Introduction to eugenics

by Evropa Soberana

‘All people can be Gods people now through the New Covenant… all peoples have a right to exist and continue to exist, but no race is superior in the sight of God. Each people has been given specific attributes and responsibilities but to God every soul is valuable’ —Matt Heimbach.

Editor’s Note: Is race a social construct? This is what liberals believe—and apparently Christian white nationalists like Heimbach believe that, for God, race is a mere human construct. (No wonder why people say that liberalism is the bastard son of Christianity…)

Below, my abbreviated translation of ‘Intro a la eugenesia’, published six years ago by the Spaniard blogger Evropa Soberana:
 

______ 卐 ______

 

It is undeniable that in the species and in any human group there are diversity of qualities.

Some individuals are intelligent and others are stupid; even there are morons. Some individuals have health of steel and others are sickly. Some individuals are tall, others are short. Some individuals are strong, others are weak. Some individuals are brave, others are cowards. Some individuals are disciplined and hardworking, others are lazy and slothful. Some individuals are honest, noble, righteous and loyal, others have a clear inclination towards lying, falsehood, disloyalty and betrayal.

It is also undeniable that almost all these qualities are hereditary and depend on genetics to a greater or lesser extent (usually more greater than lesser).

The question that arises is: what qualities, from those listed above, seem more desirable to us and which ones would we like they end up prevailing in the future world if we want the Earth to be a better place?

If you are a logical person I address the following question: in the path that, as a species, we have been going through the last millennia, what qualities, of those listed above, tend to be selected?

The current mentality, produced by a civilisation isolated in its technological bubble, ignores a hundred percent the laws of Nature, of blood, of selection and of the inequality of men; laws that, necessarily, place the best ones above and the worst ones below. The modern world is, then, the perfect example of a diabolical selection in reverse, or dysgenics. Many people of inferior genetics have been perpetuated, and many people of superior genetics have not done so (for example, in medieval times because of fratricidal wars, witch hunts and celibacy of very large social sectors at the hands of the Church). That hurts the race. When the number of biological waste increases and that of bodily monuments to the gods decreases, we can be sure without any doubt that we are moving towards a future of biological trash.

Today, the individual is sacred and untouchable, while concepts such as ‘race’ and ‘homeland’ are considered abstractions, when the only abstraction is the individual who is born and dies fleetingly and while only human groups are solid and lasting realities.

In harder and more authentic times, the birth rate was vigorous, but the harshness of environmental conditions cut off the lives of the weakest. Thus, in a family of ten children, it was possible that they reached reproductive age only five. Each of these five would have, in turn, ten children, of which five would survive, the fittest. The result was that, in several generations, the defectives were virtually eradicated and the only ones left standing were the fittest. Thus, fighting against the elements, in wars, epidemics and catastrophes, the population of the planet remained stable but, nevertheless, as a species, we tended to improve generation after generation. Each ‘litter’ tended to be better than the previous one.

Humanity was not spiritually prepared for the advent of the modern industrial revolution, technology and health services. Obviously, the technology turned out to be in many ways salvation for Man, but he forgot to foresee that the immense population growth that would inevitably take place would have to be compensated in other ways. Instead of foreseeing measures that would continue to maintain a selection of the best ones to regulate the population, the uncontrolled proliferation of human beings was allowed, at the expense of Nature and of the biological quality of the population.

Ever since health services, technology, social services and Judeo-Christian morality have spread freely, a whole legion of sick, decrepit, retarded and handicapped people invade the horizon of the species that in a world dominated by Nature would never have seen the light, or they would have lasted a short time. We, who have the technique and the means to quickly and painlessly do what Nature usually does slowly and painfully, are propagating and perpetuating the inferior seeds.

It is argued that technology in itself is not good or bad, but depends on the use that is given. Today, it is being used diabolically, oriented to make us sick, to weaken us and to get away from the Earth and our own nature. In the future, when the imbecility of this civilisation has been overcome, the application of technology must take a 180-degree turn.
 

