The Three Norse God Kings
The Hindu Tradition segregates Indian civilization into four castes: Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras. These castes are, respectively: scholars and clergy, warriors and administrators, merchants and artisans, and laborers. This Tradition is the most explicit and its castes are the most crystallized, but these cardinal niches within the civilizational habitat are universal.
French mythographer George Dumezil postulated in his trifunctional hypothesis that these partitions originate among our common Proto-Indo-European ancestors. He broadly defined the roles as: sacral, martial, and economic, defining the occupants of those roles as, respectively: priests, warriors, and commoners. While he honed in on the most basic patterns underlying the nature of human societies, he failed to persuasively delineate a mechanism. Much like Spengler’s assertion that civilizations follow a life-cycle, it’s just so.
But rather than analogize civilization to an organism and look for patterns, it’s more appropriate to define what civilization actually is: a biological habitat. From this, we can do far more than merely analogize; we can hypothesize from parallel ecological developments and design patterns. The first sea creatures to occupy dry land were ill-equipped generalists who gradually grew to occupy separate niches and take on radically different forms commensurate with their radically different functions within their new habitat, as has been the case with humans.
The ancient Indians, contemporary fascist philosophers, and others have identified the development of these castes, which are endogamous sub-species inhabiting cardinal niches within their societies. What begin as merely careers taken on rather arbitrarily by adults congeal into relatively fluid classes of people who are socialized for those careers. Finally, those classes crystallize into endogamous castes of people who are evolutionarily and socially adapted for those classes from birth.
Career -> Class -> Caste
But by what mechanism are they subdivided in this manner: sacral, martial, and economic? What’s innate to the nature of humanity and civilization that results in history consistently playing out along this pattern? I assert that it ultimately comes down to the method of obtaining power. By analogy, there are three cardinal ways to get a man to dig a ditch: Force, Influence, or Exchange. You can either make him dig the ditch by threatening him with violence, by persuading him with various appeals, or by simply paying him. Therein lies the origin of the tripartite division of civilized humans: martial, managerial, and mercantile.
Oligarchies deriving their power through either martial, managerial, or mercantile means are the three primary drivers of human history, with their myriad avatars and incarnations collaborating and competing within and between civilizations. With the reign of each one comes the enforcement of a moral and metaphysical worldview directly derived from its innate characteristics and circumstances.
Radical Traditionalist ideologues, pallbearers of Tradition, frame their preferred martial or managerial castes as the true bearers of Tradition against the mercantile and menial ones. They fail to systematically understand why their own Traditions declined or why the oligarchies projecting them fell into dereliction, blaming the oligarchies that filled to vacuum for their demise. My approach, evolutionary traditionalism, will hopefully illuminate the root causes of these ancient patterns and cycles, potentially empowering us to master them and wrest control of our fate.
Matt Parrott
mindweapon
So the managerial class and/or caste includes the people whose influence is based on religion?
Reginald,
Yes, but not necessarily. Anything that’s ultimately cerebral or abstract falls into this category. Neither Marxism nor Confucianism are truly religious.
Reginald,
I’m not especially patient or good with numbers. Are you able to find the correlation coefficient of these two variables for a sampling of human populations:
1. Unique female ancestors / Unique male ancestors
2. Intelligence
I’m assuming one would use sex-linked chromosome diversity as a proxy for the former and IQ from Lynn’s tables as a proxy for the latter. My hypothesis is that natural selection for intelligence was primarily sexual instead of environmental.
Matt,
“I’m assuming one would use sex-linked chromosome diversity as a proxy for the former…”
So far the only sex-linked chromosome diversity study I’ve been able to find with enough populations involved for there to be a chance of getting a meaningful correlation coefficient is here:
http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1000202
“To test whether the observed ratios are significantly different from 0.75, we employ a maximum-likelihood method to estimate confidence intervals. Our method uses a population genetic model (i.e., the coalescent) to account for the inherent uncertainty in estimating diversity and divergence rates from sequence data. Figure 2 shows 95% confidence intervals for Nx / Na. For three out of six populations (Basque, Melanesians and Mandenka), the 95% confidence intervals for the ratio of X-linked and autosomal effective population sizes does not include 0.75 (p = 0.001, 0.005 and 0.030 for the Basque, Melanesians and Mandenka, respectively). One interpretation of these results is that there is strong evidence for an unequal female and male Ne in at least three of our six populations, with estimates of the breeding sex ratio (i.e., the effective size of females to males) ranging from 2.1 in the San (Bushmen) to 12.5 in the Basque. If the observed differences in nucleotide variability on the X chromosome and autosomes are caused by long-term (demographic) processes, then the estimates of Nx / Na presented in Figure 2 will be highly correlated due to shared population history. When we use the intersection of all six confidence intervals (0.87–1.02) to estimate the range of Nx / Na values that are consistent with the data from all six populations, we estimate the range of the breeding sex ratio to be 2.4–8.7. We also note that even with a conservative Bonferroni correction, a 1:1 breeding sex ratio is rejected in two out of six populations.
We also employ a separate method for estimating the breeding sex ratio in each population that does not allow for intra-locus recombination but does permit independent mutation rates across loci (see Methods). This method produces similar results to those described above, with estimates of the ratio of female to male effective population size ranging from 1.8 in the San to 14.0 in the Basque (Table S3). We interpret this as additional evidence that the unusual patterns observed in our data are real and require explanation.”
It’s interesting that the only European population of the six in the study, the Basque, had an estimation of its female to male ratio that was so much higher than any of the others.
At the same time the sample sizes in the study really were very small, and this is reflected in the large margins of error found in this chart:
Population MLE 95%CI
Basque 14.0 (1.8 – ∞)
Han 2.5 (0.4 – ∞)
Melanesians 6.0 (1.0 – ∞)
Biaka 2.9 (0.6 – ∞)
Mandenka 4.3 (0.8 – ∞)
Bushmen 1.8 (0.2 – ∞)
You’ll notice that the Han Chinese came out as having a low female to male estimated ratio in spite of having high IQs, though with a 95% confidence interval going up to infinity I’m not sure how much that means!
And the same time it’s certainly interesting that the Basque 95% CI actually bottoms out at 1.8, which would correspond to the average male Basque going through not much less than double the selective pressure of the average female Basque.
Unless you have an extremely high male mortality rate, most of the extra selective pressure men go through relative to women is going to be coming from sexual selection of one form or another.
Note that the above study looked at X Chromosome diversity in a population (relative to Orangutans) as compared to Autosomal Chromosome diversity (relative to Orangutans) in the population.
If the same percentage of men breed in the average generation as women do, then presumably the X diversity to Autosomal diversity will come out to 0.75.
Therefore the idea is that if the X Chromosome diversity to Autosomal Chromosome diversity ratio is more than 0.75, it shows that more women than men bred in the average generation.
BTW Matt, I think I remember you posting something a while ago (it may have been in the comments of your piece Monkeys on the Moon) saying that there was evidence of a greater female to male ratio in Europeans.
Am I remembering that right?
In any event that’s consistent with this X Chromosome based study finding a higher estimated sex ratio in Basques than any other group.
Anyway, let me know if this helps.
In terms of getting a correlation coefficient, I decided to try assigning 97 to the Basque (based on Lynn’s table giving that score to the Spanish), 100 to the Chinese (directly from Lynn’s table), 54 to the Bushmen (from Lynn’s book), 63 to the Melanesians (based on Melanesia including New Guinea, which Lynn’s book gave as having a score of 63), the Biaka getting 54 (based on the Biaka probably being the same as Bushmen), and the Mandenka getting 73 (based on that being the score of Ghana in Lynn’s table, and the Mandenka having to do with the founding of Ghana).
This gets an r of +.513 between estimated IQ and estimated female to male ratio, but the trouble is that the sample size is too small for that to be statistically significant.
Good post.
The main problem with the Jews is that they are a lower caste who has used deception, lies, corrupt business acumen, and usury to raise their status to the highest echelons of society since material values and money have become all important in The West at the behest of Jewry.
