Download Sweden-Individualism-desktop

Psychological Mechanisms of
White Dispossession
 The moral and intellectual high ground in the contemporary
West is controlled by elites hostile to the traditional peoples
and cultures of the West and able to punish dissenters by
loss of job or even penalties at law.
 Within this context, the immediate short-term self-interest of
most Whites is to go along with the current regime.
 public displays of White guilt and positive attitudes to
immigration, multiculturalism and “diversity” serve as markers of
allegiance to the current power structure;
 necessary for career advancement and opposition will lead to
ostracism, job loss, etc.
 The dispossession of Whites is massively incentivized.
Social Learning consequences
of domination by hostile elites
 Social learning. Models are far more effective if they have
prestige and high status.
 Fits well with an evolutionary perspective in which seeking
high social status is a universal feature of the human mind.
 Propaganda much more effective if promoted by elites that
are seen as legitimate;
 Elite academic and media institutions seen as legitimate by
the great majority;
 Harvard prof in the New York Times: a sign of intelligence
and education;
 Immigration is a consensus value among elites; opposing it is
a sign lack of education and a moral defect.
The Culture of Critique: Jewish intellectual
movements had access to the most
prestigious academic institutions.
 The New York Intellectuals: Ties with elite universities,
particularly Harvard, Columbia, the University of Chicago,
University of California–Berkeley
 Boasian Anthropology and psychoanalysis: Throughout
academia
 Anti-biologism in the social sciences: Harvard (Gould,
Lewontin) and throughout academia
 Frankfurt School: Columbia, University of California-Berkeley;
now spread throughout academia
 Neoconservatives: University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins,
Cornell
 Success not based on truth or factual support but on networking
and elite dominance
The Consequences of Institutional
Dominance
 Once the new value set was institutionalized, it became the
focus of status competition within the boundaries set by
these movements;
 Once an organization becomes dominated by a particular
intellectual perspective, there is enormous inertia created by
the fact that the informal networks dominating elite
universities serve as gatekeepers for the next generation of
scholars: hiring, tenure
 Aspiring academics are subjected to a high level of
indoctrination at the undergraduate and graduate levels.
The Consequences of Institutional
Dominance
 Tremendous psychological pressure to adopt the fundamental
intellectual assumptions that lie at the center of the power hierarchy
of the discipline: e.g., the White race is a social construct
 Once such a movement attains intellectual predominance, people
are attracted because of the prestige associated with them—social
learning mechanisms
 Conservatives who are turned off by these ideas simply self-select
to go into a different line of work.
 Ethan Fosse and Neil Gross, “Why Are Professors Liberal?”
(Working paper. University of British Columbia), 2009.
 Dissenters shunned, ostracized, denied tenure, grants, promotions.
 E. O. Wilson, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, J. Philippe Rushton,
Helmuth Nyborg
Individualism and Evolution
 Fritz Lenz (~1930):
 Nordic evolution in harsh environment of the Ice Ages;
 Less between-group competition: Ecology did not support tribes
and clan-type social organization.
 Natural selection for intelligence and inventiveness to deal with
difficult climate
 Tendency toward social isolation
 Individualism is part of Western uniqueness
Worldwide distribution of
Individualism
Individualism and Patents
Individualism and Evolution: Individual
Choice based on personal attraction
 Natural selection for pair bonding (love) and
high-investment in children
 Monogamy: Polygyny not supportable for
evolutionarily significant period as huntergatherers
 Collectivist societies: Arranged marriage to
kinsman
Individualism and Evolution: Individual
Choice based on personal attraction rather
than cousin marriage
 Exogamous marriage based on individual choice, personal
attraction rather than kinship and family strategy; many
societies practice cousin marriage
 Love as basis of personal attraction (people too high on
this trait [especially women] tend to be pathologically
altruistic)
 Sexual selection for blond hair, blue eyes—the peacock’s
tail
 Far more hair-color and eye color diversity in Europe and
particularly Northwest Europe
Individualism and Evolution
 Less ethnocentric: Europeans less selected for between
group competition; more for dealing with ecological adversity
 Less involvement in extended kinship networks
 Nuclear family: Mom, dad, and the kids rather than extended
family of collateral kin.
