Glass i stora lass

 

Vi minns ju en viss annan glass också. Just det: Nogger Black...

Glassarna vi minns

I can´t breathe

 

A propos the current situation in the UK. Yes, it´s possible that Nigel Farage and Reform will win the next elections, in part because of the recent murder in Southampton and the way the local police (mis)handled the situation. The murderer was a Sikh, presumably of Indian descent. The victim was White and British.

So Farage might become the next British Prime Minister. Promising to stop Indian mass migration. In power, he will then import even more Indian (and other) migrants. Because neo-liberal capitalism needs the cheap labour, obviously. And because of the demographic crisis more generally.

And that´s that. We now resume our regular programming! 

Det här känns så 2012

 

De senaste dagarna har jag vid två eller tre tillfällen sett uttrycket "rasifierade" (på engelska "racialized"). Men herre-fucking-gud, den här terminologin känns så 2012. 

Dessutom är den absurd, eftersom de "rasifierade personerna" (okej, de är inte längre "kroppar" utan faktiska personer - whoa, framsteg, kamrater!) av allt att döma *vill vara rasifierade*. Är inte det själva poängen med identitetspolitiken? 

Okej, låt mig gissa. De vänsterungdomar som blev radikaliserade circa 2012 sitter numera i ledningen för diverse organisationer...och har helt enkelt fortsatt med den floskulösa retorik de fick lära sig första året på kulturvetarlinjen?

Woke-vänstern stretar på... 

Xi you later

 

Jag visste att TH skulle ta upp detta, tänkte faktiskt på honom när jag såg rubriken för några dagar sedan...

Gulinghumor

On the skids

 

Some "based" takes on class, ethnicity and intelligence c/o Edward Dutton. You probably know the drift already. Dutton is reacting to a recent British documentary about the plight of the "White working class", arguing that it´s really the underclass that´s being depicted. He also notes that the docu defines "White working class" as an "ethnic group"! 

OK, *that´s* a new one. Either somebody made a silly mistake, or the people behind the documentary assume (perhaps correctly?) that nobody will care about poor Whites in Woke UK, unless these are re-defined as another ethnic minority worthy of our special consideration, alongside Muslims, Blacks, or what have you.

Dutton points out the irony that this was once a super-reactionary position. During the Victorian era, the British elites wondered aloud whether the workers really were British / English, or a completely different (unknown) ethnicity altogether! That, of course, was a form of racism, not progressive politics...

Another interesting question is whether this is some kind of paradigm shift, a trial balloon, or just some stray TV program of little importance.    

The Southern strategy

 

Credit: Frank Vassen

The midterm elections probably won´t be pretty, let´s put it that way...

Voting Rights Act Supreme Court victory gets GOP giddy over saving midterms

!!!

 

Inte?! 

"Jag är inte för fri invandring eller hög mångfaldsnivå i sig"

Den färgade qvinnans börda

 

Saxat från Aftonbladet. Men det är väl snarast Woke-vänstern som älskar döda vita män, eller? :P

Unbelievable

 

Incarcerating every gang member in the country actually makes crime rates collapse. In the Third World. Amazing.

So how come this doesn´t work in Western nations?  

Ta upp det med Saudi-Arabien

 

Lägg märke till att de muslimska länderna röstade för en resolution från Ghana som fördömer den trans-atlantiska (läs: vita) slavhandeln. Men om Ghana vill ha ekonomisk ersättning för slaveriet, borde de kanske vända sig till de rikaste muslimska länderna. Saudi-Arabien förslavade afrikaner fortfarande på 1950-talet. Den muslimska slavhandeln var dessutom ännu mer omfattande än den europeiska. Och var globalt expansiv under en längre tid.

Kanske borde Europa också kräva ekonomisk ersättning från den muslimska världen? Med tanke på hur många européer som förslavades av muslimerna under flera århundraden...

Och slutligen kanske Ghanas olika etniska grupper borde kräva ekonomisk ersättning av varandra, eftersom olika afrikanska kungariken deltog i den transatlantiska slavhandeln. Varifrån tror ni att slavarna kom från början? Tror ni att de kidnappades av vita slavjägare? Sådant förekom, men i betydligt mindre omfattning i Västafrika än vad många verkar tro. De ondskefulla vita djävlarna inhandlade svarta slavar från *svarta* slavjägare.  