Even Nietzsche, a philo-Semite, recognized the Jews as ‘chandalas,’ as an underclass of undermen, members of the lowest caste – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tschandala – with Christianity (a Jewish invented religion which worships a Jew as the Son of God) a religion which celebrates the triumph of chandala values.
“Christianity, sprung from Jewish roots and comprehensible only as a growth on this soil, represents the counter-movement to any morality of breeding, of race, privilege:—it is the anti-Aryan religion par excellence. Christianity, the revaluation of all Aryan values, the victory of chandala values, the gospel preached to the poor and base, the general revolt of all the downtrodden, the wretched, the failures, the less favored, against “race”: the undying chandala hatred as the religion of love…”
Zeitgeist,
I actually classify Jews as being a managerial caste decoupled from its original civilization, exploiting our civilization’s relative youth and lack of niche specialization to occupy that role within our maturing civilization as an invasive managerial elite. I believe that gypsies and illegal immigrants are examples of invasive menial castes.
Christ’s message resonated strongly with Europe’s most martial populations, dominating the Continent through the martial victories of its adherents. I believe Nietzsche’s mistaken, here, and that Christ’s message was more of a refutation of the ressentiment of the Pharisees than an expression of it.
I don’t believe that squares up with your model.
Maybe it’s because i’ve played too many strategy games but to me jews are just a tribe and tribes fight. I don’t see any difference between say the French and Spanish fighting a war over a gold-mine in Brazil and the jews fighting Americans or Germans over control of American media or German banking. It’s all the same thing. The only difference to me is jews didn’t have a country and therefore fought internally whereas tribes are always looking out for external threats – coincidentally giving jews a huge advantage. I see jewish actions as a kind of invisible imperialism.
The Gypsies are an interesting example. They have extremely strong dislike for non-gypsies viewing them as a source of moral polluton who must be physically avoided as much as possible. This works well to stop assimilation but obviously limits them to the fringes of the host society. There’s a strong similarity there with radical orthodox jews. You can see reform judaism would be a neccessary adaptation for their invisible imperialism to really get off the ground in a big way.
Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Absentee Edition (NSFW)
Mr Parrott – it is definitely true that Jews form an alien managerial caste within White nations, but you must remember that this is a recent 20th Century development. Before then, the idea of letting Jews have free reign to run things would’ve been laughed at by White elites in most of Europe. Yes, some White elites allowed ‘big money Jews’ to have a disproportionate effect on some aspects of business, banking, usury, etc (this mostly occurred only in the backwards Slavic nations of Eastern Europe), but they never allowed them very much political or social influence: at the end of the day, after tending to their business, the Jews still had to return to their ghettos to be locked in at night.
But in the 20th Century, slowly but surely, Jews started gaining all kinds of control using surreptitious (underclass) means. Notice also how the 20th Century (“The Jewish Century” as it has been referred to) was largely a disaster for Whites worldwide, with horrible world wars which killed off tens of millions of the best Whites, massive economic turmoil, the rise of Communism and Asia (aided by Western/often Jewish turncoats), and all kinds of other social and political problems.
The main argument against the Jewish managerial caste is that they are incompetent and corrupt, plain and simple. Look at America today: yes, the Jews are the main managerial caste, and they are ruining the nation. The USA is being destroyed by them – organized Jewry has never had more power than they currently have in America, and the nation is being destroyed by them. And look at what they did to Russia during the 20th Century too, damn near destroyed it as well. And Weimar Germany, they were the managerial caste there too – and Germany had a horrible time during the 1920s. The UK was managed by a Jewish managerial caste for a long time, and look at the state of the UK these days. And pre-1492 Spain before they were expelled en masse for their corrupt mismanagement, etc etc. My point is if you look back at these Jewish managerial elites, they aren’t really ‘elites’ at all – they are destroyers, ruiners, mismanagers, CHANDALAS pure and simple, untermenschen, a fake undeserving elite, like crazies trying to run the asylum.
We let these people manage things, and they end up ruining every-damn-thing. They should be kicked to the curb just like a corrupt corporate CEO would be fired if he ran a corporation in to the ground.
Pingback: Freemasonry and the Occult War | Counter-Currents Publishing