 Collectivist societies: Extended family, compound household
 Bilateral kinship: Higher status for women
European Population Genetics
 Western Hunter-Gatherers: >8000 years ago; northern h-g
evolved white skin, pale eyes, light hair. ***
 Middle Eastern Farmers: ~ 7000 years ago; white skin; most
influential in the south where white skin spread among
previously dark-skinned h-g’s;
 Yamnaya/Indo-Europeans from Pontic Steppe: ~4500 years
ago; around 20% in all Europeans
I. Lazaridis et al., “Ancient genomes suggest three ancestral
populations for present-day Europeans” Nature 513 (Sept.
2014).
P. Skogland: Origins and Genetic Legacy of Neolithic Farmers and Hunter-Gatherers
in Europe; Science 27 April 2012
People of southern, central and northern Swedish descent are, on
average, of 41±8%, 36±7%, and 31±6% Neolithic farmer–related
ancestry, respectively
Individualism and Evolution
 Hunter-gatherer groups are relatively egalitarian; leadership by
consensus rather than authoritarian; despots removed
 Egalitarian Individualism: No one can rise about the others.
 Common in hunter-gatherer groups; Christopher Boehm
 Scandinavia as the paradigm
 The 10 commitments of Jante Law
 1. Don't think you are anything; 2. Don't think you are as good as
us. 3. Don't think you are smarter than us. 4. Don't fancy yourself
better than us. 5. Don't think you know more than us. 6. Don't
think you are greater than us. 7. Don't think you are good for
anything. 8. Don't laugh at us. 9. Don't think that anyone cares
about you. 10. Don't think you can teach us anything.
 Aksel Sandemose (1899-1965) in his novel En flyktning krysser sitt
spor ("A fugitive crosses his tracks", 1933).
Individualism and Psychology
 Personal goals (not group goals) are paramount
 Socialization emphasizes the importance of self reliance,
independence, individual responsibility, and “finding yourself.”
 Individualists have more positive attitudes toward strangers;
less ethnocentric
 More likely to behave in a prosocial, altruistic manner to
strangers (e.g., White medical missionaries to Africa;
adopting Haitian babies)
 Empathy and pathological altruism not based on kinship;
prone to universalist empathy.
Empathy/love as a (heritable)
personality system
-4=sociopathic (Bill Clinton, Tony Blair); -2=cold, aloof, little desire for affection; 0=average;
+1-+2=warm, affection-seeking; cohesive family relationships; nurturing, children; compartmentalized:
focused on own family and close friends
+2-+3=affection-craving, empathy and altruism less discriminating, more universal; more gullible and seeing
the best in others; more prone to guilt
+3-+4 pathologically empathic, altruistic; dependency disorder
Women > Men; MacDonald, K. B. (2012). Temperament and evolution. In M. Zentner and R. L. Shiner (Eds.), Handbook of Temperament. NY: Guilford.
Racial/ethnic differences? Especially important among individualist h-g’s as marriage criterion; Richard Lynn
on Blacks.
Individualism and Psychology: Creating
Cohesive Groups of Individualists
 19th-century racial scientists: Idealism as ethnic trait of
Nordics.
 Universalist moral ideals are erected and then steps are
taken to achieve the moral vision by changing the world,
often accompanied by a great deal of moral fervor.
 Yankee-Puritan utopian communities in 19th-century America
 Morality is defined not as what is good for the individual or
the group, but as an abstract moral ideal — e.g., Kant’s moral
imperative: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you
can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal
law.”
Individualism and Psychology: Creating
Cohesive Groups of Individualists
 Moral idealism as consensus building and
control in an individualistic society where kinship
relations are weak or non-existent.
 Individualism implies an equality of interest—that
everyone has interests but no one has a
privileged moral position—philosopher John
Rawls’ “veil of ignorance.”
 Creates morally defined ingroup, not defined by
by ethnicity or kinship.
 Shame, Guilt as motivators: Internal control
 All intellectual movements in The Culture of Critique
involved moral critique.
Individualism and Psychology: Creating
Cohesive Groups of Individualists
 Arguments on morality therefore must necessarily seek
an abstract sense of morality, independent of the
interests of any particular individual.
 Groups have no privileged moral standing at all.
