On the Myth of Racial Purity (or: In Defense of (a Little) Miscegenation)

Everything on this Earth is capable of improvement. Every defeat can become the father of a subsequent victory, every lost war the cause of a later resurgence, every hardship the fertilization of human energy; and from every oppression the forces for a new spiritual rebirth can come—as long as the blood is kept pure. —Adolf Hitler, in Mein Kampf 

     Lately, that is ever since I took an interest in European nationalist politics, I’ve noticed lots of talk about white genocide and the evils of multiculturalism and race mixing. But it seems to me that to some degree, at least, the very idea of maintaining racial purity is mythological. There really is no racial purity; or if it actually does exist somewhere in this world, it is a rare exception among a few extremely isolated and “marginalized” populations. So-called white genocide can certainly be considered plausible and/or problematic; but on the other hand, the virtual nonexistence of racial purity is something to consider.

     Before I get any further with this I may as well dismiss leftist academic claims that race is nothing but a cultural construct, for example the semi-famous claims of Charles Lewontin, incidentally a Jewish Marxist, that race doesn’t exist because there is more genetic diversity within groups than between them. Neo-Marxists especially are inclined to assert that race is an illusion, despite the painfully obvious fact that these same people tend to be fairly obsessed with identity politics and race. Even if the authorities decree that races are as unscientific as phlogiston or universal aether, race still has some obvious bearing on empirical reality, and even small children reportedly can correctly state a person’s race or general ethnicity with high accuracy. So, if you prefer some idea of a spectrum of genetically-conditioned “ethnicities” to “races,” then go with that while reading this. The fact is that there are clear genetic differences between human populations, correlating with the part of the world the population’s ancestors evolved to adapt to. The pathological silliness of leftist academics, in their efforts to force-fit science and reality itself to neo-Marxist ideology, is itself becoming legend.

     That said, and accepting “race” as a possibly non-technical yet still validly descriptive term, I will say that I am unaware of any really pure-blooded race (or ethnicity) of human beings alive today, with the possible exception of some indigenous tribes in Australia or the population of some small and remote island or group of islands. I used to think that the Japanese and maybe the north Germanic peoples like the Scandinavians were relatively pure racially; but it turns out that the Japanese interbred with the aboriginal inhabitants of the Japanese islands, latterly referred to as Ainu, and probably were interbreeding with other ancient tribes even before migrating into the Japanese archipelago; and a similar case is true, very probably, of the proto-Germanic Indo-Europeans who settled in northern Europe. Furthermore, both the Asians and the Europeans are considered to have approximately 3-4% Neanderthal ancestry; and Neanderthals are declared nowadays to be an entirely different species from Homo sapiens. Peninsular Arabians may be relatively pure of race for the past 3000 years or so, but even they have some mixed ancestry, including those prehistoric semi-human Neanderthals.

     Most of my own ancestry is English, so let’s consider the racial “purity” of the English. They are in fact veritable mongrels. First of course there were the proto-human inhabitants of prehistoric Britannia, including the aforementioned Homo neanderthalensis. Then came any number of waves of stone age Cro-Magnon-type peoples, the earliest “modern” humans to enter Europe. Possibly some of the Mediterranean agriculturalists reached Britain also, after spreading from western Asia. Then came the “Aryan” Celts, then the Romans and various ethnicities of the Empire moving there as migrants or being stationed there as soldiers, then Germanic tribes and even some non-Indo-Europeans like Huns after the withdrawal of the legions, then the Normans and Danes, then various peoples from British colonies and former colonies, and lately a new wave of non-English peoples largely thanks to Tony Blair, and also the European Union’s “progressive” willingness to replace much of its own population with Asian and African immigrants.

     Most nations are not so different from the UK with regard to the racial and ethnic mixing of its ancestors over the course of history. Italy has been invaded by many different races, including Latins, Etruscans, Celts, Goths, Arabs, Normans, Germans, and many others. Much the same goes for China, which is much more ethnically diverse than most westerners realize—hence the Chinese Communist Party’s efforts to assimilate Chinese Turks, for example, into the fold of Han Communism. Turkey is an interesting case of a land mass settled by early waves of “primitive” humans, then neolithic “brown” Mediterranean-type caucasians, who were then occasionally conquered by Semitic tribes, Minoans, Egyptians, and who knows who else, then were invaded by an early wave of Indo-Europeans who acted as a kind of elite Aryan veneer over an older substrate; then the area was conquered by later Indo-European nations from outside Anatolia, including Persians, Parthians, Armenians, and Greeks; then the Romans and their relative multiculturalism; and eventually a few hordes of Turks from Turkestan swept in and changed the language and culture, forming a new ruling elite without displacing all those ethnic strata already present. So the Turks are originally from the general area of the Altai Mountains in central Asia, yet many of the people of Turkey are pretty much European-looking, and I have read that Turkey has the highest incidence of green eyes in the world, even more so than the Netherlands, which is famous for green-eyed girls.

     The Americans are of course much more mongrelish (or in the words of Murdoch Chan, “mud bloods”) than just about anybody in the world, with the possible exception of someplace that started very multicultural, like Singapore, possibly even more genetically diverse than Turkey. Even “pure-blooded” English, Germans, Italians, etc. who live in the USA still carry the mixed blood of their ancestors, including that 3-4% of Neanderthal ancestry. Virtually everyone is of mixed race to some extent even if their people have managed to live in genetic isolation since the stone age.

     Ashkenazi Jews, supposedly God’s Chosen People, are certainly not a pure race, even if one discounts as “real” Jews converted Gentiles like Sammy Davis Jr., Elizabeth Taylor, and Ivanka Trump. I have read that the average Ashkenazi Jew is approximately 40% European and 60% west Asian by ancestry—despite the efforts of stricter Jews to avoid intermarriage with the goyim. Obviously some native Jews, like Scarlett Johansson, are mostly European or even “Aryan.”

     So, a valid question for any white nationalists reading this could be, Where is there a pure Aryan? The answer is Probably nowhere, especially considering that the Indo-Europeans spread out from their ancestral homeland by invading already populated areas, and they evidently didn’t indulge much in ethnic cleansing. In fact they would often marry the prettiest girls of the non-Aryan subjugated peoples, often of the former ruling class, and would even occasionally allow non-Aryan chieftains or other elites from the old culture to claim honorary Aryan or noble status under the new dispensation. Northern Germanic people like the Scandinavians perhaps have the purest “Aryan” blood because there were relatively few aboriginal inhabitants in northern Europe, largely because agriculture was not so good there; or else the aborigines were sufficiently alien-seeming that the invading Aryan men did not find their women attractive. (This would depend on whether the aborigines were similar to modern northern Europeans already or were more like little brown Eskimos.) Meanwhile, back on the steppes of southern Ukraine and southwestern Russia where the Indo-European “race” is said to have arisen, continual invasions by Asiatic nomadic tribes pretty much swamped the ethnic purity of the Aryans who remained there.

     But this is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact it is completely natural. A certain amount of genetic diversity and cross-breeding promotes so-called hybrid vigor and also reduces any negative consequences of inbreeding. Also, some racial interbreeding is a much faster and more efficient way, evolutionarily, for a population to gain beneficial genetic traits. Interbreeding to some extent with locals after invading a new area is presumably the best and fastest way of adapting genetically to a new environment, for example by acquiring resistance to endemic diseases like malaria.

     It may be helpful to review the history (including prehistory) of the European “race,” as a means of reminding us all of our mixed heritage. It began with Neanderthals, and with whatever other “proto-human” populations there were, and they remained until they were outcompeted by the more innovative Cro-Magnons—who by the time they had arrived in Europe had already interbred to some extent with west Asian Neanderthals. This wave of early Homo sapiens sapiens evolved into neolithic Europeans with standard European features, including occasional blue eyes and brown, blond, or auburn hair. Later in prehistory a wave of smaller and presumably a little darker Mediterranean caucasians spread out from west Asia as a result of overpopulation resulting from the successful survival strategy of herding and planting their own food instead of hunting and gathering it, and of building walled towns. They stayed mostly near the central sea, which is why southern Europeans tend to be smaller and darker than northern ones. Then came the Indo-European or “Aryan” expansion, beginning around 4000 BCE, in which almost all indigenous populations of Europe were conquered sufficiently that they began speaking Indo-European languages. (The Basques are the only southern European people who still speak a pre-Indo-European language, although both they and their language have undergone considerable foreign intermixture.) Phoenicians, a tribe of Semitic Asians, colonized some of the coastal areas in early historical times, and there were occasional additions of non-European blood coming in the form of west Asian traders and slaves from pretty much everywhere. Then much of Europe was conquered by the Romans, who made a relatively successful attempt at multiculturalism, and with Asian and North African Romans (and their slaves) moving at will, including into Europe. With the fall of Rome came invasions of (European) Germanic tribes and, more to the point here, waves of central and western Asian nomadic barbarians—Huns, Avars, Magyars, Arabs, Mongols, Turks, etc.—during late antiquity and the Middle Ages. Hungary and Finland are still mostly European in culture and ancestry despite speaking Asiatic languages derived from such invasions. Eastern Europeans like Russians obviously have some oriental DNA mixed in with their European genes, as can be seen in their eyes especially (consider Melania Trump’s eyes); but even they have their fair share of blonde, blue-eyed Aryan beauties.

     Now there is a new migrant crisis, and it certainly is not the first. So long as western civilization doesn’t go completely moribund, future Europeans will probably still be mostly European by ancestry. A worst case scenario might be something like Turkey perhaps: enough rampant immigration to degrade the race into culturally non-European “mud bloods,” though not enough to prevent the land from having, or so I have read, all those green eyes, and lots of brown hair if not blond.

     People say that the white race is not reproducing; but arguably what is happening is that certain types of whites aren’t reproducing. Liberals aren’t reproducing enough to maintain their numbers, but traditional conservatives, mostly Christians, are still being fruitful and multiplying—and it may be that they will eventually subsequently replace the liberals who have virtually sterilized themselves, partly out of a sense of neo-Marxist racial self-loathing or “white guilt.” European types almost certainly won’t die out through lack of a will to breed. I’m hypothesizing that what we’re experiencing now is just a phase that is temporarily running its course.