Kort sagt: den här resolutionen är bara trams. Ett utspel, helt enkelt. Och så går vi vidare. 

Ghanas resolution, och så vidare

Dax att flexa lite

 

LOL. I själva verket har ju Jan Guillou en poäng. Oavsett vad man anser om "själva sakfrågan". Gorillan fortsätter att flexa!

Jan Guillou pekas ut som rasist

The human zoo

 

This sounds like parody, but probably isn´t. Get a grip, Eddie my dear. 

Till sista andetaget?

 

Lite lustigt att Simona Mohamsson faktiskt har rätt i den här frågan. Särskilt med tanke på att debattartikeln verkar ha publicerats typ nu. Oerhört fåniga lögner, måste jag säga. Och Stalin fick 99% av rösterna i fria val i Sovjetunionen, eller vad? 

Mohamsson, håll isär religion och politik

White as they come

 

Once, I asked a White supremacist (?) on YouTube if Albanians are White. He denied it.

The picture above shows the Albanian national hero, the Catholic crusader Skanderbeg. Looks White to me... 

Värderingar

 

Texten på skylten lyder alltså:
"Weird hill to die on, but at least you´re dead"
Credit: The Fourth Way

Woke-vänstern stretar på...

Lägg märke till att AB:s skribent inte med ett ord nämner "elefanten i rummet": invandrargrupper med konservativa värderingar. Som knappast bryr sig om vad Kristersson eller Busch säger. Lägg också märke till att hon stödjer tanken att våldtäktsmän och manliga mördare som är "trans" ska kunna placeras på kvinnofängelser. Efter "noggrann prövning" bläh-bläh-bläh. Whatever. Och nej, jag vill inte heller bo granne med "Vilma" på Ekerö...

Har inte läst undersökningen och tänker inte heller göra det. Litar dock på Tobias Hübinette som på sin blogg säger detta: "Omvänt är flickor och unga kvinnor överlag mer toleranta liksom barn från den akademiska medelklassen medan elever med svensk bakgrund hyser mer negativa attityder till invandrare och muslimer medan elever med utländsk bakgrund hyser mer negativa attityder till hbtq-personer och judar samt även till romer och samer." (Min kursiv.)

Men vad vet jag, Busch kanske har sagt något negativt om lappjävlar som perkolerat ner till hodden... 

Var femte ung vill inte bo granne med hbtq-person

Landets barn och unga blir alltmer intoleranta

White Nationalists say: Breed more colored babies!

 

White Christian Nationalists want more colored babies!

J D Vance wants to expand "Mexico City Policy", halt foreign abortions

Owned

 

I´ve heard this argument all my life, including from "liberals" and leftists. Somebody on X knows the implications...

White as the night (part 3)

 

Credit: Rolf Broberg

We now resume our original programming...

How old is the so-called Nordic racial type (or: how old is it alleged to be)?

Short answer first, then the careful unpacking:

The “Nordic racial type” was alleged to be very ancient—often Upper Paleolithic or even Ice Age–old—but in reality the traits associated with it are mostly late Holocene (post-Neolithic), emerging within the last ~6,000–4,000 years.

Now let’s separate what was claimed from what the evidence actually shows.

---

1. How old the Nordic type was alleged to be

Classical racial anthropology (late 19th–early 20th c.)

Different authors dated the Nordic type differently, but all agreed it was very old.

Typical claims:

• Upper Paleolithic origin (30,000–15,000 BP)

  • Nordics descended from Cro-Magnons

  • Ice Age hunters of northern Europe

• Mesolithic survival

  • Nordics as relict hunter-gatherers of Scandinavia

• Even earlier (speculative)

  • Some writers implied a primordial European type emerging soon after modern humans entered Europe

Key figures and views:

• Ripley (1899): Nordic race ancient, pre-Neolithic

• Günther: Nordic race as the original European race

• Coon: Nordics derived from Upper Paleolithic Europeans, later modified by selection

So in its own literature, the Nordic type was often imagined as tens of thousands of years old.

---

2. What traits define the “Nordic” type?

Classic Nordic package:

• Tall stature

• Long (dolichocephalic) skull

• Narrow face and nose

• Light skin

• Blond hair

• Light eyes (blue/gray)

Crucially:

• These traits were assumed to co-evolve

• And to define a stable biological “race”

That assumption is where things break down.