 Collectivist societies based on kinship distance for
political factions. Arab proverb: I against my brother; my
brother and I against my cousin …all of us against the
foreigner.
 “Is it good for the Jews?”
Individualism and Psychology: Creating
Cohesive Groups of Individualists
 Reputation is critical in the absence of kinship as
the measure of all things: Personal honesty and
integrity; upholding moral norms; guilt for
transgressing
 Collectivist societies: Familial obligations lead to
corruption.
 Individualistic societies have high levels of public
trust, low levels of corruption.
 Strong emphasis on conformity to group norms;
 Stifling conformity of Puritan groups;
 to ignore group norms is to ruin public
reputation
Extreme individualism is characteristic of
Whites when internal controls based on guilt
and shaming are rejected
 Libertarian anarchism: 19th-century offshoot of Puritan New
England
 Benjamin Tucker: unfettered individualism and opposition to
prohibitions on non-invasive behavior (“free love”, etc.)
 The New Bohemians in Greenwich Village (ca. 1910–1917);
 Max Eastman (1883–1969);
 Cultural liberation defined as freedom from constraints—an early
version of 1960s hippies: self discovery, emotion over logic,
intuition, rebellion, free love, Black jazz, and leftist politics.
 Eric Kaufmann, The Rise and Fall of Anglo-America
 Libertarianism: Ron Paul; oppose drug laws, race-based
affirmative action, social safety net, foreign aid; tend to favor
open borders and civil liberties
 Ayn Rand’s Objectivism; Atlas Shrugged, The Fountainhead
Individualism and Psychology: Creating Cohesive
Groups of Individualists
 Implicit Whiteness: Whites form groups but publically
Whiteness has nothing to do with it: Tea Party, NASCAR,
White suburbs
 Explicit Whiteness: We are White and have interests as
Whites
 Cortical Control of subcortical feelings; can inhibit
“prejudiced” responses
 Media—Explicit messages
self-control of pro-white
attitudes
 Leads to guilt
Controlling pro-White attitudes
Media messages: Pro-White attitudes are evil; creation of a
moral community
Cortex
—
+
Limbic System: Pro-White attitudes, attraction to genetically
similar others (Rushton), xenophobia;
MacDonald, K. (2008). Effortful Control, Explicit Processing and the Regulation of Human Evolved
Predispositions. Psychological Review, 115(4), 1012–1031
.
The fight over control of the
cortex
 The Culture of Critique: human evolution is now being
fought out in the realm of ideas.
 The intellectual movements of the left—particularly the
moral imperative of immigration and multiculturalism,
the decline of evolutionary thinking in the social
sciences, and the general loss of cultural confidence by
the West—have been major components of the huge
unfolding evolutionary disaster for Europeans.
Historical examples: Puritans
 Puritans: Based in East Anglia, originally from Denmark
 Relatively small social class differences; no slave class
 The tendency to pursue utopian causes framed as moral
issues
 Utopian appeals to a “higher law” and the belief that
government’s principal purpose is moral.
 Yankee-Puritan utopian communities in 19th-century America
 Willing to incur great costs to impose moral perfection: Altruistic
punishment
 Morally defined ingroup: Led the movement in the U.S. to abolish
slavery on moral grounds
 Strong controls within the group to enforce morality—17th-century
version of political correctness
 Low levels of criminal violence, highest level of public executions
Psychology of Moral idealism
Utopian cause: Ending slavery, establishing ideal society
Cortex
—
+
Limbic System: Self-interest; economic prosperity for Britain
New Zealand vs. U.S.:
Fairness and Freedom
 David Hackett Fischer’s book on comparing the treatment of
the U.S. by the British Empire of the 18th century (which led
to the American Revolution) with the treatment of New
Zealand in the 19th century.
 The most important characteristic of the British Empire at the
time of New Zealand colonization beginning in 1840 was a
greater emphasis on social justice (fairness). USA--Liberty
 Colonial administrators like Captain William Hobson (“a
leader of high probity … [who] recruited able and honorable
men to serve in the colony” [p. 84]) were concerned about
justice and fairness—self-consciously trying to uphold a
universalist morality.
New Zealand vs. U.S.:
Fairness and Freedom
 Already in the 19th century we see a strong sense of “highmindedness” (p. 87) and crusading moral universalism.