But then there would be a selection: we would choose the types to prevail, we would discriminate, and that is unfair (for me, of course: because I want to perpetuate my genes, and with them, the associated declines)!

It will be unfair to you, but it is fair to the race, which is more important than you. On the other hand, it is unfair for the species that your hereditary rubbish spread like the plague, no matter how much that offends you.

And yes: it sounds to me like selection. It’s like in the exams. He who gets more than a 5, approves, and he who gets 5 or less stays out… a ‘selection’ in full rule. How monstrously unfair! What ominous discrimination towards those who did not pass! How politically incorrect!

Just like those places where they do not let you pass if you do not wear shoes, or if you wear piggy pints, or if you don’t go with female company, or if you dislike the Romanian gatekeeper.

Or those expensive restaurants where you cannot go if you’re not with tie and well dressed. Or those clubs where they only accept Latin bitches. Or those 5-star hotels where if you lack dosh to pay for a suite they don’t accommodate you. Or those bars where they would crush you if you say, ‘Long Live Spain!’

This is discrimination and pure and hard selection, which surrounds us 24 hours a day, and always in much more unjust and unnatural ways than genetic discrimination.
 

But then a caste system would be formed and the equality would be destroyed!

Yes, but don’t we have a ‘caste system’ today? Is not that capitalist caste system based on money? Doesn’t that destroy the sacrosanct ‘equality’? Is such an economic criterion of social stratification not infinitely lower, unnatural, unjust and petty than the genetic one? Don’t it tend to enthrone mediocre, vile and malicious individuals?

Nowadays, one can be clown, brat, son of a bitch, depraved, pervert, false, traitor, snake, unfriendly, repellent, drug addict and stupid: but they will open the doors wherever he goes and will bow if he is rotten with money and makes ostentation of it visible.

Likewise, one can be an intelligent, good, healthy, brave, strong and friendly chap that the System will overlook if he is poor.

Today, a chick is ‘good’ if she has a neckline, thong, miniskirt and shows off her body, even if mediocre, while a beautiful gal is not stunning if she goes in tracksuit and shirt. Is not that tremendously unfair?

So what are you afraid of when you suggest the possibility of wiping out all that and selecting the best individuals or genes for higher breeding?
 

But then we would operate modifications on the individual and force changes in the whole society!

So good! You have a son. Don’t you teach him to behave so that he is more presentable? Don’t you wash him and comb him so he looks better? Won’t you give him a better education to make him wiser? Isn’t that ‘operating modifications’?

Don’t we have a ridiculous and pathetic educational system, as well as a monstrous subliminal propaganda apparatus that ‘forces change’ throughout society, even in public opinion? Are not those changes, by the way, worse?

So what are you afraid of when you suggest the possibility of operating modifications for the better?
 

But then we would all end up being tall, handsome, blond, strong, gifted, indestructible, immortal, perfect and blue-eyed!

And what’s wrong with that?

Let’s see… taking the genetic range of yours and your partner, they give you to choose how you want your future child to be. How would you ‘ask’ him?

Short, maybe? Dummy? Black, no doubt? Something ugly, perhaps…?

Wouldn’t you ‘ask’ for the best range within your gene pool and that of your partner?
 

Oh, I don’t care how he looks like, and I’ll love him anyway.

I’m proud of you. Look, I’m going to shed a little tear with so much solidarity, so much progressivism, so much equality, so much tolerance and so many rainbows. But tell me: If the look doesn’t matter, then why the hell do you dye your hair or blow it?

Why do you brush or shave? Being a man, wouldn’t you ignore an ugly gal, fat and with a goatee? Why do you buy clothes designed to enhance your virtues and hide your shortcomings? Why do you make up? Why do you wear heels? Silicone? Implants? Operation of breast augmentation? Rhinoplasty? Lifting? Skin creams? Several liposuctions? Insulin for diabetes? Extirpation of the appendix? Gadgets for asthma? Barbiturates? Sleeping pills? Glasses or contact lenses? Anabolics?

