Thursday 1 April 2010

Eugenics 2010

As regular readers of my blog will be aware, I have a weakness for American cop shows, despite the, diversity quota approved, parallel universe of evil white criminals and honest, law abiding, black victims in which they are set. We all have our own foibles and vices and late evenings will often find me, my Albion knight and a bottle of Shiraz in front of of the TV watching the mindless pap that is CSI, Law and Order or the ludicrous twaddle the Mentalist.

As a result, last weekend I watched an episode of NBC's Law and Order entitled “Birthright”.

I don't know how far we are behind America, but this was part of series 16 with Police Officers Green and Fontana rather than Lupo and Bernard who I understand are this season's black and white detectives.

Whatever the series. anyone who is a regular viewer of Law and Order will be aware that each episode follows a set formula, a crime is committed and is investigated for the first part of the show by mixed race detectives from the New York Police department under the control of the sturdy and black authority figure Lt. Anita Van Buren. After Lt. Van Buren's boys have made their arrest the action moves on to the court case where the accused perpetrator is prosecuted by the indescribably irritating Jack McCoy (Sam Waterston) and the relevant season's interchangeable foxy chick.

Invariably as the show develops some social issue is addressed from a resolutely politically correct standpoint.

However. “Birthright” did not initially appear to be following the usual pattern. What first struck me was that it actually portrayed black people as criminals, committing crimes and actually killing people without some white person pulling the strings. Admittedly the victims were also black rather than white, but this was still revolutionary stuff for NBC.

Of course, the revolution only lasted for the first five minutes of the show, after which we were swiftly jerked back into more familiar territory when the real, and predictably white, villainess made her appearance.

A black female murder suspect died in police custody and the autopsy revealed that she has been sterilised, at which point the story jumped swiftly from, instantly forgotten, black crime to more standard white fascism.

It turned out that a white nurse had been secretly sterilising black women to prevent them from producing unwanted babies. In the eyes of irritating Jack, the latest foxy chick and the Manhattan DA (played bizarrely by US Senator Fred Thompson who appears on screen for about 48 seconds each week saying something profound and politically correct – and on the strength of which tried to stand for president) this was nothing short of eugenics, as practised by the Nazis and an unmitigated evil.

I forget whether the nurse was found guilty or acquitted, I had rather lost interest by that point, and, in any even, it hardly mattered she had already been cast as the irredeemably vile disciple of a morally indefensible doctrine.

It is interesting how often the subject of eugenics pops up in movies, from Gregory Peck's snarling Meggele creating various teenaged Hitler clones, all suitably obnoxious and played by the subsequently unemployable Jeremy Black, in the 1978 movie “The Boys from Brazil” to the futuristic designer babies of “Gattaca”.

In movies, literature and popular culture, eugenics is an easily identifiable symbol of an evil and discredited ideology, and in so far as history is concerned, any hint of a flirtation with that ideology, whether true or not, is guaranteed to destroy the reputation of any historical figure.

The media and Hollywood delight in portraying a belief in eugenics as malevolent and without merit. Which is odd, given that Hollywood and the media are amongst the most fanatical protagonists of modern eugenics.

Eugenics, after all is the study and practice of selective breeding when applied to humans, with the aim of improving the species or changing human genetic qualities. To actively seek to change the racial characteristics of a people for the sake of a political aim is eugenics, irrespective of whether it is achieved by petri-dish or by propaganda.

Where exactly is the difference between the goal of creating a mono-race and that of creating a master race? I submit to you that there is none. Yet it is those who are so ready to decry the master race creating eugenicists of the 1930's who are the primary mono-race engineering fanatics of our age

When, for instance, France's President Sarcozy demanded last year that the French people should intermarry with other races he became in effect Monsieur Eugenics.

Television presenter Andrew Marr may look like a harmless goofy Doofus with his Shrek like ears and amphibian features but he is no friend of his native people. When he stated that widespread and vigorous miscegenation was the best answer for the British people
he was advocating selective inter-breeding as such he was advocating eugenics.

Day after day we are beset with propaganda promoting the joys of interracial sex, especially the tedious stereotype of the black man and the white tart, which I have addressed here before.

Much of it is crude and obnoxious. I, for one, will never buy a bed from “Dreams”after watching all those adverts showing mixed race couple in bed together exchanging jewelry and lustful glances. (I hope others will join me in that boycott.)

However, Dreams adverts are only slightly more offensive than all the other inter-racial sex promotions which are deliberately pumped into our lives day after day, and a lot of it is more subtle.

Mixed race couples are presented as role models to our children. Does anyone really believe that a woman, such as Cheryl Cole, who's tiny chin and huge forehead make her resemble nothing so much as a praying mantis, would have reached such an elevated celebrity status had she not jumped into bed with a black football player and thus become the nation's sweetheart?

Klum and Seal's White trash wedding

Why is it always the likes of Heidi Klum who are wheeled out to climb all over her black husband, seemingly frantic to the point of psychosis to prove how sexy she finds him, if not as more of the same mixed race marketing? (Klum's motives and prejudices were rather exposed when she and Seal decided upon a “white trash” theme to their wedding, and I suspect that there is some white man in her past whom she is desperate to hurt)

It is not just the media, Hollywood movies and commercial advertising which constantly thrust a fake mixed race ideal down the throat of an impressionable public. Walk into any local government office, branch of the health service or educational facility, pick up a leaflet and in nine out of ten a mixed race couple will beam out at you, whilst the child model of choice will be the interbred product of such a union.

Within our schools the proselytising is unremitting, as a female teenager in the 1980's I can testify that, even back then, the pressure to sleep with a black or brown man just to prove you were not racist was intense, and I am sure that it is now ten times worse. I personally did not capitulate, but there were many who did, and I don't think it was always by choice.

The pressure did not only come from black and brown students, sleeping with a member of a different race was presented, by those tasked with guiding our minds, as an act of free thinking rebellion, whereas, in fact, it was the new conformity.

Anyone who fails to appreciate that interracial sex is being actively encouraged by the establishment, by politicians, by the media and by those educating our children is deluding themselves. That it is happening is undeniable and it is happening for a political purpose.

Were I to be charitable I would suggest that those advocating mass inter-breeding share the demented belief that by genetically engineering a huge homogeneous mono-race we will irradiate conflict, others might suggest that their motives are far less benevolent and that they are fully aware of the disaster they are inciting.

World history shows how flawed is the belief a racial melting pot will end conflict. Look to Northern Ireland, to Rwanda, to Kenya, to the seething hatred between Middle Eastern factions, indeed to World War II and you can see that removing race from the equation does not remove conflict.

However, it was ever the mark of the political zealot to ignore reality in favour of an ideological dream.

If you were to mention eugenics to the average man or woman in the street today, most will think of the Nazis or maybe white supremacists, the better informed might refer to the social theories propounded in the 1930, and maybe mention Margaret Sanger, Marie Stopes, H.G. Wells or George Bernhard Shaw and other long dead supporters of a long discredited science. Few, if any, will speak of it as something impacting on their own lives today.

However, the active promotion of selective breeding in order to achieve a political and racial outcome is alive and well today, and now, in 2010, it assails us on all sides. The proponents of 21st Century eugenics are the most powerful pressure groups of our age. They seek to change us biologically and ethnically. Their aims are no longer achieved in the laboratory but through the tools of the propagandist and the might of the state, and, so far, their success has been phenomenal.

We are living now through the second age of eugenics but this time the damage will be far less easy to repair.



Tim Johnston said...

Excellent, Sarah.

Jonah Goldberg points out that Eugenics was always, historically, a "Progressive" i.e. Left Wing phenomenon, and Welfare is its lasting legacy.

I still enjoy American cop shows though.. it's all about suspension of disbelief :)

John McNeill said...

Well said, Sarah! :)

I think this article sums up the agenda of globalists, or rather that they see world-wide miscegenation as the way to make world government possible.

Dr Shipman voted Tory said...

I know you are going to agree with me on this when most folk would say i should be locked up for saying it.
But we both know that after being accused of being a racist someone close to Cheryl Cole, probably her manager, would have said "better get a black boyfriend quick if you want to get your career back on track"
The same with baby spice, someone would have approached her manager and said "If you can get baby spice to get a black boyfriend or even better marry a blackman, we can get you both alot of work".
These women have married these blackmen just to get more work, they have conned them.

John McNeill said...

I wonder how successful they will be, though. I've heard from various sources that there aren't as many mixed-race marriages as some were hoping. It also seems that the more diverse an area is, the less likely the races are willing to integrate. I can relate to this observation from personal experience. I currently reside in Iowa, and see a lot more interracial dating than I do in my old homestate of CT, which has had an explosion in the minority population.

