwhite person, who speaks English, has a successful career in the tech industry, is highly intelligent, and owns a nice home in the suburbs. By all accounts, he has fully assimilated into American culture.

And yet, if we ever have a conflict with a nonwhite country (such as where we kidnapped Maduro for facilitating human trafficking, among other offense; or in the more recent intervention in Iran), he will side with the nonwhite country over ours, because somehow he sees whatever we do as “colonialist” or “racist”. Apparently, he identifies more with the people of that country over ours, despite everything about his life style seeming like a perfectly typical American and not like somebody from that country. This is because, whether you like it or not, actual group loyalty – the group that you vouch for during conflicts – tends to be by race far more than civic paperwork (otherwise, why do people in America support Iran so much – there is nothing remotely similar to the culture of Iran to be found among all sects of America – indeed, the things that the left hates about the right the most: namely, religious zealotry, fascism, oppression of minorities, oppression of women and gay people, etc. are all way worse in Iran than the USA).

The story is seen again in the support that this highly educated nonwhite person likely will have for the anti-ICE protests: Why is it that nonwhite people who are here legally feel so threatened by our deportation of illegal immigrants, and keep on comparing said deportation to the nazis? Because, again, racial loyalty is stronger than civic loyalty. From the perspective of a nonwhite person, that immigrant who was deported could have been their cousin or they themselves. They will always subconsciously view any actions taken against nonwhite people as a threat against them, and therefore somehow motivated by nazi-level hatred, regardless of whether said actions are in adherence to the rule of law or not. Alas, you my reader probably haven’t been following the anti-ICE protests and terrorist attacks, and the rhetoric used by said agitators, and so this logic probably doesn’t ring true to you.

* I could go into detail on this cases for “defund the police”, but you get the picture. Why do so many law abiding black people, who are not criminals and should hate criminals, push to defund the police?

I wish all this wasn’t the case, but it just is the biological reality that we are programmed to side with people who look like us more than we are programmed to have civic loyalty. Thus, in summary, even if someone has high IQ genes, and low criminality genes, he will still be a subversion if he looks facially similar to people who have low IQ genes, etc. This is because he will on average believe that it is wrong for law and order to disproportionately impact that group – yet, law and order must disproportionately impact that group because that group is disproportionately at fault – and so this theoretical person will (on average) become the enemy to civilization and law and order, despite having all the genes that would usually make him a promoter of civilization and paradise.

And here is the more morbid part: yes, many nonwhite people defy this stereotype and end up being right-wing regardless (for example, Hispanic people in Texas are more right wing than Hispanic people in California). However, since loyalty towards people who look like you is a permanent, biological imperative, there will always be a force inexorably pulling these people and their offspring towards this aforementioned anti-civilizational attitude (that is becoming all too common these days). Thus, even if one exemplary nonwhite person is able to prevail and still embrace the truth, his kids likely will not, and even if his kids do, it is likely that his grandchildren won’t – as each generation will again be pulled back towards the group mean due to these biological forces.

I guess much of my attitude comes from my being raised in a particular area that was majority nonwhite, and it might seem at first silly to be racist towards other groups because they are racist towards you (because now you are no better than they). But this is the reality, biology works won’t change any time soon, and if you want to spread civilization, you must side with the groups who are able to do so, and contain the groups who are not able to do so.

To just provide one more example of this phenomenon: it seems like an obvious good to allow people who are natives to the British isles to freely migrate to the USA, because it seems like a sorry fate to be stuck on a prison island. Yet we could never do that, because then a bunch of Mexicans would complain that we are racist for not giving Mexico the same status, and said Mexicans have power because they already live here and we have a democracy. So, to play political games, we are forced to leave prison island prisoners in prison, because that is preferable to having open borders with Mexico. Sad.

How the World Should Be

In my view, the overarching goal of all politics is to create a paradise where souls from the premortal life can be born into and achieve an uplifting life on earth so that they can be ready to return to God in heaven.

To make this paradise become available to more souls, it needs to have a high population. So, to have a high population, said paradise needs to have a large land area, seeing that fertility rate and population density are highly correlated. Even in modern societies, this still matters, as fertility rate is dependent on debt, and debt is dependent on home prices, and home prices are dependent on land prices, and land prices are dependent on population density, and in particular, the relative abundance of beautiful areas that innovators and job creators would want to live in and drag their employees to live in as well.

And for this to remain permanently a paradise, it needs to be managed by, and full of, people who have good genetics.

Yes, it is awful to exclude people from society who have bad genetics, but this is a necessary evil, because in doing so you are opening up the potential for countless future generations to be born into a paradise where they can fulfil God’s purpose for them on earth.

A lot of political division is based on the question: should society be more free or more controlling. But, from my perspective, if your base society already is full of people who A) have good genes, and B) have correct beliefs in God, said society will always be pulled towards being governed correctly, and there won’t be a need to be super worried about whether the government is too big or too small.

Star Wars

From the perspective of modernity, I can understand why my ideas might seem disgusting.

We were all raised watching films like Star Wars or Marvel – where the good guys were able to save literally everyone on earth.

When someone starts saying it is not possible to save everyone, only a certain proportion of people, all of our media has programmed us to believe that this person is the villain.

Nevertheless, I don’t know how I could be wrong about this.

Tired of Color Blindness once More

And finally, let me repeat to you “color blind” people: your philosophically beautiful ideas about anticommunism but unwillingness to talk about race lead our society’s youngest generation to being less than half white – which will only compound due to birth rates. All of these new nonwhite people are even more in favor of communism and against free speech than your big enemy “the democrats” (I gave statistics on that earlier), though the financial burden and crime they offer probably is even worse than their political ideas. But there is nothing to be done about it other than sit back and watch the brazilification intensify – which will be a far worse fate than your great fear – a slightly higher corporate tax. Your beautiful ideas have turned out to just be narcissism and when it really mattered – when the future of our nation was on the line due to demographic change – you were awol. You were amazingly privileged to be born into this nation, but you threw it away and denied your children and grandchildren the same privilege you were afforded.

But America will be Destroyed

So why do we have immigration? Well, the answer is simple: money, power, and pride. Regarding money, immigration lowers the cost of labor, so the rich benefit from immigration. For power, a quick and easy way for politicians to get voters is to open the borders, since on average the immigrants who come in will support you out of gratitude and because they want their friends and family members to also be able to move here. And for pride, people want to be able to feel good about themselves for helping the downtrodden, or at least for not caring too much about immutable characteristics, and thus often maintain a willful ignorance about the costs associated with letting in third-worlders to our country. Of course, all of these groups likely subconsciously form justifications in their head for their actions. In a way, western civilization doesn’t actually “deserve” to have closed borders, because even westerners, who might be less corrupt on average than non-westerners, still allow greed, fame, and narcissism to motivate them to go against the good of society.

What is the point of this essay, given that I already know America will be destroyed given my dreams?

And why do I keep on putting protestants and Christians on a pedestal – these religions are corrupt too (as are all organized religions)?

Look OK, the situation is hopeless – all we can do is wait for the millennium and hope we are accounted worthy to escape all things. Hopefully in writing this hateful essay I haven’t forfeited my opportunity to escape these things.

These scriptures apply to America: