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.