Still, it's really up to my generation which will determine whether or not interracial dating will become a greater trend.

alanorei said...

Re: I can testify that, even back then, the pressure to sleep with a black or brown man just to prove you were not racist was intense etc.

I wonder what those who yielded to the pressure would say now.

Consider this case study:

My sister married an Indian businessman. One day, years later, my sister saw their daughter with a toy she didn't recognize. My niece told my sister that a woman friend of Daddy's had given her the toy.

When my sister confronted my then brother-in-law, he shrugged and said casually "all the guys have mistresses."

I guess they did. Cheryl's ex-other half certainly did.

Sceptics may argue that "a bit on the side" has always been popular in our own 'culture.'

Maybe but it is stupid to make a bad situation worse, especially when miscegenation via racial integration inevitably results in racial extinction - see comments to your blog, Sarah, 28/02/09 and 27/08/09.

But stupidity ought not to be a defence in law.

All teachers responsible for promoting race-mixing should therefore be charged with genocide. I hope one day they will be.

I believe that this crime is a capital offence.

Perhaps the leading English icon of race-mixing was the late Priness Di (Di-con?).

She was also a leading advocate (by example) of fornication and adultery, which are also nation wreckers, according to the British 19th century anthropologist J.D. Unwin.

As we know, Princess Di-con got wrapped around the 13th pillar of the Alma Tunnel and died soon afterwards.

She was a stark testimony to the truth of Hebrews 13:4, KJB*:

*Di's ex-other half has a high regard for the KJB. I think that's probably most if not all of what keeps him going.

"Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge."

Note, not "might judge" but "will judge."

Di's number eventually came up. So will those of all her imitators.

misterfox said...

There is an organisation in Germany(typically) that introduces interacial couple for marriage and child rearing. They do not tell of how many female victims of serious violence they have caused!

Tim Johnston said...

Peer pressure aside, anyone who bows to the propaganda is probably so dumb they won't be missed in the gene pool. In fact, in this way, liberal genes might just get eugenicked out!

In any case, if you've had the pleasure of reading so-called "Antiracist" scribblings, you'll know that having a black partner does not insulate you from being a racist, for some reason.
I've seen lot of mixed couples around, but I wonder how many actually marry and reproduce?

Anonymous said...

Producing half caste children in my opinion is child abuse.
What kind of life will these children have, it must be a nightmare.
Their own mothers have cursed them from birth.

Dr.D said...

Alanorei, I am baffled by your two statements:

*Di's ex-other half has a high regard for the KJB. I think that's probably most if not all of what keeps him going.

"Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge."

One word that pops immediately to mind when I read these two is: Camilla. Somehow, I have a hard time seeing Charles being overly faithful to Scripture in this area. Perhaps you have more insight that I need to hear.

misterfox said...

A little known fact is that in inner cities esp. those with a large amount of young Black "youths" mixed race children identify with them and often hate their White mothers.

Anonymous said...

One thing you notice in the USA - low white women may take black males, but you almost NEVER see a white man with a black girl. Why?

The white man better understands and resists the propaganda onslaught - "I want my kids to look like ME!"


alanorei said...

Thanks, Dr D.

I admit I am being speculative but the Prince is still with us and, in spite of whatever else could be said of him, I believe he cares about his subjects.

I think he also cares about the old KJB, given that he is patron of the 2011 Trust, set up to celebrate (their word) the 400th anniversary of the KJB next year.

From what he has said about the KJB in the past, I believe his commitment to it is genuine.

By contrast, regardless of any profession to the contrary, no other national leader e.g. Brown, Cameron, Clegg, could give the proverbial two monkeys', either about the KJB or the Prince's subjects, except for their votes.

Certainly something is keeping the Prince going, in spite of his appalling deference for heathen religions, e.g. Islam.

I can only think of his regard for the KJB as a possible explanation.

I guess God just has to work on him for a bit, like He has to with any of us.

Re: Charles and Camilla, yes, the Prince was an adulterer, like David, who killed Goliath, saved his nation from enemy invasion and wrote up to 149 of the 150 Psalms in the Old Testament.

The scripture's evaluation is simply this:

"For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God" Romans 3:23.

As for Camilla and Charles being faithful over the long haul, your guess is as good as mine, I guess. I would simply make that a matter of prayer as well and do, I trust, in the light of 1 Timothy 2:1-4, my emphasis:

"I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."