Why, in short, do you try to pretend? Isn’t it because you are aware that this is a treasure? And isn’t all that a thousand times more unnatural than being born with privileged genes?

The problem is that people work on the phenotype, disguising their defects with money, paints, patches, amendments, accessories and harmful chemicals (and expensive, which is a lucrative and convenient business for the System). Perhaps, O hypocrites, wouldn’t you kill for good genetics, for health of steel, for beauty of birth and for not needing all those ridiculous complements to disguise your superficial miseries?

Don’t you spend (you and the State) bunch of monies in such patches and globs to hide your defects and your diseases, cash that could be saved if such defects were eradicated by tuning up certain genes harmlessly? Doesn’t all the waste of keeping the retarded, terminally ill, be cut off in a single generation with a little common sense, for God’s sake?
 

Oh, I wouldn’t choose the looks of my son, I’d just let him be born without messing with his genes.

Once again I’m shedding a tear. Sniff.

But when you see that all your little friends go through life begetting beautiful super-babes, healthy, responsible, intelligent, strong, loving, I have the vague feeling that you don’t want to stay behind, be the less coolest mother and condemn you to have to listen to your asthmatic, diabetic or simply mediocre child, without asking yourself how you were such a scumbag as not to give him a better birth having the means to do so.
 

But then babies born through genetic engineering will be unnatural beings!

Those babies wouldn’t be any more unnatural than a bourgeois obese with toad face; drinker, sedentary, dressed up to the neck and spending five hours a day on TV, or taking his BMW even to go shit.

Nor would it be more unnatural than a 50-year-old fat woman, unlookable, ramshackled, wrinkled, materialistic, smoker, varicosed, sterile, without children—but yes: a progressive, activist, sponsor of children of alien races in foreign countries, with her hair dyed blond, with lots of make up, with a purse, talking on her cell phone and stuffed with gelatinous muffin tops and flabs that none wants to see.

And, of course, they won’t be more unnatural than the troop of the sick, deviant, criminals, whores, parasites, inverted and degenerates who parade through our civilisation and to whom, on the other hand, no one deprived of their right to be born.

You yourself, don’t you take the bus or go by car? Don’t you get into noisy bars to get drunk and distract your will? Don’t you have sex with a condom or with an anti-baby device? Don’t you watch TV? Isn’t all that also ‘unnatural’? So what are you telling me, fucking piece of plastic with legs? I will accept the word ‘unnatural’ as valid only and exclusively if they come from the mouth of someone like Tarzan or Mowgli.

Why, then, almost perfect children, born out of the cross-breeding of the best of the species, should be unnatural and abominable beings? Couldn’t they be ordinary people, and have the same privileges as, for example, a homosexual mestizo, obese, diabetic, squatter and carrier of various venereal diseases?
 

Well, that seems discrimination to me. Who decides who is perfect? Isn’t that playing to be God?

Maybe it is playing God, but since no one is going to come down from heaven to give us instructions, and since we are not going to sit and watch the species degenerate until we become sickly Tinkiwinkies fused with TV, the bag and the car at the same time, someone with judgment has to fill that void.

Bearing in mind, moreover, that the species is on the verge of catastrophe we must favour an exacerbately high birth rate among the best specimens, and prevent the worst from multiplying. Modern Western civilisation is the only civilisation in the history of humanity that does not conceive of sex, marriage, family and birth-rate as biological weapons destined to propitiate ‘the victory of the cradles’—without which ‘the victory of the soldier’ is incomplete.

It will be necessary to cross-breed keeping in mind the selection of qualities such as Nordic blood, good constitution, intelligence, strength, stature, courage, leadership ability, health, resistance, discipline and a very long etcetera, which are the qualities selected by Nature itself when the suicidal and insane Judeo-Christian morality does not interpose between Her and man. It would not be necessary to ‘force’ things in this sense (‘you two are good specimens, let’s mate’), but to encourage their desire to emerge naturally and spontaneously.

If this type of policy was supported by the techniques and means that exist today, we would have, in a matter of generations, an almost perfect race, and all the defects—together with the expenses and miseries they cause—eradicated forever.

‘Good’ is everything that improves the race; ‘bad’ is everything that makes the race worse.

From this point of view, it could be necessary to resort to artificial methods (genetic engineering, state intervention, selective crossings) to correct the indescribable nonsense caused by 2000 years of artificial dementia.

Your urban brothel lifestyle, contaminated, uprooted, unhealthy, asphalted, greasy, degenerated, drunk and immoral harm the species and that is unnatural.

Your compassion and diligence towards junkies, the defective, retarded, homosexual, dirty, delinquent, sickly, parasites and judicially sentenced is something that harms the species and that is unnatural.

Your social-economic selection is something that harms the species, that makes it worse and tends to form a type of inferior man, in addition to being a thousand times more immoral than natural-genetic selection.

Your castration of the instinct of aggressiveness is something that worsens the species and leaves us unarmed before more brutal humanities.

Genetic selection, good birth and the selective matching of the best individuals are things that benefit the race and tend to form a type of superior man. Therefore they are good and desirable in themselves.

Conclusion: as long as an intervention in human reproduction is not a reality, mate only with individuals of similar genetic and racial quality of you. Guide yourself through the traits of the body, the soul, health and the tone of skin, eyes and hair.

35 Comments

  1. This is why Spartan women did not need any makeup—they were still pure Dorians—while the Athenian women, that were beginning to crossbreed with Meds, did use makeup.

    Not even Richard Spencer understands something so obvious as eugenics. The Russian woman he chose to have a baby with was not as pure genetically speaking as him. And the fact that white nationalists don’t protest the least bit regarding such marriage and biological product demonstrates for the Nth time that WN is a farce.

    • @C.T. The religious white nationalists / right wingers will surely never recognize the importance of eugenics. After all, it violates their “Pro-Life” stance of preserving all life and believing that all life is from “God.” I do not believe they are even really racially conscious of differences between certain whites, or those perceived as being “White”.

      The Russians are actually Asiatic, despite some admixture from the Vikings. If someone really spent some time around Russians to look closely at their eyes and shape of their eyelids, aging patterns, vocal cadence and their cognitive responses, it is evident that they are not white bad and have bad genetics, and have a very primitive response compared to Aryans. I doubt Richard Spencer was smart enough to recognize this about his former Russian wife, and was evidently bamboozled by her bountiful boobs.

      • The religious white nationalists / right wingers will surely never recognize the importance of eugenics.

        The tragic thing is that before WW2 eugenic societies existed in the US and that even president Calvin Coolidge attended them.

        Black Pigeon Speaks (my sticky post’s hatnote) was right: something really, really changed in the American psyche after that war.

      • @C.T. indeed. Even more disturbing is that Black Pigeon Speaks, just like Stefan Molyneux, are both Jews. BPS, like many Jews, also has Asian Fever, haha.

      • I have heard several times that BPS is Jew but where’s the credible source for that?

      • @C.T. His real name is Felix Lace. He also dodges the JQ even though addressing individual Jews like Soros, and has all the stereotypical physical and vocal traits of Jews. Also check out his photo under Google images. Like any jew, they are extremely astute about issues facing Whites, and he has enormous connections with militaries and private contractors which furnish him major data from the mines.

      • Okay. I’ve now seen his face for the first time. He certainly is non-Aryan and yes: he avoids the JQ.

        As an Alt-Lite type however he could be used as a first stepping-stone for some normies during their crossing the psychological Rubicon. Even the RationalWiki hates him and at Reddit today I saw someone calling BPS a fascist, and precisely because he represents a baby step toward the right direction.

  2. My mantra – Hitler aided the Spanish Catholics against the explicit anti-Christian revolutionaries. Explain that.

    [Admin's note - this comment was off-topic and I deleted most of it.]

