Fecundity: The Natural Act of Survival

L’amour et Psyche


The Process of Genetics and Eugenics

by Frank L. DeSilva

It is a safe position, although much maligned, to say that it is colour, which is the basic line of self-defense for the ‘group’. This is to say, that if a group wishes to stay the same, to stay intact, both in physical appearance and in mental attitudes, it must remain itself for as long as it can. It is through ‘extreme’ exogamous mating [marriages], which create, and allow new mutations to occur which will, inevitably, change the literal complexion and mental outlook of a people. These newly combined factors can, in certain instances (e.g. Celto-Nordic, or Germano-Iberian crossings) be considered good, or acceptable – the passing example of the British Isle may suffice, inasmuch as this island people, a Celtic stock, being fiercely loyal to their chief and tribe, nevertheless intermarried with, and fostered relations with, the Nordic invaders with which they had many years of contact, and which changed their ‘alpine’ physiology in terms of height and bone structure, and added brunettes to their lot, along with a more ‘lineal’ or mathematical sense of reasoning, this is bourne out by the fact that unlike the ‘continental’ alpine’s, this island people have developed an empire which contradicts the legacy of the Gauls.  The other side of these formulae may be cited as well, that of the Island of Cuba which is defined as a Mulatto population, which was settled by mariners of European extraction, and held for many years, only to destroy, or rather ‘consume’ these settlers, and allow for the re-introduction of the non-European through mixture of the two diverse bloods. Let the reader be the judge in this example.

Even when isolation, considered as a natural or enforced ‘social form’, is safe to say that man, as a specie, has changed greatly; whether this change has its origins in ‘creation’ (i.e. dispersion after the deluge) or evolution makes little difference. The differences in the races of man are manifest. Commonality, to be sure, is also to be seen, yet one must not simply lump all together, melted as it were, into the morass of the ‘common man’ of the Modern. This would be to falsify the entire history of the Cultures of Man, and would seek to achieve a perspective that has no real basis in fact or truth. In short, it would be a ‘great lie’ used by those who would seek to control the presence of the races of man. To this ‘great’ mission, the Modern ever seeks to complete.

Western man, in particular, seeks always to change his environment; he views himself in the same fashion. Man does, indeed, have the ability to change himself, to modify for better or worse, his conditions of social, cultural, scientific or physiological make-up. Nature lifts her eyebrow in anticipation.

With the present· progress of genetics, as a defined science, not as clear and precise as eugenics perhaps, but well on it way, and on its own two feet, we have gained much knowledge on how such changes may be accomplished. Is there a limit to the changes that may be effected by [genetic] selection? This question may be eternally unanswered, for the debate is a heated one. Fixed ‘creationists’ would say that deviation from the ‘parent stock’ is limited by the act of creation itself. Conversely, those who ascribe to the evolutionary processes at work in man are convinced that no limits may be placed upon modification of the species through variation and selection. As a rule, improvement in the specie is accomplished quite rapidly, yet tends to stabilize to almost a walk within several generations. Each particular stock is affected differently in the extent that it can be modified upward. Thanks to such men as Galton and Mendel, we know that Hereditary Diversity is responsible for modification – whether that be upward or downward:

“If a species contains a great deal of hereditary diversity, or is, as the geneticists call it, heterozygous for many factors affecting the character in question, it may readily be changed by selection, and the limit of modification is not so easily reached.”[1]

So it is that man, because he is of a diversified heredity, is a highly modifiable animal. It is true that the most diverse races of man can interbreed; their independent progeny produce offspring, which, in turn, can reproduce. Hence, inter-race crossings produce limitless possibilities for the production of ‘new’ varieties of human kind. One must, however, take into account that these ‘crossings’ may produce breeds [of man] that are superior to the highest existing breeds and, as well, such breeds that are inferior to the lowest of existing races of man. Indeed, almost any amount of creating may be reached through such diverse crossings.

Through variation and selection for instance, we are able to produce albino’s, six-fingered hands and the like if we wished; but this would be simple carnival tricks, not to mention the affrontive demeanor facilitated by nature and common moral sense were we to attempt this for no other reason than to simply ‘do’ this creation – to satisfy some aspect of our ego. The higher duty of man however, is to become noble; thus do we have the science of eugenics and genetics. With this knowledge, we may strive to create strong bodies, mental aptitudes, and inherent spiritual qualities that lay dormant among those of the West.

There should be absolutely no limits placed on the acceptance of Eugenics other than common sense and moral imperatives. Through recent studies as diverse as Olympic and National athletic committees and championships, the recognition due as to the part played by genetics in ‘superior’ athletes is enormous. Such examples of male and female participants in these events will include well known figures such as Arnold Swartzeneger and Cory Everson, who have been praised by competitors and critics alike as being the ‘perfect’ athletic specimens; geneticists, as well, remark that their bodily ‘form’ is favored by ‘good genes’. The professional athlete knows that his/her endowment with success is partly his own doing, but the rest, is that natural edge given him by his ancestors who passed the rigors of ‘selection’ and ‘variation’. Somewhere in his/her line [family tree] they had ancestors who were marked by large shoulders and chests, coupled with a strong back for pushing and puling motions; through various isolated areas geographically, his ancestors climbed high mountains, rowed long-hulled ships, or swung axe and hammer to achieve, with time, those traits which were then passed on to their progeny – their future generations. These are good [practical] traits.

Like all aspects of human nature however, good is only part of a duality in nature. There is no exception in eugenics. Traits can, and will always be, both good and bad. Of course, these may be and, of necessity, are subjective to either the individual or group represented based, also, upon the subjective analysis of the ‘other’ group. In either case of ‘subjective’ approval, these ‘traits’, whatever they may be are, or can be, bred into man. Conversely, they can alsobe bred out of man. Among the bad traits accountable to heredity, there are ‘manic-depressives’, ‘insanity’, ‘epilepsy’, and the feeble-minded. All these cases can be attributed to the Mendellian frequency rates mapped out by Mendel. In these various cases, especially those of insanity and feeble-mindedness, the high probability exists that inherited factors are consistently present. When, as the case may demand, two feeble-minded individuals decide to mate, owing that both contain similar defects in their make-up then, in all likelihood, they can expect [through the Mendellian frequency rate] that a majority of their offspring, also, to be feeble-minded, even as they; the exceptions which will, in all probability occur, does not mitigate the fact that the ‘trend’ will be, also, that of a ‘negative’ not a ‘positive’. Indeed, a natural antithesis abides in all of us on this subject. In point of fact, the policies of most Western nations prohibit the mating of ‘insane’ people; therefore, so should we also consider the sound and determined reasoning, which supports the contention, and reasonable observations, which make it clear that ‘feeble-minded’ individuals be included in that number.

The ‘natural’ fate accompanying all ‘civilizations’ is to rise and decline; what makes exceptional cultures is how they live. Our civilization and culture may, perhaps, escape this common fate because it has at its disposal the unlimited resources of science. But science deals exclusively with the forces of intelligence. Intelligence, as a priori, deals exclusively with the forces of intelligence. Intelligence never ‘urges’ men to action unless it is in the abstract; only through ‘emotive’ energy can this action take place, however much intelligence plays a part. Put another way: Intelligence ‘may lead’ one down a particular path, but would never ‘rationally’ put one in harm’s way – only the duality of emotion will lead to this end. Only fear, enthusiasm, self-sacrifice, hatred, and love can infuse with ‘life’ the products of our mind, which will allow for action, to either ‘defend’, or ‘attack’ as the situation warrants. This is Idealism in its truest and purest form. It is what the ‘post’ fratricidal warriors and academics of the West had hoped for; to create, and infuse the same ‘idealism’ in the hearts and minds of the people of the ‘allies’ as had the Germans and the Italians with their people. They hoped that the ‘democracies’ would succeed in this endeavor for the ‘good’, where the ‘others’ had succeeded for the ‘bad’. Ironic, is it not, that it was the parent nations of these democracies which were now to receive the brunt of her children’s anger and misdirection. The vacuum thus created by the destruction of the ‘idealists’ in Europe has not seen a return in the West of the Modern’s making. There is no fire, no passion, in the heart and soul of the West today. It is to that ambiguous ‘world-order’, and to those who would create it, that ever seeks and clings to a ‘faith’, of any stripe, and then fed to the ‘un-washed’ masses. The power of the genius, that true and perfect culture of ‘personality, is aborted before any bud may flower. [Any ‘similarity’ of this reasoning present in the West today is not, in the context implied in this work, applicable to any modern western statesman or government]

Like all organisms however, the West seeks to save itself from destruction and has already secreted that special seed necessary for its future growth; it has already been placed in that place, forgotten by the modern, and will thus revive its ancient memories in the most unlikely places, or in those very places considered most likely, but unseen.

To the Noble man, wherever he may be found, consistent with his desire to better his fellow man, as well as with himself, his utmost concern lies most heavily on the mental abilities of his race-culture, with his blood. This includes both the ‘reasoning and intuitive’ aspects of human psychology. Intelligence cannot be taught in school, it can only by disciplined and refined. Through a rigorous application of eugenics, a more healthy and vibrant race-culture can be realized. This is the duality of a Noble People. Like Art, it is to beauty to which a healthy people are drawn. To ‘ugliness’ then, are healthy people repulsed. Physical beauty is no different, for it is the ‘obvious’ bait by which the impulse to procreate is born.

Science terms young and beautiful vitality as ‘paedomorphy’. This is defined as the ‘radiance’ seen in the youth of a vigorous people; that fresh rosy-cheeked flame of idealism and unconquerable spirit held by youth of indomitable horizons. We are drawn, as individuals, and as a group, instinctively, to young and healthy partners. This has determined the largest fecund rate for the longest period of time; that is, young ‘races’ and individuals start young, and thence procreate for longer periods, making the ‘national character’ a young one. This breeds vitality, that excess so much needed in the future West.

Over the thousands of aeons, which have passed into history, this has simply been the evolutionary wisdom of survival.

Early man, for instance sought, or over a period of time did seek, the healthiest, strongest, and most beautiful of his mates to continue his kind. Ugly, sickly, or unhealthy, obviously, would not attract the finest and best to extend the specie in proportion that the healthy would or could. In fact, Culture depends directly on our ‘biological predilections’.

We term ‘biological predilections’ as taste.

Taste is personal, and instinctive. It is bred over the millennia and ingrained into our social mores, art, and forms of affinity we all share in our human experience. It is ‘racism’ in its purest form – not the crass impostor called racism by the mixed mass of the Modern; his multitudes of diversity. The foundation of race-culture, of this racism, is genetic to be sure, and is the wellspring of ‘how’ a race sees itself. It is self-evident and natural to all save the Modern. The example by which, for instance, certain elements of the Orient’s admiration for ‘blondes’ which, at least in part, reflects their admiration of the [Western] technics of our Military and Industrial power; a fact which does not keep this tenacious race-culture from attempting to supplant these powers of the West with their own might and power. And the African, in like fashion, who does not love or admire this power but, rather, hates this emblem of power and achievement. There is a natural harmony here, which the Modern ever seeks to hide from those he would govern, and that is found even these extremes of ‘love’ and ‘hate’. Sex appeal, vitality, and health, are all seen from the subjective eyes of the beholder; and himself the mirror, reflections of what he, himself, sees. This, in any event, is a matter of taste. It reflects the inborn quality of distinction.

Physical beauty, in a general sense, reflects intelligence. Mental achievements correspond to that of physical achievements in general – the modern ‘myth’ of the dumb blonde not withstanding. The antecedent probability exists that mind and body are associated by heredity; science indicates* as much. This was generally accepted prior to the second war of fratricide. To the Modern however, this concept of heredity is distasteful precisely because it competes with the egalitarian dogma of environment over that of heredity – hence the assumed ‘equal and fair’ representations of all peoples. While the Law, to some degree, can ‘conceive’ of equal and fair treatment, its force and form is defined by the very genetic inheritance, which has formed its very foundation [e.g. Anglo-Saxon common law, and Dane Law, not to mention our usage of Greek and Romanic Law, which is the basis for all Western law, comes to mind. FLS]. Difference does, however, exist amongst the various members (i.e. governments) of the West, not to mention those not of western stock. These differences exist despite the numerous attempts, sincere though they may be, of various individuals, governments, or groups, which would make it so. The tremendous mosaic of the earth and her peoples fly in the face of the Modern, despite the foreign attempts of ‘patchwork’ designs created by minds that are far removed from waking reality. The ‘betrayal’ by the governments of the West in Bosnia-Herzegovina  – at best a temporary reprieve – at worst, a trend which will overthrow the West as we know it; the storm which has appeared upon the horizon of our shores is in direct response to the Modern’s injection of ‘compromise’, misplacing the historical epochs of our tradition, and filing them with the other ‘antiquated’ forms of traditional knowledge, is a good case in point.

In due course, genius is also a product of heredity. The Family, as ‘unit’, being a prerequisite to a sound environment, and strong constitution, is attached with still more importance in this context. A sound family unit will, in accordance with the laws of heredity, be well suited in type and disposition, if they are to produce a more well-proportioned and higher individual who is physically and mentally superior to both their parents. In the country of the origin of this work, America, we have seen a steady and ineluctable decline in those intelligent and well proportioned matings (i.e. conformation, height, weight, hair and eye colour) which will assure a more vital and vigorous people, of higher intellectual capacities, and nobility of ‘spirit’. Their inevitable progeny, likewise, have suffered. Since the ‘sixties’, this deceleration of intellectual momentum, as a trend, has manifested itself in almost every stratum of American Education and I.Q. levels:

“When people die, they are not replaced one for one by babies who will develop identical IQ’s. If the new babies grow up to have systematically higher or lower IQ than the people who die, the national distribution of intelligence changes. Mounting evidence indicates that demographic trends are exerting downward pressure on the distribution of cognitive ability in the United States and that the pressures are strong enough to have social consequences.

Throughout the West, modernization has brought falling birth rates. The rates fall faster for educated women than the uneducated. Because education is so closely linked with cognitive ability, this tends to produce a dysgenic effect, or a downward shift in the ability distribution. Further more, education leads women to have their babies later – which alone also produces additional dysgenic pressures.”[2]

The above statement does not shed new light on the subject, many before these authors have given their lives in the pursuit of truth, and paid very dearly for making them known, once again, to their fellows. The two authors quoted above, have suffered in their own right for speaking what studious research has told them. This subject, lest we forego our train of thought, is based more on a ‘demographic’ model, and we will attach more interest to it later on. We find, essentially, the same ‘trend’ wherever we turn among the professional and intellectual classes. Lawyers, professors, engineers, ministers, inventors, bankers, artists, educators, military men [who the nation depends upon for national protection], writers, all represent ‘stock’ which make up the masses of our nation.

Professor Dublin, writing long before the above-mentioned authors, stated clearly that this ‘stock’ as a trend was marching downward, because of a lack of fecundity. For the moment, let us add:

“There is only one conclusion to be drawn: these groups are not reproducing themselves. These people and their stocks are quickly dying out and their place is being taken by a new generation who are the offspring of our fertile immigrants… We are now making the stock out of which the new America will arise… Whether we like it or not, the people of America will look different, act differently, and be different from those who made our country great. And all this because of the facts of reproduction and heredity.”[3]

Let the reader make up his or her mind on the above-mentioned statements. Look around; see with your own eyes what is true and what is not.

Copyright ~ Rise of The West

  • · See article [Smithsonian, Feb. 1990, pg. 41]: ‘James Watson and the search for Biology’s Holy Grail’ – an ongoing fifteen year effort to map all the genes of every human chromosome.

[1] Holmes, op. Cit., pg. 8.

* See Indices for a list of a ‘Who’s Who’ in the field of genetics, anthropology, and the like who promote the concept of heredity in intelligence over that of strictly an ‘environmental’ factor. FLS

This issue of ‘ethnic cleansing’ with which the Modern has held out for the Western world to see is another lie. In point of fact, it is an ‘extra-European’ affair, and has afflicted the West for several thousands of years: the ‘religio-racial’ implications of Islam v. Christianity. In a purer sense, it is the age-long conflict between Semitic [even of ‘indo-European’] and European forces. The geographical implications of the Balkans is too complex for this work, but do not fail to see the interactions between those members of an Islamic tradition and, thereby fail to see the ‘Christian’ tradition which is, and shall always be, in conflict with it.

For the government of the American West to ‘slip’ so badly, by taking the ‘egalitarian’ position of ‘protecting’ a certain side against the ‘founders’ of civilization in this area of the world is, to say the least, the worst sort of political and moral machinations which, as time has bourne out, has set the course of this, our Nation, into the very real possibility of a collapse of Western hegemony in an area which has historically been the bulwark – the wall if you will – against the very ‘ideals’ which has put us at odds with the other nations of the earth, rather than supporting our allies/people to stem the rising tide of fanatical religious incursions into our own territory and beyond.

Historically, it may be added, the West has always had a symbiotic relationship with the Arab – his religious technics not withstanding – and has a shared historicity predating Al Farabi, and Ibn Fadlan. We left them alone, and they left us alone, if not coming into contact on those occasions which the West, under some design or another, sought a ‘misplaced’ connection with the territory of the Arab proper. If we are to take sides in this region of the world, let us maintain nothing but a ‘neutral’ position upon the region, whether we are in total agreement with them or not; for our lone ‘ally’, Israel, certainly does not ‘always’ do those things which are in the best interest of America, or the West in general, yet we continue to advance one over the other. This is the ‘cycle’ which the West has ‘committed itself too – but for who’s benefit? Let each American, and each individual member of the West question these policies, and decide for themselves which answer should be given for the ‘advancement’ of the West, and to each ‘localized’ region where each calls his home. Truly, if we fail to address this issue, in its comprehensive form, our grandchildren will be shedding their blood, soaking deep into the sands of shame and uselessness. FLS

[2] R.J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray – The Bell Curve, Free Press [Simon & Schuster] 1996, pg.341.

[3] Dublin, Luis I. – Birth Control – reprinted in Social Hygiene, 1920, cf., pg. 8.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s