Maybe if more of us, i.e. professing Christians in the UK, took those scriptures seriously, our nation would not be in the ungodly mess that it is.

Dr.D said...

Alanorei, thank you for your expanded comments. That helps considerably.

Potgieter, it would be a mistake to say that white men never bed black women; it does happen (why I will never understand). They are very, very rarely seen with them in public, however, because of the scandal attached to it. As you note, however, white women taking up with black men has been come the way to attract attention. This is particularly important to those with low self esteem, who see themselves with little or nothing to offer. What a shame!

Dr.D said...

Alanorei, just a short second comment on Charles:

Has he written anything comparable to Psalm 51?

brian boru said...

Sarah, I am sure that you know that the frantic program to encourage miscegination is a conscious genocidal effort on the part of the enemies of all life, not only that of white people.

Anonymous said...

It all only makes sense once you accept that the whites are the Biblical Israelites. Once you accept this, every day brings more proof.

Anonymous said...

Who the hell is Cheryl Cole?

Anonymous said...

And, if her choice to marry a non-white footballer is such a tragedy (due to the tendency of non-whites to cheat on/devalue their spouses), then how would you explain the antics of white sportsmen who do the same?

Mr. Shiny and New said...

I bet you won't publish this comment, but I have to speak out.

I am always shocked when I read material such as what you have posted here. This is pure illogic on so many levels.

First, the fact that some people marry outside their race is not a sign of a eugenics conspiracy. Did it occur to you that sometimes two people fall in love despite coming from different ethnic backgrounds? In Toronto, where I come from, it is considered perfectly normal for two people of dissimilar races to date or marry. Yet it is also completely unremarkable for two people of the same race to marry as well. There is no eugenics plot or even idea. Nobody is trying to make a common race or master race or anything. It just sometimes works out that two people get together, because they want to. There are fewer cultural barriers now so that's why it is more common. Don't confused the past norms with "right" and the present situation with "wrong" just because they've changed.

Second, it's extremely ignorant to claim that some woman is using a mixed-race marriage for some advantage. The truth is that some women, of all races, use their husbands for advantage, despite their husband's race. If it happens that you have an actual example of a woman who marries outside her race and uses this as a tool, that doesn't prove anything. You are suffering from confirmation bias. How many times did a woman marry outside her race and NOT use this as a tool? You have to look at the whole picture before you leap to conclusions.

Finally, I don't know what messed-up highschool you went to, but did you seriously have "pressure to sleep with a black or brown guy to prove you weren't racist"? That is insane. Maybe it was the 80s, maybe it was your school, maybe it was your city, but this is simply not the norm in society today. And do you think this "pressure" is evidence that some global powers were trying to influence the future genetics of humanity, by targeting your school? Yeesh, that's simply absurd. I CAN think of some way that human genetics could be improved and it DOESN'T involve you reproducing.

Revisionist said...

Interesting comments on TV cop shows. Everyone who watches these things, and the news, and 'documentaries', and soaps knows what you mean.

BUT is there anyone or any organisation that keep summaries of plots? I've quite often tried to work with other revisionist types, but I could never find any very energetic ones. Is there anyone who notes down, reliably, what's in the evening BBC news? Or makes summaries of such programmes as 'Casualty' etc etc?

The media watch university departments of course can't be expected to be even minimally honest; nor I think does the BBC despite it astronomical budget ever give summaries of its shitty output.

Revisionist said...

On the specific subject of eugenics, can I make the point that the word is supposed to mean 'good genes'. (Greek eu prefix = good). The opposite is 'dysgenics'. I'd suggest the proponents of mixed races support dysgenics. Incidentally the USSR's 'communists' (a codeword) killed off virtually the entire intelligent stratum of Russia. This, also, was deliberate policy.

alanorei said...

Thank you for your comments, Dr. D.

Re: Psalm 51, Charles hasn't advanced that far yet. It's a good scripture for everyone, of course.

pi31416 said...

No-one here has looked yet at the flip side of eugenics: cacogenics.

I found a prime example of it some years ago, which I summed up HERE

Granted, it did not work out too well. But if we keep trying...?

Anonymous said...

Kakiogenics would be what the kakiocracy has in mind for us.

"A total of 63,000 people, mostly women, were sterilized in Sweden from 1935 to 1975 based on eugenics and the desire to weed out "inferiors" to create a stronger Swedish race."

Alberta introduced eugenics in 1928 and British Columbia in 1934.