    • ” Hitler aided the Spanish Catholics against the explicit anti-Christian revolutionaries. Explain that.”

      Even christians, and a christian ruled country, is preferable to a bolshevik stronghold. The Spanish battle was one of traditionalists against complete depravity. Hitler merely prevented complete depravitry to win.

      However, later Hitler was so disappointed with Franco that, as he put it ” he would rather have his teeth pulled out than to ever meet him again”.

      Explained. Glad to help.

      • “The Spanish battle was one of traditionalists”

        Christianity is the chief poison, not Bolshevism. Christianity murdered the original traditionalism – Bolshevism merely murders an impostor.

        I thought we here liked the idea of bringing humanity to oblivion with us? Of spreading a virus to wipe out humanity? Spain was already a dead corpse – he who fails to appreciate the sight of dead priests is not one of us. Those Catalonian Bolsheviks were unknowingly avenging their miscegenated Visigothic ancestors.

      • @AdunaiLeVierte

        As I see it, Hitler failed because he lacked the ruthlessness of bolshevism both inside and outside of Germany. He had many moments of softness and he did not push his intolerance to the maximum level. He also severely understimated bolshevism’s prowess. The Second World War was in fact a Russo-German war.

        The war was Germany’s to win. Hitler lost it before it started.

      • No. Hitler lost because Americans stabbed him on the back (which is why the founding stock of the US is rapidly disappearing due to dysgenics and well-deserved karma).

        Bolshevism merely murders an impostor.

        Apparently,​ Adunai never read The Gulag Archipelago or 200 Years Together.

      • No, nobody outside Germany betrayed Hitler. He always knew that one day he would go to war with the countries the Jews had in the hollow of their hands: USA, Russia, France, England.

        Germany was strong enough to take on the whole world. He always boasted so and he was right, so why those blunders like Dunkirk and not going total war on Russia in 1941 and not in 1943 when it was already too late?

      • The gringos betrayed themselves. They already had FBI memos informing that the ‘Russian’ Revolution was actually a Jewish Revolution. Even Churchill knew that. They, the Anglo-Saxons, betrayed their continental cousins and also betrayed the English and American peoples by siding the genocidal kikes.

      • The ‘Russian’ Revolution was a Jewish Revolution founded by Wall Street Jews. America was hopelessly in their hands by then. If you look at Roosevelt’s Brain Trust you find at least 40 extremely powerful Jews, I have their names. The British Empire was Jewry’s asset for centuries, Churchill’s debts were paid by Jews and he was great friend i.e. slave of Bernard Baruch. Rothschild and Montefiore had all cards in that cursed island. The Soviet Union was basically a colony of the Jewish West were they produced the famous soviet tube-test man. Are these things the Germans did not know? Hitler, Goebbels knew it very well since the days of the Kampfzeit. So why did Hitler try peace at Dunkirk with fucking Rothschild? He knew when his peace offer was rejected that Russia would attack, that was England’s only possibility of continuing an otherwise lost war! So he should have expected that Bolshevism armed like it did. Why total war in 1943? When it could have been done much earlier? The war won in 1941, America would have been alone with the Germans, what could americano do in that position? Nothing. Why is Hitler in table talks so calm and assured of the fact that the war is certainly won?

        The fate of the world was in Germany’s hands, stop looking at the others, they were either corrupted to a point of no return or weak sauce like Fascist Italy.

        It’s so maddening that they achieved so much only to lose everything in the end.

      • All of this discussion is off-topic (eugenics ought to be the topic of this thread). I should have deleted Adunai’s 1st off-topic comment right at the beginning but didn’t do it.

        Maybe it is time to moderate every single comment before approving it?

    • It is off-topic but we both ran into it. Delete it for all I care.

      • Adunai’s provocative comment way above started it. No need to delete the thread but I’ve just added a new post asking not to hijack the thread again.

      • Understood.

        P.S. Adunai often is provocative.

    • “We have backed the wrong horse in Spain. We would have done better to back the Republicans. They represent the people. We could always have converted these socialists into good National Socialists later. The people around Franco are all reactionary clerics, aristocrats, and moneybags – they’ve nothing in common with us Nazis at all!'”
      – Hitler to Reinhard Spitzy, Ribbentrop’s private secretary in April 1938 (Irving, “Hitler’s War”, p. 60-61)

  3. This is for normies, but doesn’t Soberana have material of more depth (other than that translated on this site)? I’ve read in a few entries that you consider him a genius but I don’t read Spanish.

    • This essay is better than the essays of Steve Sailer and AmRen on IQ and eugenics because of its sarcasm. Also, Sailer & Taylor would never write a profound phrase like the one I italicized within the article above, ‘Humanity was not spiritually prepared for the advent of the modern industrial revolution, technology and health services’.

  4. Franco was informed at the beginning of the war that the Germans were going to lose. That’s why he stayed neutral.

    • @Dan-0-lee, any leaders which were informed that the Germans were going to lose the war the second time around, were most definitely receiving leads from British Intelligence / Agents, and in many cases were partially sponsored or monitored by them.

      This was also true with Mustafa Ataturk, who believed that Hitler was a madman and that he would lose the war because of his Racialist policies, yet the Turks and Ottoman Empire ran into grave difficulties which still persist even today throughout Turkey and the Balkans due to their courtship with the Jews and no Racialist Approach.

      I do not have the highest opinions of Franco or Mussolini (as an Italian myself) because they rejected the Racialist Policies of Germany, and in many cases had protected and made exceptions for certain Jews. The Fascist Movement – and by extension, Falangism modeled from it – were much more rigidly focused on suppressing Communism and Freemasonry, but not necessarily the Jews.

      In any case, with Spain, either way, they were unfit to be a part of the Axis power at that time due to internal strife from the Spanish civil war and their military conditions would not be qualified for the terms of being part of the Axis agreement.

      Even Kaiser Wilhelm II – who I believe was secretly envious of Hitler and his methods – during his exile he criticized that Hitler would lose the war based on using Non-Traditional Methods and the pursuit of his racialist policies for the Reich.

      That being said, all of these leaders who have criticized Hitler and his Non-Traditional approach and style, is that the Old Europe that was hanging on by a thread, required a completely different and dynamic approach to solving problems rather than traditional methods. Only the Germans were capable of reorganizing Europe and in the right direction, but also the other Nations did not understand the intimate conditions and implications the Germans faced. This is why such things as Lebensraum, Racialism, External Threats and what the outside world perceives as “Paranoia” and creating an environment of “Fear” was further amplified by the Jewish control of the press in amplifying pre-existing sentiment about the German situation at that time.

      And from my own understanding of the height of oppression imposed on the Germans, only the Germans had the highest awareness of the implications that the Non-German world would try to create for the Germans had they not fought with the determination and fanaticism required in the mindset for them.

      if you ask me, Hitler and the National Socialists were not fanatical enough! The downfall is that the Germans were too nice, too forgiving and too patient.

      In my opinion, it is worthless to debate whether or not Hitler would lose, even from the standpoint of those leaders, because any leader with honor and properly informed would recognized that they [and Europe] were slated for destruction, and that it would be better off going down even if they fail, rather than waiting around like sitting ducks, ripe for the Bolshevik picking…

      Germans have a lot of major enemies, but also small-scale enemies because even in earlier days, rival powers have always feared the Germans growing big due to envy and the possibilities they would be capable of.

      • Re: Spain I agree with you.

        The biggest flaw in Spanish culture is that they fail to recognize how the old Visigothic Hispania committed, in the 7th century, a sin against the holy ghost thru miscegenation—and that a thousand years later that foundational sin would be recreated exponentially in the Americas.

        The whole culture of the Iberian peninsula is charlatanry from the racial viewpoint.

      • @rhnegatives

        You wrote,
        “This was also true with Mustafa Ataturk, who believed that Hitler was a madman and that he would lose the war because of his Racialist policies…”

        What’s your source for this claim? Ataturk has actually been compared with Hitler (by the Duchess of Windsor) and Hitler evidently held him in high esteem and as a model to emulate.

        > I do not have the highest opinions of Franco or Mussolini (as an Italian myself) because they rejected the Racialist Policies of Germany, and in many cases had protected and made exceptions for certain Jews.

        Can you account for the Italian people’s enthusiasm for Mussolini, which was reported by Hans Baur to have eclipsed the German people’s enthusiasm for Hitler’s?

      • @ Janus.

        Read my sticky post ‘Please, from now on…’

        I’ll let this comment of yours pass for this time. But henceforward only on-topic comments will be allowed in every single thread.

      • Yes, I noticed it right after I had made that comment. Alright.

  5. Fascism is not related to National Socialism. Indeed, NS predates fascism and is fundamentally a million-fold superior. Fascism, as in Italian fascism, appears to have been a man’s attempt at pure self-aggrandizement using any reactionary militant he could find to get into power. Mussolini didn’t even participate in the March on Rome. He left that to the Quadrumvirs while he stayed in Milan. With little wonder his rule brought little, if any, good to what was essentially an artificial country forged from different and unconnected folks.
    Compare that to Hitler, who ever so selflessly dedicated himself to his cause. Even with the little power he possessed in the 1920s he still went Hall to Hall and city by city so that anyone could see him. When it came to physical strife Hitler [unlike Mussolini] not only served in the war but also joined the fray on his rivals like an actual Kshatriya. In 1921 Hitler and a few other NS-men beat the shits out of the christfag Otto Ballerstedt of the worthless Bayernbund “separatist party” to teach the puny punk not to resurrect what cannot come back. When Hitler got power Ballerstedt had not learned his lesson and was shot. Mussolini on the other hand? A draft-dodger who spent time with Bolsheviks in Switzerland instead of the war. I don’t even think Mussolini ever fired a shot in anger let alone risked his own life.

    Comparing fascist/para-fascist leaders to Hitler is like comparing Truman Capote to John Carter.

    • Off topic—please read the whole thread or my new article posted an hour ago.

  6. Industrialisation is precisly what renders eugenics an absolute necessaty in order to prevent inferior genes to survive.

    Of course this is why the current Jew regime is absolutely mortified by the idea of eugenics.

    Something or someone created this beautiful planet with all its life. The inevitable outcome had to be intelligent life forms. If those intelligent life forms, designated by evolution to establish the highest possible understanding of creation – do not prevent their own extinction by inferior life forms – by keeping the latter on artificial life support – they are sinning against the creator’s will and will be punished for it. Sounds almost religious, right? Well, that’s because it should be our religion.

    Even a child can understand this. ( well, a child of superior genes that is )

    Not too long ago, during the 19th century this was well understood by sensible men. But alas, the inferior genes were granted life and are now outnumbering the superior ones. This could very well be a repeating pattern on this planet. Scattered around the globe one can find very ancient – often impossile – megalithic structures built by what once must have been great civilisations. Perhaps they made the same mistakes and were obliterated because of it.

    • > Of course this is why the current Jew regime is absolutely mortified by the idea of eugenics.

      But as always there’s a double standard here, as:

      2 100,000 Jewish immigrant children were experimented on with high lethal doses of radiation in 1951 overseen by Shimon Peres and sponsored by the USA.

      The director general of the Israeli Health Ministry, Dr. Chaim Sheba, flew to America and returned with seven x-ray machines, supplied to him by the American army.

      They were to be used in a mass atomic experiment with an entire generation of Sephardi youths to be used as guinea pigs. Every Sephardi child was to be given 35,000 times the maximum dose of x-rays through his head. For doing so, the American government paid the Israeli government 300 million Israeli liras a year. The entire Health budget was 60 million liras. The money paid by the Americans is equivalent to billions of dollars today.

