Neoteny and the logic of massacres

I had another dream. Go figure.

In this dream, a Russian gang had moved into a Chinese city under the control of a Chinese gang. A brief period of fighting ensued. The Chinese gang had a habit and financial interest in maintaining the status quo, and this made them bureaucratic and weak where the Russians were organized and ruthless like a military. After a couple of days of this fighting, the Russians had the lay of the land and, in a single operation, rounded up all the civilians related to the Chinese gang and massacred them. I watched the same basic scene play out a number of times in different locations.

In one location, a squad of Russians put around twenty women, children, and parents of the Chinese gang members against a wall and machine-gunned them. In another, they had a storage container with a dozen or so of the Chinese gang’s girlfriends that they opened and torched with a flamethrower. In another, they had basically won the war and were pulling people out of an improvised cage and setting ferocious dogs on them because it was more fun. There were a couple more with the machine guns and another with the flamethrower (my id is a pretty sick fuck). I remember there were some people shot execution-style as well, but those scenes are less clear in my mind.

When I woke up, I first lamented having such a morbid subconscious brain, and then I began thinking about how similar are the scenes of massacres done by humans all over the world. In every continent, in every era of written history, a massacre always follows the same elementary forms. Is this one of the mythical forms that everyone somehow knows without being taught? Is it somehow necessary to round people up and kill them all at once in the same place?

I am convinced that there is a logic to this which soldiers instinctively grasp (rather than being a genetic memory) and it relates to how “tamed” the victimized population is.

If you are over-running and ransacking a fort filled with tough, independent-minded soldiers who will fight to the end, then you don’t go to the trouble of gathering them all in the same place for a big barbecue. Taking prisoners is costly and more dangerous than simply killing them. Afterward, every prisoner is a constant liability and every additional procedural step- between the gallows and beating them unconscious so you can tie their hands- is a chance for an enemy to break out and either cause additional mayhem or escape to fight another day. In such a case, a “no prisoners” policy is in order. One or two prisoners might turn up anyway, and one or two prisoners can be interrogated, tortured, and executed without much fuss.

However, if you intend to put an entire town of civilians to the sword, the way to get as many of them as possible is to keep your intentions ambiguous for as long as possible, and let fear and uncertainty keep the civilians from resisting or fleeing. During this time, you can progressively limit their freedoms by systematically binding their hands, binding them together, and locking them all inside the same building. Once they are all effectively immobilized, they can at will be exterminated individually, or en mass using such tools as industrial civilization has blessed us with. By this method, 10 soldiers or civil police can kill 1,000 civilians without suffering a single casualty.

Now as I’ve just demonstrated, this can only be achieved by cowing a population that is already predisposed to submissive reactions in the face of hostile power. First, the population must be atomized and unable to take collective action for a common interest. This will prevent them from acting rationally. Second, they must be so afraid of dying that they can be convinced to give up their freedoms in exchange for promises of a slightly longer life. This will prevent them from acting morally. (For example, a single cop could pull his gun on a bunch of rioters and say “put these zip ties on or I’ll shoot you” and they would do it, if they were sufficiently fearful of authority.) Third, they must be uncertain that the soldiers intend to kill them, or at least able to convince themselves that they are uncertain. This will prevent them from fleeing.

All of these traits are more likely to be expressed by facially neotenous people. Neoteny is a trait common to tamed animals and people, like floppy ears and big eyes. It indicates the adoption biological survival strategy based on appearing safe, cute, and agreeable rather than appearing dangerous, competent, or independent. It means a person’s genetic expression favors social navigation, i.e. R-selection, with emphasis on following the mandates of the group or its external authority figures rather than possessing either an inner locus of self-control or an altruistic small-group focus (or both).

Traditionally, the most neotenous hominids have been mongoloids, which basically means East Asians. Mongoloids are also the most “tame” as explained above, and therefore the most likely to become enslaved to relatively small outside tribes. However, I can personally report that American whites are veritably sprinting toward neoteny. Every year, it seems like girls and boys are more androgynous, with chins receding, zygomatic arches collapsing, faces becoming round and retaining fat, and eyes artificially appearing bigger via projection from the sockets and concomitant loss of brow ridges and socket depth. Like children, their brains are becoming more infantile and impressionable, overwhelmingly preferring to seek dopamine rewards bestowed by trusted authorities, and losing the ability to draw generalizations from independent observations.

The same “progress” is happening to American blacks, to such an extent that American black and white skulls are now more similar to each other than to their own ancestors. If this continues, all human peoples will be microcephalic, fat-cheeked, doe-eyed, neurotic, child-fucking slaves ruled by propaganda and momentary impulses (save a few elite overlord tribes), who will be traded and slaughtered like cattle.

Advertisements

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Neoteny and the logic of massacres

  1. Nottuh says:

    How do you reckon that there will even be an overlord race in the future if almost all of humanity is evolving towards neoteny? Perhaps the aristocratic Melonheads will continue to breed among themselves, leaving a conniving, (relatively) gerontomorphic race to rule over the childlike masses of the future?

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      Assortative mating via stratification. Right now this is done via the Prussian schooling model, as explained in John Taylor Gatto’s book. (This is required reading: https://archive.org/details/TheUndergroundHistoryOfAmericanEducation_758)

      • Heaviside says:

        Prussia did nothing wrong.

        All of the people who hate on Prussia are a bunch of Anglocentric dildocratic liberals who were the last century’s equivalent of SJWs.

        Ah, the state as armed camp. Removes SJWs and Jews, or triple your money back.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          The things you profess: the state, centralization, top-down planning, collective class politicizing and bargaining, etc. are required for SJWs and Jews to exist in the first place, much less to be in charge.

      • Heaviside says:

        >The things you profess: the state, centralization, top-down planning, collective class politicizing and bargaining, etc. are required for SJWs and Jews to exist in the first place, much less to be in charge.

        Just because institutions can be subverted doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have institutions.

        Jews, American right liberals, and American left liberals, are varieties of the merely private individuals that Pericles scorned. Alexander Dugin is absolutely spot-on when he calls Americanism “Planetary Idiocy,” because of the Greek origin of the word idiot.

        The State is not the same thing as the government. When we say that society consists of an haphazard collection of private individuals, who have only external relationships with each other, and who are menaced by this totally alien entity known as the government, then we are already hopelessly mired in liberalism. The reason why Americans are tyrannized by their government is because there is no State. The government imposes social engineering on society because it sees itself as outside society. The government sees itself as just another private individual(albeit with special privileges) facing other, indifferent, individuals.

        The State, as it was for the Greeks, for Hegel, and for Yockey, is an implicitly pagan notion. In Japan we have this great word “kokutai”, which is much closer to the classical idea of a State than the modern term as it is abused by liberals. The State is the transcendental, implicitly supernatural, whole of “society,” which is greater than the sum of its parts. In a monarchy, the king, because he is the sovereign, is the human embodiment of the State. The State is that which is sovereign, and not just in the legal sense but also as that which is ontologically sovereign, as that which has an unlimited claim on the individual. The individual is not who he is first, and the State merely an aggregation of such atomic individuals. The State exists first, and the individual is who he is by virtue of his position in the State. That’s why the position of the king is more important than the person of the king. That’s why you “salute the rank and not the man.”

        Jews are against the State. That’s why they are so bad at having kings. That’s why they killed the Romanovs.

        I totally reject the dichotomy of “top-down vs bottom-up”. It is just like what Charlton recently said about “Order vs Chaos”; Chaos/”bottom-up” is implicitly favoured. When we use these terms we assume that the top and the bottom are not part of an indivisible whole to begin with.

        I don’t support class war. That’s a Jewish idea used to undermine the State. I support class/group-based representation because people are part of groups. Classes, castes, estates, guilds, etc. are real and meaningful entities. That’s a prerequisite to hierarchy.

        The adoption of identity politics by the Left is worthy of serious investigation. There are many obvious reasons why it happened, but on a deeper level I think it is very mysterious and signals a very important shift which won’t be appreciated for what it really is until all of its effects have played out.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          I understand that I’m an outlier, in that pretty much everything you describe here fills me with revulsion.

          For instance, the idea of “saluting the rank” has always struck me as inherently queer, like the idea of daycare workers putting their kids in daycare so they have time for work. By extension, if “law and order” do not emerge from a specific shared goal like repulsion of an invasive force, I don’t see any reason why we should have them. Why not let soldiers follow whichever officer they please? If they pick bad ones, then they probably don’t care too much about winning.

  2. Nottuh says:

    Also, I wonder if ceteris paribus, neoteny is correlated to increased performance on IQ tests like Raven’s Progressive matrices, as East Asians tend to perform extremely well on such tests, while the more gerontomorphic Native Americans and Europeans do more poorly, despite similar brain sizes. Perhaps if neoteny is correlated to greater performance on such tests, then maybe the movement toward neoteny over the past couple centuries is responsible for part of the Flynn Effect.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      Offhand I think the answer is yes, and this also follows from my model for general intelligence where “impressionability” contributes to g, and especially the verbal component.

      Further reading:

      https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/07/03/iq-and-phenotype-is-there-a-link/

      • Nottuh says:

        I didn’t find much use with that link of Robert Lindsay’s, although he does have some interesting insights into HBD topics in general. I’m not sure what to make of the purported Native American IQ of 87 either, it seems rather low, though it might be correct. I have suspicion to suggest their genotypic IQs are higher than that, in any event.

        Also, progressive and neotenous phenotypes aren’t really the same thing, and many progressive types seem to be quite gerontomorphic and sometimes even archaic;this means that progressive and archaic are not always mutually exclusive terms for describing phenotypes.

        I think you’re onto something with impressionability, and that it probably forms the basis for much of fluid intelligence as tested by Raven’s and perhaps even on verbal subtests of Weschler, like Similarities, where I believe there has been improvement in raw scores over the past century.

        Where I think I disagree, is that I think that impressionability probably contributes more to visuospatial performance on tests like Raven’s, rather than on verbal tests, as Raven’s-type tests seem to be tests where East Asians do especially well, and also that people tend to become more verbal as they grow up (become more gerontomorphic).

        I apologize for the long comment, this just happens to be a subject that I am very interested in for the time being.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          >I’m not sure what to make of the purported Native American IQ of 87 either, it seems rather low, though it might be correct.

          Ditto all. I haven’t known many NAs, but it seems like groups that intermarry with them get a decent boost. Could also be dysgenics due to the reservations/casinos.

          > I have suspicion to suggest their genotypic IQs are higher than that, in any event.

          Do tell.

          >Also, progressive and neotenous phenotypes aren’t really the same thing, and many progressive types seem to be quite gerontomorphic and sometimes even archaic;this means that progressive and archaic are not always mutually exclusive terms for describing phenotypes.

          Noted. I do confuse these because my anthro is specious.

          >I think you’re onto something with impressionability, and that it probably forms the basis for much of fluid intelligence as tested by Raven’s and perhaps even on verbal subtests of Weschler, like Similarities, where I believe there has been improvement in raw scores over the past century.
          Where I think I disagree, is that I think that impressionability probably contributes more to visuospatial performance on tests like Raven’s, rather than on verbal tests, as Raven’s-type tests seem to be tests where East Asians do especially well, and also that people tend to become more verbal as they grow up (become more gerontomorphic).

          I think you’re right. My intuition says an average child (impressionable) will outperform their IQ cohort on the Raven’s (fluid intelligence), whereas an old man will underperform.

  3. Robotnick says:

    I was wondering about this as well. This confirms my fear I have about myself. I’m an odd mix of facial neoteny and socket depth and brow protrusion. I’m only 20 so perhaps I still have some growing up to do, but I’m not expecting the best.

    • Nottuh says:

      I’ve seen your pics on the Neanderhall. You don’t strike me as very neotenous compared to the general population. In fact, I’d say you look more gerontomorphic that the average man these days.

      You have a few neotenous traits, like large eyes, a high forehead, and a lack of mid-facial prognathism. But the overall structure of your head does not suggest neoteny.

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        >I’d say you look more gerontomorphic that the average man these days.

        The average man of comparable age, yes. Robotnick would have looked soft in the ’50s, nowadays he looks significantly tougher than average for his age cohort.

      • Robotnick says:

        My forehead is very low and sloped. Perhaps my big face dwarfes it a little,but it definitely isn’t high. I have a ton of midfacial prognathism. I don’t think a lack of midface prognathism is a neotenous trait.

        Some people say I look very young while others say I look 5 years older than I actually am. It’s weird.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      Also keep in mind that you’re one of our two most prototypical deep thals (the other being Slampropp), so your development trajectory is more likely to be delayed. I wouldn’t be surprised if your face looks completely different at the age of 35.

      You should also be expecting frontal lobe IQ gains until about that age. Don’t stop taking math classes, it’s amazing how far you can go in that field by taking one subject per year (or more).

      • Russell says:

        “You should also be expecting frontal lobe IQ gains until about that age.”

        I’m a little late to the party, but I can offer my first hand experience of that. I could do math before 35 years old, but it wasn’t until around then when a part of my brain matured and math became much easier. Much, much easier.

        I find undergraduate college math tests online with answer keys and take them for fun, like they’re crossword puzzles or something. I’ve done massive open online courses in math and stats also for fun. I taught myself calculus (single var so far, multivar is on my todo list) this way.

        I’m not some uber-mathematician, I do math because I find it to be enjoyable.

        That wasn’t the case before I hit 35-ish.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          Thank you for mentioning. I expect that a significant fraction of this is due to your lower baseline energy, because three important parts of absorbing new maths are super boring: reading, refreshing and practicing techniques.

  4. Heaviside says:

    >If this continues, all human peoples will be microcephalic, fat-cheeked, doe-eyed, neurotic, child-fucking slaves ruled by propaganda and momentary impulses (save a few elite overlord tribes), who will be traded and slaughtered like cattle.

    2lewd

    >Mongoloids are also the most “tame” as explained above, and therefore the most likely to become enslaved to relatively small outside tribes.

    Come home white man.

  5. Nottuh says:

    Hey Aeoli, just to get back to you, I think the reasons that Native American genotypic IQ is higher than 87 are as follows:

    1. Native Americans have very large brains in Canada and the northwestern United States; north of 1400 cubic centimetres, IIRC.

    2. Native Americans in these regions live(d) in very cold winter regions for thousands of years, with only stone, wooden, bone, and leather implements. There is a positive correlation between a place’s average winter temperatures and the IQs of their indigenous peoples as well.

    3. Native Americans were fairly K-selected prior to their degeneration into the dysfunctional, reservation-dwellers of today.

    4. Fetal alcohol syndrome probably runs rampant among Native Americans today, significantly lowering phenotypic IQ in some cases.

    I don’t have any studies to back up this hunch of mine, but I find it hard to imagine that a K-selected, cold-adapted, large-brained group of Thallish people would have genotypic IQs of 87. It doesn’t seem that likely to me. I do think dysgenics due to r-selection is likely a problem among today’s Native Americans. I think they may have interbred with the dregs of White people over the past several decades (White trash), too.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      Thanks for replying.

      >1. Native Americans have very large brains in Canada and the northwestern United States; north of 1400 cubic centimetres, IIRC.

      I remember Memoire or polymath saying something about that. Can’t find it though.

      >2. Native Americans in these regions live(d) in very cold winter regions for thousands of years, with only stone, wooden, bone, and leather implements. There is a positive correlation between a place’s average winter temperatures and the IQs of their indigenous peoples as well.

      Maybe. It’s hard to say much of anything about Native American culture when the Smithsonian is hiding and destroying anything related to the giants.

      >4. Fetal alcohol syndrome probably runs rampant among Native Americans today, significantly lowering phenotypic IQ in some cases.

      I believe Native Americans should be forbidden by law from buying alcohol for a period of 100 years. Might not hurt to include thals in that ban.

  6. Nottuh says:

    I thought I would mention one more point that might help you disambiguate archaic, progressive, and neotenous/infantile phenotypes. Some examples of White men at extremes:

    1. B-movie actor Bruce Campbell has a mature (gerontomorphic), very progressive, mostly non-archaic phenotype.

    2. French rugby player Sebastien Chabal has a mature, archaic, non-neotenous phenotype.

    3. Actor Frankie Muniz has a neotenous, non-archaic phenotype.

  7. monkie says:

    How the hell do ye manage to have such concrete and elaborated dreams?
    Mine are always extremely abstract with no meaning.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      I think part of it is practice, part of it is my brain has gone a little strange, and part of it is just better dream interpretation. You have to ask yourself what stuff in your dreams *could* mean, and every now and then a correct interpretation will pop into your head and you’ll just know somehow it’s correct.

      Helps to have a foot on the ground too so you don’t have to constantly worry about being totally out to lunch. Humility too. Humility is huge for interpreting stuff because it’s a correct vantage point. For instance, I’m smarter than 99/100 people, but people are actually retarded. So the correct, humble perspective is that I’m just a little bit *less* retarded.

      • Dean says:

        Did you know that iq correlates with strength of gravity? Iq and gravity are at higher levels further from the equator. It is pertinent To link gravity to human evolution (evolution of intelligence) because gravity is the only external variable that can be relied upon to be present. Want to hear more, I am Dean and I know how it’s done.

  8. Edenist whackjob says:

    “Did you know that iq correlates with strength of gravity? Iq and gravity are at higher levels further from the equator. It is pertinent To link gravity to human evolution (evolution of intelligence) because gravity is the only external variable that can be relied upon to be present. Want to hear more, I am Dean and I know how it’s done.”

    Sounds like Jack Kruse’s theories.

    http://selfhacked.com/2015/04/12/interview-with-dr-jack-kruse-emfs-biohacking-water-dha-and-blue-light/

  9. Pingback: The anterior cingulate cortex is the seat of judgment | Aeoli Pera

  10. Pingback: A theory about the Holocaust | Aeoli Pera

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