---

3. What modern genetics and archaeology show instead

A. Upper Paleolithic Europeans were not Nordic

Ancient DNA and phenotype reconstructions show:

• Cro-Magnons:

  • Dark skin likely common

  • Hair likely dark

  • Eyes sometimes light, often dark

• No evidence of a “Nordic package”

So the alleged Ice Age Nordics did not exist as such.

---

B. Light skin is very recent

As discussed earlier:

• Key European light-skin alleles:

  • Rise sharply after ~8,000 BP

  • Often after agriculture

• Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans:

  • Likely dark-skinned or intermediate

Thus:

• A defining Nordic trait appears late, not early

---

C. Blond hair is also late and unstable

• Blond hair is rare in ancient genomes before the Holocene

• It likely spread via:

  • Sexual selection

  • Founder effects

• Probably post-Neolithic

Again: not Paleolithic.

---

D. Tall stature & cranial shape are plastic

• Height varies with:

  • Diet

  • Climate

  • Selection

• Cranial shape shifts over millennia

• No stable “Nordic skull” persists through deep time

---

4. Where the Nordic look actually comes from

Steppe ancestry (Yamnaya-related)

• Enters Europe ~5,000 BP

• Contributes:

  • Tall stature

  • Certain craniofacial traits

• But:

  • Steppe populations themselves were not Nordic-looking in the racial sense

Northern latitude selection

• Low UV → light skin

• Possibly light hair/eyes favored

• These traits intensify after steppe admixture

Result:

A composite phenotype emerges in northern Europe during the Bronze Age and later.

---

5. So how old is the Nordic type, really?

Depending on what you mean:

• As a racial essence:
  → Never existed

• As a distinct phenotype cluster (tall, light-skinned, blond, light-eyed northern Europeans):
  → ~4,000–3,000 years old at most

• As something mistakenly projected into the Ice Age:
  → A myth retrojected backward

---

6. Why the illusion of great antiquity persisted

Three main reasons:

1. Skulls don’t show pigmentation

   • Anthropologists projected modern skin/hair color onto ancient bones

2. Romantic nationalism

   • Northern Europe wanted deep roots

3. Lack of time depth awareness

   • No genetics, no ancient DNA

They mistook:

recent local adaptations
for
primordial racial essence

---

7. Final synthesis

The Nordic racial type was alleged to be Ice Age–old, but the phenotype it describes is largely a late Holocene product of steppe admixture and northern-latitude selection.

Or more bluntly:

Nordic man was imagined as ancient, but he is evolutionarily young.

 

White as the night (part 2)

 

Siri, were the first Caucasoids actually Black?  

The irony with the Caucasoid concept is that the earliest Caucasoids (or proto-Caucasoids in Africa) must have been dark-skinned, since "White" skin didn´t evolve until much later in Europe!

Yes — that irony is real, well-recognized in modern anthropology, and it neatly exposes how misleading the old racial categories were.

You’re exactly right: the earliest humans who would have been called “Caucasoid” were almost certainly dark-skinned, and in many cases African.

Let’s unpack this carefully and rigorously.

---

1. Skin color and “race” were conflated far too early

19th-century racial taxonomy quietly assumed:

Caucasoid = white skin

But biologically, skin pigmentation and craniofacial morphology are only weakly linked, and they evolve under very different selective pressures.

• Cranial traits respond slowly and are polygenic

• Skin pigmentation responds rapidly to UV radiation and vitamin D balance

So the premise was flawed from the start.

---

2. What we know about the evolution of light skin

Key genetic facts (solid consensus)

• All early Homo sapiens in Africa were dark-skinned

• The ancestral human condition is dark pigmentation

• Light skin in Europeans is recent and derived

Timing

• Major European light-skin alleles (e.g. SLC24A5, SLC45A2) rise to high frequency:

  • ~8,000–5,000 years ago

  • Mostly during / after the Neolithic

• Upper Paleolithic Europeans (Cro-Magnons):

  • Likely dark-skinned

  • Possibly light-eyed in some cases, but not “white”

So even the canonical “Caucasoids” of racial anthropology were not white by modern standards.

---

3. Earliest “Caucasoid” candidates: African and dark-skinned

Levantine early modern humans (Skhul, Qafzeh)

• ~120–90 kya

• Anatomically modern

• Historically described as proto-Caucasoid

• Almost certainly:

  • Dark-skinned

  • African in origin

  • Adapted to high-UV environments

North African populations

• Mechta-Afalou, Capsian

• Likely medium-to-dark pigmentation

• No genetic or climatic reason to be “white”

Horn of Africa

• Dark-skinned populations with narrow faces and noses

• Another direct refutation of skin-color = race

---

4. Why “white” skin evolved late in Europe

Light skin is not a prestige trait — it’s a metabolic adaptation.

At high latitudes:

• Low UV → vitamin D deficiency risk

• Selection favors reduced melanin

This process:

• Took thousands of years

• Happened independently in:

  • Europe

  • East Asia (via different genes)

So “white Europeans” are a late, local adaptation, not a primordial type.

---

5. The real irony (and the real lesson)

If we apply the old racial logic consistently:

• The earliest Caucasoids were African

• They were dark-skinned

• “White people” appear late and regionally

• Skin color is one of the least stable human traits

So the very category meant to anchor “whiteness” collapses under evolutionary scrutiny.

---

6. Why this matters conceptually (and not just politically)

The deeper issue isn’t moral; it’s epistemological.

“Caucasoid” tried to:

• Freeze a dynamic evolutionary process

• Into a static essence

Modern genetics shows instead:

• Continua, not types

• Time layers, not races

• Adaptations, not essences

Which, interestingly, lines up rather well with the kind of anti-essentialism you’ve explored before in Buddhist and metaphysical contexts — phenomena arise from conditions, not fixed natures.

---

One-line conclusion

Yes: the earliest so-called Caucasoids were almost certainly dark-skinned Africans — and that fact alone shows why “Caucasoid” was never a coherent biological category.

White as the night (part 1)

 

Siri, where did White people come from? 

What are the earliest human skulls/remains which could be classified as "Caucasoid" (assuming for the sake of the argument that Caucasoid is a valid category)?

Short answer (under your stated assumption): the earliest human remains ever described as “Caucasoid” are the early anatomically modern Homo sapiens from the Levant, especially Skhul and Qafzeh (≈120–90 thousand years ago). Later Upper Paleolithic Europeans then become the classic reference sample.

Below is a careful, historically accurate breakdown.

---

First: a necessary caveat (kept brief)

“Caucasoid” is a 19th–20th century typological category, not a biological lineage. It groups certain craniofacial traits (narrow nasal aperture, orthognathic face, relatively gracile skull, etc.), not a coherent population history. Still, many older paleoanthropological descriptions did apply it, and that’s what your question is about.

---

Earliest remains historically labeled “Caucasoid”

1. Skhul and Qafzeh hominins (Levant)

Date: ~120,000–90,000 BP
Location: Present-day Israel
Species: Anatomically modern Homo sapiens

Why they matter

• These are the earliest anatomically modern humans outside Africa

• Several crania (e.g., Skhul V, Qafzeh 9) were explicitly described in older literature as having “proto-Caucasoid” or “Caucasoid” morphology

• Traits cited:

  • High, rounded cranial vault

  • Reduced brow ridges (compared to archaic humans)

  • Narrower nasal aperture

  • Relatively orthognathic face

Important nuance

• They show mixed features (some robust, some gracile)

• Many researchers now interpret them as early African-derived modern humans, not ancestors of later Europeans

• Still, historically, these are the earliest fossils ever put into that category

➡ This is the correct answer if “earliest” is taken strictly.

---

2. Oase 1 (Romania)

Date: ~40,000 BP
Location: Peștera cu Oase
Notes

• Early European modern human with significant Neanderthal admixture

• Sometimes excluded from classic “Caucasoid” lists due to archaic traits

• Rarely used as a type specimen, but worth mentioning chronologically

---

3. Early Upper Paleolithic Europeans (“Cro-Magnons”)

Date: ~40,000–30,000 BP
Key sites

• Cro-Magnon (France) – ~30 ka

• Kostenki 14 (Russia) – ~37 ka

• Sungir (Russia) – ~34 ka

• Predmostí (Czech Republic) – ~27 ka

Why they became the “classic Caucasoid”

• These populations were the primary reference material for 19th–early 20th century racial typology

• They exhibit:

  • Tall stature

  • Narrow faces

  • Prominent but refined noses

  • Gracile postcranial skeletons

• Often treated (incorrectly, by modern standards) as ancestral to later Europeans

---

Summary table

Earliest → