CHANCELLERY

One of the most frequent distortions committed by both apologists of liberal equality and communist internationalists is the substitution of biological superiority for the concepts of social superiority of one race over another. The latter immediately begins to be considered at the level of individuals, counterexamples are selected and here «the Negro is a professor, everyone sees that the races are equal, and who does not see is a fascist.» I must say that by reducing differences to biology and individual differences, nationalists also sin, only in the opposite direction. Substitution takes place in the very formulation — the comparison of races, and it is necessary to compare civilizations, societies, or at least clearly separate these concepts.

Meanwhile, the unit of evolution is not an individual, but for the social animals to which we belong, and not a population in a narrow biological sense. A person is born narrowly biologically premature, and in a social sense, he is generally born at 3-5 years old. Placed outside of society from birth, he does not develop not only socially — he cannot and will not be able to speak, but biologically — he cannot walk on two legs, use his hands even for the simplest operations, like shoving food into his mouth. In rats, also social animals, this is much less pronounced, a rat raised outside the rat community is biologically quite adequate. Therefore, it is not individuals who evolve, but societies. And the results of this evolution should be compared. Let’s say Central Africa and Europe, also central. And all questions are immediately removed. And you can find a smart black mathematician, no question. You can find a Negro more intelligent than most whites. But he can only be a mathematician in the society of the white race, and not in a Zaire village. Simply put, it is not necessary to compare a Negro and a white man, but blacks and whites. Paradoxically, supporters of equality do not understand that by giving the example of a black professor, they prove the superiority of a white civilization, because the professor, the university and the bistro on the corner were created by whites.

It may seem that I reject biological differences, focusing only on social ones. That’s not so. Yes, the newborn is a «clean slate», to a certain extent. But the size of this board and the amount of paints that can be painted on it is determined by biology. Here, of course, individual variability is very high and therefore it is easy to find a Negro-white pair, where the Negro will be superior in all respects. Stat. The distributions, by any criterion, blacks/whites will overlap, but they will not match. And this is the difference of races. After all, the concept of race is defined only for many people. A person may belong to a race, but he cannot be one. And you only need to compare sets, not individuals. It is also clear that it is impossible to talk about the unconditional superiority of whites, since the sets overlap, but nevertheless there is superiority and statistics confirm this. I won’t give you any, it’s enough to look around. However, the lists of university graduates are not secret.

Another argument, often used by supporters of equality: «They are basically the same, but they were prevented from developing by circumstances/whites/oppression, etc.» The answer is simple. Life is a struggle. Everyone has circumstances, but not everyone overcomes them, and the ability to overcome them is superiority. From «but if» it is easy to build chains from grandmother to grandfather and from bicycle to tram. But… It didn’t work out, it didn’t work out, and that’s what it is. It is quite possible that if something had happened differently hundreds of millions of years ago, the Earth would have been inhabited by intelligent octopuses, cats or crocodiles. But it didn’t work out. And if something had turned out differently hundreds of thousands of years ago, would white professors have been shown in black universities as an example of tolerance. But it didn’t work out. There is what there is.

Finally, there is another argument from supporters of equality. «And why should the path of development of white civilization be considered something superior to the «proximity to nature» of the African bushman? Yes, they are different and maybe they can’t become like us, but not worse.» The answer is simple. Because we’re suppressing them, not them suppressing us. This is a universal principle of life — one who devours / displaces / suppresses / forces to work for himself is the most advanced. If more clearly: whoever determines the future is the one who stands above. Those who talk about proximity to nature as an equivalent alternative to the white way… Well, go to the Bushmen or the Central African pygmies. Just as it is, without tents and a satellite phone, in a loincloth. For a week, that’s enough.

A question arises. And why should such an approach — comparing societies — be applied only to blacks/whites? And inside the white race? The answer is yes. Different societies belonging to the white race are not equal to each other. And the people who make them up, as a set, are not equal. The only question is the extent of these differences and their biological conditioning.

Ivan Storozhev

The stupidest idea in the world is the idea that the «decomposition of primitive society» and the formation of «class formations», that is, the state, property and civilization is something universal, historically natural and inevitable. That’s not so.

Primitiveness is the natural state of human societies. Their «inertia level». Civility is a very expensive and very risky negentropic condition.

At the time of the Great Geographical Discoveries, Australia and Oceania, 98% of the societies of the Americas, were in a primitive state. The vast majority of societies in Africa. Societies of Northern Eurasia beyond the Russian border. Most societies in South, Southeast and Central Asia are only superficially covered by political structures. At best, these societies crossed the threshold of hoe farming, but did not rush further at all.

The civilized societies of Europe (while there was a Wild Field in the Southeast of Europe), the Middle East and the coast of North Africa, East Asia, the semi-civilized societies of nomadic empires, the Ethiopian Highlands and America, and the apically civilized South Asian societies were not primitive. All. Moreover, since ancient times, the space of civilization has not expanded.

The colonial period led to the dragging of primitive societies into history by the ears, forcing them to civilization. In most cases, where colonialism was not accompanied by demographic colonization, this coercion failed.

Decolonized societies want to be primitive and strive to acquire a primitive structure in any environment, including large modern megacities. And, most likely, they will achieve their goal. Civilization will survive only where the peoples who have always been engaged in it live.

Egor Kholmogorov

Christ is Risen! Congratulations to the brothers of the Order and our friends on the day of the Bright Resurrection of Christ! I wish you all good health and success in your business!

May 5, 2024