     Contrary cases to modern Turkey have also occurred, in which Indo-Europeans have colonized some territory and then have had their blood mostly diluted with non-Aryan essences (so to speak). A classic example is India, in which the Bronze Age Aryan invaders didn’t wipe out the indigenous peoples but mostly just ruled over them; and after thousands of years of occasional intermarriage with Dravidians, who themselves had mixed with the still earlier Australoid inhabitants of the subcontinent, it’s now mostly just some of the people of the highest social classes that still retain obvious European-like genetic traits. A similar case has occurred with Spaniards throughout much of Latin America; a few nations like Argentina underwent ethnic cleansing and are mostly European by ancestry today, but even in largely Amerindian Mexico the ruling elites tend to look much more European and fair-skinned than the proletarian masses.

     The important point is that any crossbreeding should be beneficial, with intelligence, health, and vitality being of high importance. Some interbreeding with Jews and East Asians especially is probably more good than bad, or at least neutral on balance, so long as it is conducted in moderation. This is especially true with regard to general intelligence, considering that Ashkenazi Jews and East Asians have a higher average IQ than do “Aryan” Europeans. Remember, we were never racially pure anyway.

     Thus a smallish amount of interbreeding actually benefits a population as it continues to evolve, inexorably, in a forwards direction. Even so, rampant “miscegenation” to the point of producing a uniform race of light brown mongrels with an average IQ of 90 would very likely result in the decline (or crash) of a formerly European society into something more like Turkey or Algeria; and America has the potential, if Americans don’t wise up soon, of becoming North Mexico.

     So in conclusion I would just observe that people demanding “racial purity” are really demanding that the race stay essentially the same as it was one or two centuries ago. Otherwise racial purity is a myth.

The Germanic inhabitant of the American continent, who has remained racially pure and unmixed, rose to become master of the same; he will remain master as long as he does not fall victim to defilement of the blood. —Hitler and Mein Kampf again


  1. Great article!

    I am a traditional leaning right wing type but never understood Hitler's obsession with "Blood" and race. It's very materialistic and to me puts the cart before the horse in many ways. That said race and class can not be totally dismissed either. Kamma is the natural law principle dictating present states. Mind is chief and has a certain momentum that takes it from existence to existence. If anythin , the race and culture one is born into tells us more about the previous life but how we react in this present moment will reflect where we end up. To me this is why Hitler failed and why many in the right wing European nationalist movements will continue to fail. Blood doesnt make one noble! As many can see, there are many white degenerate cultural marxist types whose blood does nothing for their mental trajectory. The mental trajectory has to be set by each individual and many passively let it go with the popular social currents of the day without much critical thought. Not to get off on a tangent but culture is more important for a society than a race. Keeping the 4 right efforts is one of the best ways in my opinion to refine both the micro and macro scales. To develop the wholesome states. To maintain wholesome States. To abandon all unwholesome States. And to prevent the arising of unwholesome States. For the people who wish to operate in this world, it would be good for them to remember this as they manage their families and live in their communities on the macro worldly level and of course this refining formula can go to the most subtle levels for the individual who aspires for the unconditioned...

    The above is just my take but I would like to hear your thoughts on such a subject in regard to mind and kamma and how it might relate to race, culture, and class. The Buddha seemed to be against the knee jerk reactions and responses of those who saw class alone as a mark of nobility. What can we take from this in response to the world we live in today? Worlds collide heavily in this day and age. Various, cultures and races of people mix and it seems to create a sort of turbulence in the mental/emotional climates. All people still with various degrees of greed, aversion, and ignorance. Identifying with self and by extension recognizing others and forming alliances with those similar and thus there are cultural/racial attachments and the preservation of a race/culture seems nothing more than a extension of the very self nature (ignorance).... What are your thoughts?

    1. Well, I agree that the mental states of a people are more important than their ancestry; although as guys like Evola have said, each race has its own "spirit," and so generates its own culture in accordance with that spirit. He admitted, though, that, say, a non-Aryan could have an Aryan spirit. Even a lot of hard-right Euronationalists show respect for the Japanese, for example, because they show a spirit that is compatible with Euronationalist ideals. The thing is, though, that a society's genetic makeup (using non-Buddhist terms) does influence its culture. An obvious example would be average intelligence: people with an average IQ of 85 aren't going to be able to produce a society with the same level of technical sophistication as a population with an average IQ of over a hundred. But yeah, the culture we're born into is the fruition of past kamma.

      So I think rampant immigration from non-western societies is a horrible idea, although small amounts of it have been happening since the stone age and is not bad at all. And a society should be held together with noble ideals and values rather than by appeals to race. I don't know if I answered your questions, but that's what I have to offer for now.

    2. Yes, thank you Bhante.


Post a Comment

Hello, I am now moderating comments, so there will probably be a short delay after a comment is submitted before it is published, if it is published. This does have the advantage, though, that I will notice any new comments to old posts. Comments are welcome, but no spam, please. (Spam may include ANY anonymous comment which has nothing specifically to do with the content of the post.)


Most Clicked On