r:K.png

The section I highlighted above shows all that there is to know about the current state of r/K selection theory in the public consciousness, that is to say—it’s lacking. The fact that it (((lost importance))) around 1994, the year Nelson Mandela was elected in South Africa—I assure you, is not a coincidence.

There are two big reasons that (((they))) peddle this widespread confusion over race to us.

  1. They know deep down how provocative they can be. But if nobody thought race was real, they wouldn’t think Jews were real. Hence, nobody in their right mind, mostly in fear of social suicide, would question anything they do, even if many of them claim to be doing what they do as a group, which they do.
  2. Their goal is to ultimately rule over us and our confusion about race makes it easier, as it not only draws attention away from them, but also keeps us divided and hating each other—because they purposefully finance policies that merge groups with histories of hostility together, expecting us to get along with our newfound, bourgeois beliefs about “equality”, knowing full and well—it’s going to tear us apart and it is.

 

mouse_litter1

r/K selection is a model of understanding in biology behind the strategies of sexual reproduction and raising offspring. In short, some species produce many offspring and allow them to fend mostly for themselves (r-strategists), while others produce a few offspring and nurture them into adulthood (K-strategists). This can vary at the sub-species level however and that’s the key to understanding why r/K selection isn’t such a popular theory anymore. For it sheds light on the fact that newer human races have had fewer and fewer children since their emergence.

Now, one may feel inclined to suggest that we just “get our act together” and try and will these differences between us as people away. But can we? What is free will? Can you even describe it? Something free is uncontrolled; Something willed is completely controlled. Science has no who, what, when, where, or why of any such “free will”. If anything, we’ve gradually disproven it by providing more and more explanations overtime for phenomena we had once attributed to “free will”.

What was the last thought you had? Did you choose it? How’d you do it? Did you think about what you wanted to think? And what made you do that?! Do you have free will, or has a chain of intellectually lacking “wills” infected you with the notion?

Still not convinced? It’s necessary, I assure you. I wouldn’t bring this up if I wasn’t going to tie this into r/K selection. But we’ll get to that in a minute. Let’s go over some basic axioms of life and see if your beliefs hold up to reality, assuming you believe in free will.

  1. Would you agree, like most people, that we are part of nature? That is to say, not separate from it, and in fact—entirely dependent on it?
  2. Would you agree, like most people, that ants are a part of nature?
  3. Would you describe the behavior of ants as robotic? If not, how about bacteria? It’s just cells. All it can do is spread mindlessly. It’s as close to a pure automaton of nature as we can get. But keep in mind, bacteria—like you is just another part of nature, right?
  4. Speaking of bacteria, wouldn’t you agree that all of this complexity in the animal kingdom had to emerge from something? A cell or two, maybe?

If you answered yes to all or most of these questions, then I’ve got a question: what are you? If you ask me, you’re nothing more than a heavily advanced version of bacteria. You wanna know where the idea of free will comes from? Quite simply, our hubris. The ego is a powerful thing, as it should be, for it served an evolutionary purpose during our daily struggle for survival.

But once we had survived both the forces of nature and ourselves, the ego had become vestigial (useless), much like the appendix, which used to filter out gastrointestinal toxins we encountered in our days roaming the Sahara desert, but now serves as I shit you not, a potential bomb waiting to burst from within you.

As scary as that may sound, the ego has the same problem. We’ve been made to believe that it’s a good thing to feed it with hyperindividualism, and when we do, we see it manifest itself too often in vile ways (particularly through usury).  Democracy is not a system that benefits “the people”. It allows a few, moraless individuals to gain the system, push everyone else down, and slowly crush them to death.

Elephant in the Room

What Do We Do about “Mixed” Families?

We incentivize, through state policy for each member of said families to reproduce within their ethnic groups in the future, and for their children to do so, and so on—until a few generations from now, everyone’s “back to normal” so-to-speak. More importantly, we incentivize those families to immigrate to culturally appropriate countries elsewhere. There’s a myriad of completely non-forceful means of getting these people back to their ancestral homelands and taking our’s back. The first thing we need to do though to be frank is give the vote back to white men.

Just white men. Afterall, it is our land, our institutions, our culture; I’m fairly certain that if anyone knows how to keep it healthy and functional—it’s us. We don’t go into Mexico and say, “yea, whitey’s gonna make everything better; we’re gonna fix ‘problems’ we percieve with your culture.” We’d hear viva la raza and get pegged with tacos instantly.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this:
Skip to toolbar