      To fool the parents of the victims, the children were taken away on “school trips” and their parents were later told the x-rays were a treatment for the scourge of scalpal ringworm. 6,000 of the children died shortly after their doses were given, while many of the rest developed cancers that killed thousands over time and are still killing them now. While living, the victims suffered from disorders such as epilepsy, amnesia, Alzheimer’s disease, chronic headaches and psychosis.

      Because the whole body was exposed to the rays, the genetic makeup of the children was often altered, affecting the next generation. We watch the woman with the distorted face explain, “All three of my children have the same cancers my family suffered. Are you going to tell me that’s a coincidence?”

      The majority of the victims were Moroccan because they were the most numerous of the Sephardi immigrants. The generation that was poisoned became the country’s perpetual poor and criminal class. It didn’t make sense. The Moroccans who fled to France became prosperous and highly educated. The common explanation was that France got the rich, thus smart ones. The real explanation is that every French Moroccan child didn’t have his brain cells fried with gamma rays.

      The film made it perfectly plain that this operation was no accident. The dangers of x-rays had been known for over forty years. We read the official guidelines for x-ray treatment in 1952. The maximum dose to be given a child in Israel was .5 rad. There was no mistake made. The children were deliberately poisoned.

      David Deri makes the point that only Sephardi children received the x-rays: “I was in class and the men came to take us on a tour. They asked our names. The Ashkenazi children were told to return to their seats. The dark children were put on the bus.”

      The film presents a historian who first gives a potted history of the eugenics movement [my bold type]. In a later sound bite, he declares that the ringworm operation was a eugenics program aimed at weeding out the perceived weak strains of society. The Moroccan lady is back on the screen. “It was a Holocaust, a Sephardi Holocaust. And what I want to know is why no one stood up to stop it.”

      David Deri, on film and then as a panel member, relates the frustration he encountered when trying to find his childhood medical records. “All I wanted to know was what they did to me. I wanted to know who authorized it. I wanted to trace the chain of command. But the Health Ministry told me my records were missing.” Boaz Lev, the Health Ministry’s spokesman chimes in: “Almost all the records were burned in a fire.”

      We are told that a US law in the late ’40s put a stop to the human radiation experiments conducted on prisoners, the mentally feeble and the like. The American atomic program needed a new source of human lab rats and the Israeli government supplied it. Here was the government cabinet at the time of the ringworm atrocities:

      Prime Minister – David Ben Gurion; Finance Minister – Eliezer Kaplan; Settlement Minister – Levi Eshkol; Foreign Minister – Moshe Sharrett; Health Minister – Yosef Burg; Labor Minister – Golda Meir; Police Minister – Amos Ben Gurion.

      The highest ranking non-cabinet post belonged to the Director General of the Defence Ministry, Shimon Peres.

      That a program involving the equivalent of billions of dollars of American government funds should be unknown to the Prime Minister of cash-strapped Israel is ridiculous. Ben Gurion had to have been in on the horrors and undoubtedly chose his son to be Police Minister in case anyone interfered with them.

      There is one person alive who knows the truth: Shimon Peres. The only way to get to the truth and start the healing is to investigate him for his role in the mass poisoning of over 100,000 Sephardi children and youth.

      This film is known as “The Ringworm Children” and you can see it on YouTube.

      So once more: the Jews committed these crimes and then they accused the Germans of exactly their crimes (just as what happened with Christianity and its apocryphal martyrs, when, in real history, during the 4th and 5th century whites suffered an apocalypse at the hands of Judeo-Christians).

  7. One of many reasons why Germany lost the war was because…

    [rest of the comment removed by admin].

    • Maximus: have you read this?

  8. For many years eugenics has formed the basis of my ideology. Everything written here is resounding truth. The *need* for eugenics has become a desperate thirst. We need it or we will die a rotting, sickening slow death.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: