21st Century Rape Culture

“A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.”
― Albert Einstein

Is there an environmental “rape culture” in the United States? Yes, of course, there is. Most contemporary ecological problems, or “rape the land” mentality, is deeply rooted in Western patriarchal culture.

Rape (transitive verb) definition for this piece: 1a: (archaic) to seize and take away by force b:despoil 2: to commit rape on

It is the nature of a patriarchal society to dominate and control entities that exist outside of established rules of culture. And we all know who writes the rules – rules that automatically devalue everything perceived as “the other.” In other words, anything not white-heterosexual-male is categorized and marginalized without much thought by the powers that be.

Most of the myth and imagery of the goddess in nature (Mother Earth) as a source of power has been suppressed for centuries. Nature, women, religious, racial and ethnic minorities, indigenous cultures, and homosexuality all get lumped together in “the other” category. Rape culture is slave culture. And what is a slave if not “property,” a commodity to be bought and sold or destroyed if the owner so chooses.

The obvious challenge now is how best to overcome blatant, ubiquitous indifference to rape/slavery of land and men (men and women). Beyond a predictable, but small subset of empaths, will the light go on in time to arrest ecological rape before there’s no nature left?

These days we seem to be plugged into everything artificial. Huge problem. As we plug into more and more technological things – our extensions – the more disconnected from nature we become. The connections that maintain the web of life, the life-force energy that runs through everything, are breaking down. This weakens our relationships to each other.

Blind to our connection, we rush to cut down the forests, turn grasslands into deserts, mine the rock below, and frack everything from Oklahoma to Pennsylvania.

Native Americans tried to warn us. Destroying habitats of wild creatures eventually makes the world uninhabitable for man. We still don’t realize that the web of life has been damaged so much that we are feeling the impact.

Disconnected from the natural world, we have lost our ability of feeling empathy for what is going on. Our obsession with electronic connectivity substitutes reality with an artificial construct. We have been consumed by The Matrix.

The television bombards viewers with a repetitive pattern of flickering images, which creates a passive state quite like hypnosis. Within the first minute of television viewing, brain waves switch from predominantly beta waves – alert and conscious attention – to predominantly alpha waves, indicating an unfocused, receptive lack of attention. Our brain’s left hemisphere, the part that processes information logically and analytically, tunes out while the right hemisphere of the brain, which processes information emotionally and non-critically, is allowed to function freely. We do not consciously rationalize the information resonating within our unconscious. We become sitting ducks (slaves) to the messages being conveyed.

To regain connections lost, people will need to spend time in nature to truly feel it. Watching nature on an electronic devise just won’t cut it. The escape route from techno-slavery is out the back door and into natural surroundings. Leave the cell phone at home.

We Americans seem to be in the middle of a rapidly-evolving conversation concerning 21st-Century “rape culture.” Rape culture is a problem that most still pretend not to see. We can see ourselves as “victims” but not yet as slaves. Where it will end is anybody’s guess. However, one thing for sure is that the link between destruction of the environment and rape of women (and men), and other animals, is gradually becoming much more transparent. But like the iceberg, the enormity of the condition is still largely hidden from view. To free ourselves from our self-imposed prison, we must begin to investigate, explore, and experience reality. Step outside. Nature is all around us.

51 thoughts on “21st Century Rape Culture

  1. So many good points, Steve. We’re treating our environment as if there was some spare Earth to run away to in the case of emergency. The emergency of our mess is a real issue here, since we have absolutely no clue what are the consequences of environmentally reckless behavior. Maybe one of the consequences will be the first real manned space travel as Mother Nature finally spits us out into the void of space. For a short while, that would be some real progress, right?


  2. If “we all know who writes the rules” then we need to name the names, and list their addresses too! In this day it’s obvious that the majority of white heterosexual males have no say so, as if the poor ones ever did, and have been put on an endangered species list. The others, minorities, etc., percentage wise have benefited from the spoils of Earth Rape. China seems to be the new rapist of the Earth. I don’t think it’s possible for everyone to do everything they can starting today, to protect animals, nature and restore natural resources. There is a possibility that some of the rules, were inscribed on the Georgia Guidstones.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. “Anything not white-heterosexual-male is categorized and marginalized without much thought by the powers that be.”

    Sorry, but I think that statement is bull s**t. Let’s blame all the white men for all the problems… part and parcel of the “men are pigs” project. I so agree with Miles Mathis whom I think sees this with clear eyes: the damnation and demonization of the straight white male.

