What am I referring to?
Of course, it is Blair Cottrell’s Hitler-esque diary entry.
Blair recently published one of his pseudoscientific scholarly cluster-fucks to his NSDAP modelled ‘NDPAU’. The article in question addressed the notions of racism, sexism, xenophobia, et al.
As per usual, to catch the attention of his most fervent readers, he overtly expanded his vocabulary repertoire, using what many would consider to be loquacious and verbose ramblings to perplex, yet cast a level of certitude amongst his patronage.
See what I did there?
Except, I didn’t have to use a thesaurus.
Now, rather than sitting here taking stabs at a ‘man’ who is oh so easy to take stabs at, I would actually like to address his drivel.
What we seem to be seeing over on UPF and NDPAU is the next stage of their attempts in desensitising their following to discrimination. Except, not being on the receiving end of discrimination, no, very much the opposite.
You may remember back a month or so ago when Blair professed that the words “homophobia, sexism, racism and Islamophobia” were ‘fabricated’. Not only is this a ridiculous notion considering that all words are a fabrication, hence their existence, (Jesus fucking Christ!) but it was the intention of the video that raised alarm bells. The UPF originally (although we strongly doubted) was created as an anti-Islamic movement, however, the ‘leaders’ of such had shady histories of attacking any minority that was not white, heterosexual, male, able and Christian.
The video seemed to address some of the main forms of discrimination in our society, and try to portray them as fallacies that are not worth considering – effectively adding anti-LGBTQI, anti-gender equality and pro-racism onto the UPF agenda.
Wind forward a month, and although it was slow, it’s finally come to fruition. A sort of ‘test the waters’ scenario. I’m talking about these two posts:
The first post is attempting to create a word that describes anti-Caucasian sentiment. Sadly (for their credibility), it delved into the idea of ‘whites are endangered’, and that’s when I switched off my openness to the idea of the discrimination. I don’t see any other racism-describing words claiming such a threat, yet I constantly see this claim of “white people are being bred out” on forums and posts by those of the far-right.
Oh, and it was also hosted on Urban Dictionary, just to make matters worse.
But, putting the idiocy of the delivery aside, it was interesting to see the reaction of their following. Not only were they overly positive to the idea of such a notion existing, but it seems they have now adopted the vocabulary, and believe it. That’s right, majority of their white following believe that anyone who opposes bigotry is just anti white. Well done Blair!
The second is a video of a magpie, coloured both black and white, with Neil narrating the clip discussing his confusion about whether a magpie can be racist, as it is black and white.
I don’t even need to address the stupidity in the idea that only white people can be racist.
This video is the second in a series of UPF videos that uses birds to legitimise “racial purity”. They state that “birds don’t mix species, so why should humans?” (I paraphrase)
Funnily, I have heard that somewhere, I wonder where?
Oh yeah – Mein Kampf:
“Walking about in the garden of Nature, most men have the self-conceit to think that they know everything; yet almost all are blind to one of the outstanding principles that Nature employs in her work. This principle may be called the inner isolation which characterizes each and every living species on this earth.
Even a superficial glance is sufficient to show that all the innumerable forms in which the life-urge of Nature manifests itself are subject to a fundamental law–one may call it an iron law of Nature–which compels the various species to keep within the definite limits of their own life-forms when propagating and multiplying their kind. Each animal mates only with one of its own species. The titmouse cohabits only with the titmouse, the finch with the finch, the stork with the stork, the field-mouse with the field-mouse, the house-mouse with the house-mouse, the wolf with the she-wolf, etc.
This urge for the maintenance of the unmixed breed, which is a phenomenon that prevails throughout the whole of the natural world, results not only in the sharply defined outward distinction between one species and another but also in the internal similarity of characteristic qualities which are peculiar to each breed or species. The fox remains always a fox, the goose remains a goose, and the tiger will retain the character of a tiger. The only difference that can exist within the species must be in the various degrees of structural strength and active power, in the intelligence, efficiency, endurance, etc., with which the individual specimens are endowed.”
Blair’s latest article borrows many lines from the above entry, almost word for word. “Iron law of Nature”, Blair?
His article asserts that equality among races is easily disproven:
“Egalitarianism, that is – the equality of all cultures, races and genders is nothing but a theoretical dogma; equality is an idea which not only has no substantial basis but is easily disproven; equality is actually a perversion of Nature, as Nature, as a rule, has established inequality.”
While in actual truth, this notion is nothing but far-right dogma. Equality and inequality in nature is simply in the eye of the beholder, the understanding of the concept is innately human.
One can argue that in the beginning of time, at the theorised ‘big bang’, it was pure equality that caused the following events, whereas someone could also argue that it was inequality. You see, although we have previously addressed the idea of “natural equity” with this man, it seems he has not quite yet grasped an evolutionary concept known as genetic diversity, which directly addresses his biggest gripe with egalitarians, the ‘problem’ that they ‘interbreed’, a ‘disease’ that he calls “xenophilia”.
Of course, if he is a creationist, then the rest of my article is going to make no sense to him.
Genetic diversity is just that – a diversity of genetic characteristics amongst genetic makeup.
Arguably, genetic diversity is the reason that we exist today, going back as early as homo sapiens sapiens mixing with homo sapiens neanderthal.
Without such ‘race betrayal’, you and I would not exist.
You see, genetic diversity allows evolution – it allows adaptation. Homogeneity within genetics causes populations to become more vulnerable through what is known as frequency-dependent selection. The more common alleles become, the higher the chance of susceptibility to pathogens and disease. Take for example, an extreme example – a consanguineous relationship (incest). This raises the risk of congenital birth defects because it increases the proportion of zygotes that are homozygous for deleterious recessive alleles that produce such disorders. The same issue exists within ‘tribes’ and even ‘purebreds’. The only difference is a factor of time. Eventually, all would begin to raise their risk of congenital birth defects due to deleterious recessive alleles. Dominant alleles are more likely to be present in offspring than recessive alleles, but if one continues to perpetuate those with similar genes in their ‘group’, the recessive gene will become more apparent. The only solution is to ‘mix’.
Genetic variation and diversity reduces these chances, as variations of the alleles that adapt to environmental changes are shared, thus giving the general population a higher chance of overcoming environmental threats. Be that disease, or biological differences that are susceptible to environmental factors (for example, fair skinned vs dark skinned and UV exposure).
Blair has openly stated that this is unnatural and should be abhorred. There is no scientific nor natural reason for genetic variations not to occur in opposition to the option of genetic homogeneity.
Poor genetic variation is disastrous to species. For example, the Cheetah has poor genetic variations, and its current and only genetic characteristics include weak sperm, which means that breeding is difficult. There is also only a 5% chance of Cheetahs living to adulthood because of their poor genes. Genetic variation is the only way this can be solved – the Cheetah in its current form will die out.
The process of genetic variation that Blair seems to hate is “miscegenation”, or “the interbreeding of people considered to be of different racial types.”
Blair claims that egalitarianism, the idea behind the practice of “miscegenation” and equality, leads to the demise of civilisations.
“But since egalitarianism alongside pacifism challenges the iron principles of Nature, it must with mathematical certainty eventually lead to the demise of the civilisation which embraces it.”
Well, Blair, I see your racism, and raise you a Cheetah and Incest.
The nations that have embraced equality seem to actually prosper. Be it whether you take the comparison by GDP, Human Development Index, Quality of Life or Life Expectancy.
It seems those pesky egalitarian embracing nations are excelling.