Bishop George Augustus Selwyn, who became Anglican
Bishop of New Zealand in 1841, was “a high-principled
idealist” with a “broad ecumenical version of Christianity
which in New Zealand became linked to an idea of racial
equality between Pakeha [i.e., Whites] and Maoris” ; Selwyn
was “a fierce defender of Maori rights” [p. 87]).
Andrew Joyce on the Morant
Bay (Jamaica) Rebellion of
1861 TOQ, Summer, 2013
 “To the clear-thinking individual, it was a plainly criminal, and
unimaginably brutal series of actions, carried out for
malicious reasons against a population targeted for being
White. And yet, there was a liberal faction in England
convinced not only that it was the Black population that were
the true victims, but also that their fellow Whites were
reprehensible monsters who deserved the fate which befell
them. This pathological response, laden with a misplaced
hyper-emotionality, would shake the Empire to its core,
sapping its confidence, and bequeathing a legacy which is
still felt to this day.”

Andrew Joyce: “The Morant Bay of
1865” TOQ, Summer, 2013
 The main warriors on behalf of the Blacks were Christian
philanthropists who believed that these races could be raised
to standards of education and conduct which would place
them alongside Europeans.
 Members of this group tended to be non-Conformist, middleclass, and liberal or radical in their politics.
 Crucially, most had never travelled outside Britain, and had
little or no experience with the races they so emphatically
and persistently eulogized.
The Movement to End Slavery in
England (TOQ, Summer, 2013
 Late 18th century, Quakers, Methodists, Puritans, and
increasingly as time went on, the Church of England. All of
these groups opposed slavery.
 Quakers central because they were the leaders at the very
center of the movement to abolish slavery in England.
 Quaker networks and Quaker money were “of critical
importance” in the early campaigns of 1787–1788; they were
“the foremost champions of liberty for enslaved Africans.”
Quakers did the vast majority of the practical, day-to-day
work of the Society and were a major source of funding.
Quaker ideology
 Quaker religious ideology is the apotheosis of moral
universalism—an ideology in which moral principles trump
self-interest.
 A basic Quaker belief was that “the ‘Inner Light’ of God’s
revelation shone equally on human beings of any race or
class.”
 Anthony Benezet: human equality “was an ontological fact
rather than a philosophical doctrine or maxim”; in addition to
his African slaves, he extended his interest to the welfare of
Native Americans and the poor in Philadelphia.
 A statement by a Quaker subcommittee submitted to
Parliament was titled The Case of Our Fellow-Creatures, the
Oppressed Africans.
Quakers
 Highly egalitarian: they were “democratic and
nonhierarchical”; there were no bishops or ordained
ministers, and any person (including women) could speak. As
with hunter-gatherer groups (see below), policy was passed
by consensus of the entire meeting.
 Quakers were economically successful, a merchant class
capable of devoting substantial resources to the cause of
anti-slavery activism.
 Like the original Puritans, the Quakers formed a group apart,
where group membership was based on moral/ideological
conformity. They were a “holy nation” who, also like the
Puritans, desired that England become a Holy
Commonwealth—the nation as moral ingroup, not kinship or
race.
 Dissenters shunned and ostracized: Sound familiar?!
Quakers
 There was a watchful regard for morals of the society, and a
strict determination to bring all misdemeanors to account.
Friends were regularly appointed to examine into and to
report on the state of the society. Did a member neglect to
attend on the means of grace, or was he guilty of “disorderly
walking,” he was exhorted in a brotherly way.
 Like the Puritans, an early version of political correctness
 The hunter-gatherer ethic implies that one’s moral character
becomes the most important aspect of ingroup status.
Individuals maintain their position in society by subscribing to
its moral norms. Fundamentally, the movement to end
slavery operated by defining abolitionism as a moral ingroup
psychologically analogous to the situation in a huntergatherer ingroup. Those who continued to advocate the slave
trade and slavery were shunned as moral pariahs.
Quakers
 The logic connecting these tendencies to the individualist
hunter-gather model is that like all humans in a dangerous
and difficult world, hunter-gatherers need to develop
cohesive, cooperative ingroups.
 But rather than base them on known kinship relations, the
prototypical egalitarian-individualist groups of Northwest
Europe are based on moral reputation and trust.
 Like the Puritans (East Anglia), the Quakers stem from a
distinctive, ethnically based British subculture originating in
Scandinavia. The predominant region for Quakers in England
was the North Midlands colonized by Viking invaders who
prized individual ownership of houses and fields; they spoke
Norse into the twelfth century.
Quakers, et al.
 John Woolman, the “Quintessential Quaker,” was an
eighteenth-century figure who opposed slavery, lived humbly,
and, amazingly from an evolutionary perspective, felt guilty
about preferring his own children to children on the other side
of the world.
 Quakers created a moral ingroup in which those outside the
ingroup were seen as immoral, while being inside the moral
ingroup activated their brain circuits for pleasure and selfesteem.
 Similar tendencies can be found among the Methodists,
some influential Anglicans, and especially the descendants of
the Puritans whose sense of moral idealism was a critical
factor in the anti-slavery movement in the U.S.
Moral ingroups
 Abolitionists framed the African slaves as members of a
common humanity—as members of a universal moral
ingroup rather than a racial outgroup.
 Reverend James Ramsay, the leading intellectual light of the
Evangelical Anglicans, the point of opposition to slavery was
to “gain to society, to reason, to religion, half a million of our
kind, equally with us adapted for advancing themselves in
every art and science that can distinguish man from man,
equally with us capable of looking forward to and enjoying
futurity.”
HMS Brookes, 1792: Pulling for
Universalist Empathy; Swedish
PM: “Open Your Hearts”
“Am I not a man and a brother?”
Medallion, 1792: Pulling for
Universalist Empathy
Conclusion
 Western uniqueness results from two powerful currents:
 1.) Hunter-gatherer culture indigenous to Europe, especially
Northern Europe, and persisting through the Ice Ages
 Egalitarian individualism
 Exogamy, personal attraction as basis of marriage; weak extended
kinship relations
 Representative, non-despotic political culture
 Moral conformity and reputation as force for ingroup social cohesion
rather than kinship
 Policing the morals of the group—now opposition to “racism,” pro-White
sentiments
Conclusion
 Western uniqueness results mainly from two powerful
currents:
 2.) Aristocratic egalitarianism likely stemming mainly from IndoEuropean invaders after ~3500 BC
 Offshoot of Neolithic culture enabled by increasing productivity of
animal husbandry culture
 Strongly hierarchical military cultures
 Egalitarian within the elite of peers; non-despotic political culture
 Powerful relations of dominance and subordination between
themselves as an elite and the lower strata.
 European pre-modern military elites; planters in U.S. South
Individualism and the Decline
of the West
 Egalitarian individualism has consistently won out over aristocratic
individualism in Western history at least since the English Civil War
 E.g., American Civil War pitted the egalitarian individualists of the North
(Puritan-descended) versus the aristocratic individualists (Cavaliers) of the
South
 In America, the Puritan tradition of moral universalism dominated culturally
until the rise of Jewish-dominated intellectual movements of the 20th century.
 The Puritan liberal tradition altered by a period of ethnic defense from 19201965 based on Darwinian thinking. Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard
 White ethnic defense collapsed after 1965 with rise of Jews as a “hostile
elite.”
 Relatively weak ethnocentrism (WASP elite was relatively permeable) and
proneness to moral universalism made Whites susceptible
Moral idealism as the ideology of
Western suicide
 The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish
Involvement in 20th-century Intellectual and Political
Movements
 Moral indictment of the West: Slavery, colonialism, anti-Semitism,
exclusion of Jews from the Protestant elite
 The general dismantling of the culture of the West, and
eventually its demise as anything resembling an ethnic entity, will
occur as a result of a moral onslaught.
Suggestions
 1. Defending the moral legitimacy of defending the traditional
peoples and cultures of the West
 2. Emphasize the costs of multiculturalism—conflict,
disengagement and lack of community, lack of willingness to
contribute to public goods
 3. Creating our own moral ingroups, shunning those who
disagree
Suggestions
 4. Make White people conscious of their hyper-moral,
universalist, indiscriminately empathic, individualist
tendencies. Like other natural tendencies, they can be
blocked by top-down cortical control.
Cortex: Racial/ethnic and cultural survival
—
+
Individualism, Universalist Empathy, etc.