    I found this piece quite pessimistic, and I don’t want to get into any debates with anyone. Life is too short. I personally despise the push for more and more technology and the lack of connection with Nature, but there is something about the approach in this piece that for me is unnecessarily preachy and condescending. I believe that we should look after Mother Earth and that we should strengthen our connection to Nature, but then there is the thing thrown in about white heterosexual males and patriarchy that simply turn me off. As if women and women only are the saviors. Hmm, Gold Meier, Angela Merkel, Benazir Bhutto, and Hillary herself don’t seem to represent the Goddess all that benignly.

    I will do my best to serve the earth and serve others without demonizing any one group of people. There is enough blame to go around as Greg intimates. That is exactly what TPTB want, for us to turn against each other (whites against blacks, brown against yellow, men against women. straight vs gay) while they laugh and gloat in the shadows. DIVIDE AND CONQUER.

    The biggest proponents I know for leaving the cell phone home, cancelling cable and reconnecting with nature happen to be: straight white males. Go figure. While others choose to fly to Disneyland, the white males in my family and I plan our next visit to the mountains for hiking and fishing, and breathing fresh air. Next time we go, do I need to tell them that they are part of the problem?” Oh never mind, I believe that they already got that message awhile back loud and clear. Who gave them that message? TPTB through every media outlet and psy-op possible.

    I do find it curious that this “rape culture” essay appeared smack dab in the middle of the sexual assault feeding frenzy and “me too” movement (spook driven psy-op) – guilty until proven innocent, war against men. I always ask why are we turning against each other, when we should be going after the powerbrokers, in the shadows, no matter their race, ethnicity, gender.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Well said, Grace. If white, heterosexual males are running everything for their own benefit, they’re the most incompetent group on earth. Based on how they’re ethnically cleansing themselves (just visit any major US city and most everywhere else to see for yourself) having them “destroy nature” would be the quickest route to restoring the Garden of Eden.

      While Steve’s sentiments on the disconnection with nature are on target, the “blame whitey” motif sounds like hackneyed Susan Sontag rhetoric from the 60’s. White folks will be found on both “sides” of the equation, but my guess is they make up well over 90 percent of the side working for the return he wisely suggests.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. If you refuse to enter into any debate in advance, then why bother to criticize publicly?

      White-heterosexual-male (WHM) dominates all levels of the society since ever and that’s a fact. I never saw, read or learned about any disproportional, large group of colored (as non-WHM) man making legislative or any other framework of our society throughout history. Have you? If the same category of WHM acts as the target of some blackwashing psyop, that doesn’t change the previous fact per se. Steve made it very clear who should be the focus of our environmental concerns and you’re taking his WHM point out of the context. Further, the concept of “men are pigs” psyop will never ever be able to change the system of WHM domination – such change will require something much more effective and meaningful to become a reality.

      It’s very important to make a clear distinction among the members of the WHM group itself, since a) not all WHM individuals are the same and b) blackwashing “men are pigs” psyop targets all men equally, regardless of their skin color, nation or religion. While you and maybe MM (and probably many other people) think only WHM are targets, I believe all men are equally demonized in the context of manhood. Men-to-women relations can’t be altered using propaganda. It’s only about the “flavor” of such psyop, with the effect on average brainwashed modern-day feminine individual being exactly the same, regardless of their skin color. For instance, metrosexuals are a disgrace to all men equally, where the skin color doesn’t represent any meaningful parameter in how they’re perceived by the women counterpart in this psyop. Are only WHM metrosexuals? Nope. But that’s not the reason why Steve brought WHM into the focus, as he explained twice already.

      This war against men is used, beside pushing the ultimate confusion, to give deeper and better disguise to a very tiny number of people, who are part of WHM. They, in particular, represent majority of the PTB in disproportional number and can be held responsible for countless psyops, wars, poverty, inhumane politics, destruction of environment, etc. — all in the name of profit and dominance. It’s ignorance not to acknowledge that. As it can be proven beyond doubt, the PTB will do anything to keep their position of power – thus anything not WHM will always be marginalized and categorized. That’s why I agree with Steve 100% and think you’re missing the point he made.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. If you visit South America and Africa you’ll find out non-WHM aren’t exactly the pioneers of perfecting the social and ecological fabric of society…


    3. I want to briefly touch on the “Divide and Conquer” slogan. It has become a Propaganda term nowadays or not used in a proper way or inaccurate context. I get what you mean when you use the phrase. The thing is that this phrase is the name of a well known computer algorithm for sorting elements. I will leave it at that and won’t elaborate on the algorithm, it is beside the point. A more suitable phrase to your idea IMHO is “Divide et impera”. The problem with that one is that is referred when talking about a ruler (a Prince, Machiavelli) trying to best rule over a dominated territory or regarding rival rulers, at least back in the day where power was not that centralized (Think Italy’s territory in the Middle Ages… Borgia/Medici/Savonarola interregnum). What I want to say in short is that ‘Divide et impera’ is not applied to the vulgo. The ruler does not care too much about the populace in the same way a lion does not care about sheeps’ opinions. My 0.02.


      1. I did not get the feeling this post was preachy. I liked the post by S. Kelly, BTW. All my sympathies to the Native American “Indians” as well. Also let me say that the so-called “men are pigs” project is limited to USA or at least anglo North America. South of the Rio Grande, that project does not hold water. People is not too worried about the “cara palida” being a pig when gangs and violence and poverty are casting a long black shadow upon them. Interaction between the only 2 sexes is very different south of the border (south of the border is not only Mexico, that is waaaaaaay narrow minded as well).


  4. Gia,

    Did you accidentally misinterpret what I am saying? Or, did you build a straw man to deliberately distort my stance? I appreciate your opinion either way, but know nothing of your intent.

    Here’s the statement: “It is the nature of a patriarchal society to dominate and control entities that exist outside of established rules of culture. And we all know who writes the rules – rules that automatically devalue everything perceived as “the other.” In other words, anything not white-heterosexual-male is categorized and marginalized without much thought by the powers that be.”

    Sentence #1: Is this (dominate and control) not the nature of a patriarchal society?
    Sentence#2: Do rule-makers and current rules (in the US) not devalue what is perceived as “the other?”
    Sentence #3: What do the powers that be think about categories of humans that are not white-heterosexual-male? I think TPTB, “without much thought” marginalize “the other.”

    That is what I said and what I intended to say. No more, no less.


    1. And yet there is evidence that native culture has persisted for close to 10,000 years, or so. Will our anti-nature culture (of mammon) be so fortunate in this extreme environment? Stay tuned, right?


        1. Not inventing and making thinks which are useless or harmful in the long run could interpreted as sign of intelligence as well. Just noting.


        2. Leave it to you Swede to Google and find a list of intelligence by country! It is meaningless.

          At this website we try to cut through a lot of crap to get to the real meaning of things … set “IQ” aside. I look around and see a mass of ignorance and a few isolated pockets of real intelligence. You can throw most of our science and history out the window, set aside our “news” and “education” and medicine, and don’t even get me going on economics and the other social sciences. What we are left with is this: We are the beneficiaries of that profession called engineering. They build our stuff, roads, bridges, cars, houses, toilets, without which we are a primitive culture of incredibly ignorant people. I am typing on a device that I cannot begin to understand and the words will travel to you by a similarly opaque process. Only a few people understand it. Later today I will drive my truck, and marvel that the thing has gone 177,000 miles now without a major breakdown.

          It seems to me that more warlike cultures advance in technology – they are able to quarantine the few really intelligent people and force them to produce inventions to make better war on others. This is us, this is Europe, this was the Roman empire. But the mass of humanity are mere beneficiaries of the few really intelligent ones, whose appearance and location is probably happenstance.

          Starting and ending with this website, from our lens, we can see that we are managed by a few overlords who are smart enough to provide us with toys that keep us in a deep state of ignorance so we do not threaten them.

          What have you invented, Swede? Invented, hell! You haven’t even read this. I know you well.


  5. The Earth is being terraformed toward a new state that will no longer support humans. Some humans were genetically modified to be obedient and this trait is in every population and race. The fact that some (most) people are overly obedient is being used against us by an enemy that can appear human, but which is not human. There is no race or religion of human origin that supports these goals. The atmosphere is being modified. The microbial biome is being modified all over the world on the land and in the oceans. The attack against our world is not being led by rapists of the human variety, but by what Paul referred to as “Powers and Principalities”.


  6. Big Swede is right with this IQ stuff in the destruction of the West because of the mass immigration projects set-up by the perps. You see it happening today and this dumbing down of the West (by mixing a lot of low IQ people with higher IQ people and taking the lowest common denominator in “education” systems) is intentional.

    I disagree however on his views about the native people of the Americas. There were so many societies there, that flourished, were self-sufficient, had rich spiritual lives and mostly peace between the different groups. There simply was no need to invent a wheel, so why is that the defining factor?


    1. Your first paragraph is spot on.

      “And mestizo cunning is even more impressive than that. In comparison to America, Mexico runs an extremely parsimonious social welfare system. This imbalance creates the first initial incentive for parasitic migration. It is one the Mexican government enthusiastically encourages. So Mexico lowers its own costs of human upkeep by offloading the left-flank of its bell curve, who then return hard-currency remittances back to Mexico, while acting as a huge and growing advocacy bloc for the only country that actually retains their loyalty. Thus the lucid dumb say to the bright delusional: you take in, pay for, and grant preferences to my children over your own, and they’ll express their gratitude by cancelling your votes, demonizing your heritage, and colonizing your communities. Tenemos un trato?

      Intelligence is actually counterproductive to those with enough surplus to rationalize their own annihilation. Far better if our delusions were so benign as to merely seek medical respite in albino genitals.”-Porter


  7. I find it worthy of comment that on a truth research website, Mark is poo-pooing the culturally suppressed truth about mean racial IQ differences.

    Sure, teasing Big Swede about not inventing anything himself is fair game. And it’s true that IQ varies so much by individual that race doesn’t tell you anything about an individual’s intelligence. And it’s true that IQ differences are far from the only factor explaining the massive disparity in innovation and economic progress across countries.

    However, mean differences in IQ by race and by country are very real. These differences are among the most robust results in social science. There’s not really any scientific debate. There simply are no studies suggesting that mean IQs in most African countries are higher, equal to, or actually anywhere NEAR mean IQs in Northern European countries. The notion that there are mean racial differences in, say, jumping and sprinting ability but not in IQ is not supported AT ALL by science.

    Rather, the scientific findings are culturally suppressed. The idea that all races have similar mean IQs comes from the realm of politics, propaganda, magazines, political correctness, fear of causing offense, fear of justifying racism, etc. etc. And maybe it’s even a good thing that this truth is verboten to discuss in the public square. It probably WOULD be used to justify racism. But this website is not Time Magazine. Here we look with clear eyes at painful truths. Or try to.

    We are all controlled by the Matrix and strongly driven by our political beliefs, the times in which we live, cultural norms, etc. And I humbly submit that on this IQ issue, Mark, you have blinders on. Our great grandmothers all knew that what I have said above is quite obviously true. But nowadays our position is that our great grandmothers were a bunch of ignorant racists. But here’s something for us moderns to consider: We are not smarter than the entire past.

    I further humbly submit that your explanation of technological advances coming from some races more than others due to differences in warlike nature and forced innovation from the few (randomly distributed across races) really smart people is a fairly convoluted rationalization, which was required to protect you from the psychological pain of thinking forbidden thoughts which would threaten your self-conception as enlightened, tolerant, non-racist, etc.

    While I agree that humanity is controlled by a small group and they make the rules, hoax us, mind control us, etc., this does not mean that there are not meaningful intelligence differences further down the hierarchy of power. Western Civilization, as distinct from African civilization, may have been exploitive and patriarchal and anti-nature and all the rest. But it really did create massive innovation and massive wealth and impressive art and literature. Much innovation was produced not by the controllers and not by the few superintelligent among us, but by middle class engineers.

    The correlation between as-measured average national IQ and economic performance is very, very high. Of course there are other factors, but to ignore this one takes an extreme effort of “not noticing.”

    And that’s what we on this site are always accusing the normies of. HOW can they be blind to the evidence of hoaxing and lying propaganda and control? But we don’t have a leg to stand on if we are willfully blind to VERY well-documented mean IQ difference by race because we are self-censoring and refusing to notice. The same psychological dynamics apply. The normie who thinks “our government would never do something like that” is afraid to think forbidden or disloyal or unpopular or destabilizing thoughts. And the normie who thinks “there are no mean IQ differences between races” is afraid to think forbidden or mean or condescending or unpopular or destabilizing thoughts.

    Let me be clear. I am not saying that one can make an accurate prediction about an individual’s intelligence based on race. Nor am I saying that less intelligent individuals are less important or less valuable than more intelligent ones. We are all God’s creatures and we are all much more similar than different. All I am saying is that there are well-documented mean IQ differences between races. And political correctness doesn’t change that. We should not fear the truth.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. This “racial IQ difference” thing as quite a minefield I don’t want to walk in. The greatest issue I have is the definition of “IQ” itself – is this Left-Brain-Machine-Thinking a goal the human species striving for ? Give me a break …
      Rhetorical question – is there a relation between a nation’s mean IQ, and it’s average mental and physical health ?


      1. I always did well on those tests, but they are looking for traits that are useful in a bureaucratic society. I was good with numbers, words, writing out stuff, so in a company I was useful keeping the books in order and writing reports. That’s what they were looking for. Put me in the woods, tell me to survive by farming and hunting, I would maybe not perish, maybe I would, but they were not looking for those types of skills. IQ is peculiar to the needs of the controllers.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Exactly.
          Didn’t ever take such a test, but I’m not that bad with numbers and associative thinking either. Got me a technical university degree, equally useful for the controllers and their industrial bustling. If it wasn’t for this nagging “Oppositional Defiant Disorder”, that kept and keeps me from making a career inside the Matrix …

          Liked by 1 person

    2. If race is a cultural, and nonscientific factor, if there are genetically speaking no races, then all “IQ” differences are based on some other factor. Most innovation is imitation supplemented by just a little creativity. taking what was done before and improving on it. Genius is rare. Collaboration produces extraordinary results, that being a group effort by many otherwise ordinary people.

      Native Americans did not have horses to work with, but once they got them quickly learned how to use them. European settlers knew to keep guns out of their hands. Whether or not the tales of the first settlers being rescued by the natives is true, I cannot say.


      1. Mark, I fear you have it reversed. Race (or now more correctly because of the mixing and better technologies haplotypes) is real, biological, empirical science. The social construct is calling race a cultural thing, which is a strategy of the current cultural marxists.

        The same they do with sex, which they now cleverly call gender. It used to be a transsexual, now that is called a transgender (and it works, it cost me a while to remember what the old word was). Sex is as race a biological, exact scientific factor, XX, XY and some XXY variation in minority. But they now have the agenda of “identifying as”, which is completely sociological nonsense meant to move away from hard empirical science into “scientism”.

        I am always amazed just how North Americans think about pre-Columbian cultures. There were way more cultures in Latin America than in North America, yet people kind of forget that. The indigenous Latin American peoples were also encountered much earlier, mixed much more with the Spanish and Portuguese, died en masse of diseases, were used as slaves and had a completely different history with the Europeans than what the native Americans in North America had, some beaver wars aside, in Latin America the dominance was much bigger and brutal (slavery and disease, not genocide). There are literally hundreds of indigenous languages in South America, in Colombia alone I remember there are 85 recognized (now!, imagine how many there were; many of those cultures simply disappeared because of mixing with the Spanish or got extinct due to the slavery and diseases).


        1. Race is not genetic. Environment and social structure play a large role in how a society advances. What we had in both Americas was the arrival of a technologically advanced society over a primitive one. Without disease and weapons, would the Spanish have prevailed? Based on what? Pugilistic skills?


          1. “Race is not genetic”, whut? How do you support that claim? And yes, of course, environment and social structure mainly define a society, but that has nothing to do with race. African blacks have higher chances of being lactose-intolerant, the different shapes of bodies, even among the same race (West- vs East-Africans), pigment, (lack of) facial hair in Asians, etc.

            For sure, weapons and disease “helped” the conquerors in both Americas, but also trickery was a big factor. The first conquistadors were vastly outnumbered by the indigenous peoples they encountered. They tricked other indigenous groups to take up the fight against the bigger ones. See the Aztec and Tlaxcala for instance. Without a higher intelligence, you don’t succeed in tricking others to fight for your cause, but against their own. See the military today.

            Coming back to Steve’s original post, the indigenous peoples lived much more in harmony with their environment than what later came to be, with huge environmental problems as a result (the Amazon rainforest replaced by huge cattle farms, mining and related pollution, etc.).


          2. I fear I have to Google this, which I hate doing, as I don’t know enough about it myself. As I understand it, there is a biological underpinning to racial differences, but not genetic. It’s all new to me, so I will quote it and let you wrestle with it.

            Racism and discrimination are wrong as a matter of principle, not of science. That said, it is hard to see anything in the new understanding of race that gives ammunition to racists. The reverse is the case. Exploration of the genome has shown that all humans, whatever their race, share the same set of genes. Each gene exists in a variety of alternative forms known as alleles, so one might suppose that races have distinguishing alleles, but even this is not the case. A few alleles have highly skewed distributions but these do not suffice to explain the difference between races. The difference between races seems to rest on the subtle matter of relative allele frequencies. The overwhelming verdict of the genome is to declare the basic unity of humankind.

            That’s Time magazine, and not definitive or the final word, but it sums up my impression of where the genome science was at before this conversation.

            Liked by 1 person

  8. Does some culturally specific way of measuring IQ have anything to do the destruction of the world?

    Comparing the extermination of a planet to the act of rape is not an exact comparison, it is more like an extension of a metaphor. The conduct of Monsanto is not actually rape, but it is certainly inhuman and not generally something that a person capable of empathy could defend. The poisoning of the ground waters of the world by way of fracking may appear to have a profit motive but what if instead the motive is actually just to poison all the wells? The use of depleted uranium in various battle fields scattered around the world may have some other objective beyond that of armor penetrating bullets – what if that actual objective is the deliberate spreading of poison? If fracking, DU and glyphosate are all systematically poisoning the world, is it too much of a leap to assume there is an actual objective in place to poison the whole world?

    If the entire world is deliberately being poisoned is it logical to assume that humans have this objective? Is it all just happening by accident or is it part of a larger operation ? Is it more logical to assume that the objective is in fact not of human origin? This line of thought first occurred to me in the 1980’s when I was studying the disposal of radioactive waste. Suddenly it seemed clear to me that whoever is in charge of the secret agenda does not believe that they have any need for the planet Earth’s biosphere.

    It seems that conquest and pillage spread from the middle east thousands of years ago, then metastasized in Europe and went world wide as a wave of colonization in the past few centuries. It may be that White Heterosexual Males have been seen leading this scourge, and for thousands of years the profit motive has seemed a plausible explanation. But in our generation the depredations against the Earth have gone beyond the profit motive and I think we may need to reconsider if the real motive may be the extermination of humanity and possibly also the total enslavement of a small remainder.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ” The use of depleted uranium in various battle fields scattered around the world may have some other objective beyond that of armor penetrating bullets – what if that actual objective is the deliberate spreading of poison?”

      Uranium is actually as common as tin or silver in the crust, and undepleted, so spreading around less radioactive forms of it to poison people or ground seems less likely.

      But your last paragraph is apt and interesting. The Takers began our culture back there in the Fertile Crescent, or so the story goes, and we still live in that monoculture now. Totalitarian Agriculture. The hoarding and lording of food, over the people who grow it. The slaves. We are also still in that class, whether we grow food or not. If you’re not a multibillionaire you don’t count.

      I agree, it seems there will be a tipping point sooner or later. Violence will and must erupt. My best guess is that it will come along with cybernetics, augmentations that would/could level the playing field between the slaves and masters. Right now, the field is not remotely level.


  9. The whole premise that IQ testing applied widely to compare and define genetic stratification is biased and laughable.

    “Among the strongest evidence that IQ tests are testing not just innate ability, but the extent to which that innate ability has been put to work developing specific skills, is the remarkable “Flynn effect”: In the United States and many other countries, raw IQ scores have been rising about three points a decade. This rise is far too rapid to have a genetic cause. The best explanation for what’s going on is that increasing social complexity is expanding the use of the cognitive skills in question – and thus improving the opportunities for honing those skills. The Flynn effect is acutely embarrassing to those who leap from IQ score differences to claims of genetic differences in intelligence.” – Brink Lindsey http://www.theatlantic.com/author/brink-lindsey/

    Frankly, I think the greater danger is the misuse and abuse of IQ testing deeply embedded in the foundation of the public education system.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. It’s quite ironic, even paradoxical, that you would use an article from a known propaganda outlet–The Atlantic!–from an author who is a senior fellow with the Cato Institute and the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation as “support” for your stance. (I’m trying to stifle a guffaw right now, it’s so laughable.) The article states: “The best explanation [i.e. his opinion] for what’s going on is that increasing social complexity is expanding the use of the cognitive skills in question – and thus improving the opportunities for honing those skills.” What is that supposed to mean? Is “social complexity” referring to the increasing chaos and confusion that is the result of forcing racially and culturally-diverse groups together (as Gaia mentioned in her comment)? (There are many more “red flags” in that article, but I won’t continue. My bullsht detector was definitely triggered, though!) Both of these organizations are used to promote the agendas of our Controllers, to indoctrinate the masses with their self-serving ideas and turn us all into agreeable zombies. Here’s the lead *story on the Kauffman foundation page: “Can We Turn Our Backs on Immigrants?” (A politically-correct word for “refugees” from countries torn apart by U.S.-funded war and destruction of non-western cultures.) Take a look for yourself; there are too many questionable assertions–“spook markers”–to list.


      1. Here’s the link to the Kauffman foundation. http://www.kauffman.org/

        Check out the Board of Trustees. First one listed: President and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. And then there’s this guy: Senior Vice President, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney.


        1. I am well aware of the “red flags” you mention, and the “agenda” of The Atlantic and Cato. Smarter people than I use Wiki, Google and the like for research, even good ideas. Knowing all that, I did, however, use my own reason to choose the author’s point of view from among many, which, as you can see, I agree with. I try not to judge, especially based solely on association. I think there is merit and substance to his words. Got anything else?


  10. Mark, “a haplogroup is a combination of alleles at different chromosomes regions that are closely linked and that tend to be inherited together. As a haplogroup consists of similar haplotypes, it is usually possible to predict a haplogroup from haplotypes. Haplogroups pertain to a single line of descent, usually dating back thousands of years.” wiki haplogroup.

    On that same page you also see the map of dominant haplogroups in the world.

    The “race” (mixture of haplogroups) they use to identify people from “DNA” (whatever that may be, double helix or just some feature they branded DNA).


    1. Yeah, I read all that though it does not really sink in. I am still seeing genetic differences as nonexistent, but inheritable traits that distinguish us, just as all dogs have identical genes, but can be large or small or of a wide range of colors.

      The thing that troubles me is that the people who harp on racial differences, Swede for instance, are taking undue pride in being part of a superior race, a dangerous idea. And I live among whites, and know that half possess and IQ lower than 100, and that really smart ones are a rarity, and do not see the point of arguing which race might be superior. Try “none of the above.” Look at the ease with which 95% of Americans are easily fooled by the latest fake event. Who, pray tell, are we superior to?


  11. If being fooled by the mainstream stories means a lack of intelligence, it would mean we used to be f*cking stupid for most of our lives…

    Were you? I cannot imagine.


  12. Wow. Mark is VERY resistant to the science on this one. Who would have thought the proprietor of Piece of Mindful would be afraid of “dangerous ideas”?

    This is an area where you really should do some reading. There’s no debate about this in terms of the science. The “debate” is purely cultural marxists and useful idiot progressives trying to declare the facts “hate speech.”

    The fact that there are significant mean racial differences in intelligence scares people. It shouldn’t but tdoesWhich is why they’ve come up with all these ways to rationalize away the troublesome facts.

    Like: IQ tests are racist, IQ tests only measure how clerical and bureaucratic you are, a race that scores lower on average on IQ tests is probably higher than average in some other “type” of intelligence, etc.

    Races aren’t “superior” or “inferior” to one another but there are mean differences across populations on various traits. Pretending that’s not true because the truth seems “dangerous” is magical thinking.

    It might be time to confront your fears and do some reading. Throw off your mental chains!


    1. You seem to be very resistant as well with repeating your opinion. Can you please provide some titles, articles and/or research work to support your idea of significant differences in IQ values among different races?

      I find it really intriguing and will definitely give it some thought as nothing seems to be the way MSM preaches. I would as well expect this subject to be equally misinterpreted as much as everything else or under-researched if actually important/relevant. I’m struggling with your dramatization, though.

      I don’t see it that much important if true, so in my opinion, your criticism aimed at Mark is too sensational. We’d potentially have a real issue with one race’s superiority in IQ value, which could be used by the PTB to further divide people and even create hostility and wars on the wings of it. However, such possibility is identical to any other human attribute that could be used to create division: skin color (done before), other nationality (done before), religion (done before), etc… So your argument fades as pretty thin, doesn’t it?

      It would not be that surprising to find out about certain regions or races actually having a bit more mental talent or IQ capacity on average. Intra-racial diversity is key in improving specie’s genome, in my opinion, and improving probability of specie’s survival options in the long term. Is such diversity evolutionary in nature? We, the humans, are a very diverse specie and some differences among us are more noticeable, while others are subtle. But I still don’t see where the idea of IQ differences among races becomes dangerous. It doesn’t become dangerous per se, that’s quite clear – we’d again need perverted PTB to appoint, finance and propagandize an even more perverted individual to lead some overtly manipulable nation into another nonsensical war against a fellow human. Is it possible? Sure, but if we actually see another major war, it will not be waged based on differences in IQ values.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. And just to repeat it, with the term “IQ” defined as “A mental peculiarity currently en vogue and useful for the controllers”. And I theorize a certain controllability of the individuum is integral and proportional part of the current “IQ” – euphemism.


        1. I agree. There is an IQ euphemism upgrade, claiming there is a measurable EQ as well. Go figure 🙂 We’re apparently able to measure and attach numeric value to the state of our emotions and then interpret that as a sign of intelligence…. Reads like some shamanic ritual leftovers , doesn’t it?

          Liked by 1 person

        2. I read this a long time ago and easily found it on the Google …

          “In 1983 an American developmental psychologist Howard Gardener described 9 types of intelligence [1]:

          Naturalist (nature smart)
          Musical (sound smart)
          Logical-mathematical (number/reasoning smart)
          Existential (life smart)
          Interpersonal (people smart)
          Bodily-kinesthetic (body smart)
          Linguistic (word smart)
          Intra-personal (self smart)
          Spatial (picture smart)”

          As I recall basic intelligence testing, they are measuring Logical-mathematical, linguistic, and spatial … if “spatial” means assembling all those damned little boxes on the IQ tests.

          I love music and think that musicians are smart beyond the pale in being able to play and read music on a high level. I am not talking about rock stars*. Athletes do things that most of us cannot do – train and control their bodies on a high level. And it takes real courage and intelligence to know oneself.

          *How do you get a guitarist to stop playing? (Put some sheet music in front on him.)

          Liked by 1 person

  13. The older I get (I’m 44) I find that less is more. KISS principle. So I am satisfied with Machiavelli’s categories of intellect and go my way about it: “Because there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”. I’m not trying to school anyone, my 0.02.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. These arguments miss the key point as I see it. First of all, TPTB love wrecking cultures and ethnic groups and weakening opposition by diluting tribal and group loyalties. Many examples from history (at least as we’re given it) include the Assyrian conquests in the Old Testament, Alexander the Great, the Soviets replacing leadership element in towns and villages with people from other regions to “cut off the head” which was supposedly what helped thwart the German advances in WWII.

    It’s a key element of their strategy from time immemorial.

    It’s also disingenuous to ignore what any child can see by going to “science” which tells us race is a mental construct and not “biological” or “real” because they can explain it away with gobbledy gook.

    The non-stop guilt trip laid on white European descended people at every level shows the TPTB don’t believe their own B.S. They know it’s central to their aims to deracinate and ultimately destroy these groups, however “real” they are to the same folks who think sex or “gender” is a construct as well.

    But a more fundamental flaw that leads to a cul-de-sac in achieving Steve’s stated aims is that only individuals are conscious and make moral choices. Laying guilt for moral crimes or flaws on groups is mixing fantasy with reality. Blaming “white people” for slavery or environmental destruction is as useful as blaming rocks.

    A fully consistent “environmental viewpoint” would understand the preservation of ethnic and racial diversity as the foundation of preserving diversity in every other aspect of life. If we, the conscious agents able to direct actions toward what is good or evil don’t respect a fundamental principle in our own lives, how will we ever respect it anywhere else?

    As MT has pointed out, we don’t get “credit” for the achievements of others just by virtue of racial kinship. But by the same token, how can we be blamed for destructive things others in our group do? Primitivism is not the answer to technological destruction, only the logical outcome of not addressing it intelligently.

    Liked by 3 people

  15. While I have no doubt that IQ is to a degree useful. I would recommend that anyone who uses race as a benchmark read a couple of books, 1491 and 1493 by Charles Mann. While not meant as a chronological piece. It might make one think about the distribution curve a bit more. I would also request anyone to post any historical account of the Native Americans that describes them as anything other than extremely intelligent and capable.


    1. “Race as a benchmark” for what? Race and its subdivisions of ethnic groups are part of the mosaic of life. It makes as much sense to mix them all into an indistinct “gray” as to do that to the flowers.

      Seeing it as some sort of “problem” or “defect” that has to be overcome or ignored or apologized for shows how far down the road to transhumanism we’ve already come. It’s an organic boundary for social organization that’s much more humane than social engineering by “philosopher kings” or whatever we have now.

      No doubt there are complications that come about in the “modern” world, but what area of life hasn’t been complicated by modernity? If race is merely a “construct” then how can we say that sex isn’t? Or “humanity” or even life itself?

      Liked by 2 people

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 )

Connecting to %s