Remember this next time you hear it just being associated with the Nazis.

Anonymous said...

Hanging Solar Lights
Find Cheap Prices Due to [url=;u=31039]Solar Patio Lights[/url]
[url=;action=profile;u=174697]Outdoor Solar Lighting[/url]

James "The Irishman" said...

Okay, I'll start out by saying the progressive movement does try to mold public opinion through TV shows and advertisement; and that game is sad, especially since human beings are drawn very easily into memes and doing what's "in".
However, I resent your opinion on miscegenation; I do, furthermore, believe everyone has a right to an opinion, even if it's opposing to my own views. I don't care what color you think the sky is, it's your right to see it as you will.
I am of re-undiluted Irish descent (Irish/English, interbred with other Irish lineage); my wife, is mostly black and white in lineage. We are both card carrying Republicans, and die-hard libertarians (if what you do doesn't affect me, I could care less). Nobody told us that we should get together to make a slave-race for the coming New World Order, we didn't feel as if our marriage was obligation to the world to help "mix the jellybeans" for racial diversity. My wife, who I am madly in love with, is a beautiful woman, both inside and out; as one of God's children, like all the rest of us, she is very loved by her creator, even if she is vilified by her earthbound neighbors.
She, you may find this to be a surprise, didn't have much say during her conception on who the contributing genes would come from. Considering she has spent a life full of questions like "What ARE you?" from black people, and hearing from white people, "Interbreeding is wrong, those children will be dammed", you make her existence nothing but a pleasure. Should she have been aborted? Would that have made her inconvenience to all of you, any better? Do you know she was given up for adoption, not because of the Progressive agenda, but because of the stipulation that was associated with her "unclean" existence. Her adopted parents thought she was Hispanic when they took her think, the devil spawn growing up in a white household, not knowing or caring what her background was until her late teens. She is routinely asked, are you Italian, Filipina, Mexican, or just really tan? Does it matter? I guess were she a spray-tanned orange white person, or a brownish-homogeneous indigenous race she'd be okay. You know, God put genes in us to prevent "interbreeding"; what happens to the Mule's ability to reproduce, or the Beefalo? But for some odd reason, animals of the same SPECIES, dogs, cats, birds of many varieties, breed readily, and, whoa, prepare for your mind to be blown, the effects of genetic stagnation (AKA, inbreeding) seem to fall off of the map. Albinism, sickle cell, mental retardation, cancers, all seem to prevail in those who share a predominantly homogenous racial background. Weird, huh? It's like God didn't want us loving our relatives, even if their skin color is the same.

James "the Irishman" said...

Cultural differences, like "other wives" for the Indian fella? Thank God there is no cultural differences between Polish people and Spaniards, nor any difference between Pakistani's and Indian people. But wait, their skin colors are the same...? Someone should tell them they need to get along, and 'get along' too, since they all look the same.
Ever had a German Shepard, why do they all have hip dysplasia? Why are many Dalmatians deaf? Oh yeah, genetic stagnation...Good thing that dogs don't "interbreed"; we'd run out of German Shepherds and Dalmatians! Wait, do they still have Dalmatians around? Oh, cause our mutt is part dalmatian, and we were gonna put her to sleep because of her genetic impurities, but I guess it's okay if there's still a couple of dalmatians around.
I get the message of your blog entry loud and clear, Filipinos, Mexicans, Central Americans, people of the Caribbean, and you too Tiger Woods, all go do us all a favor and just jump off a cliff. After all, since the Spaniards went around the world conquesting native women, there's too many brownish people, and the Spanish went extinct centuries ago all thanks to their sexual indiscretion.
Here's a good KJB verse for all of you racial purists, remember how Lot's daughters got pregnant? Genesis 19:30-38...Yeah, pretty gross, huh? And they left Sodom and Gomorrah because of their purity, good thing they kept their race pure, too.
You should ask a genetic science major what pheromones attract a female to a male partner (hint: the genes most unlike those of her genetic father, to strengthen the gene pool). I guess we'll all have to write angry letters to God for making us that way...what do I know though, Putin & the Commies must have already gotten to me.
Rapists, murderers, thieves, liars, and our damned son, for being of a mixed heritage; I'll just have to pay for my sins of being a loving father and husband (after I'm done beating my wife for looking different than I); I'll wave to you guys from hell I suppose, even Christ can't forgive me for mixing the jellybeans...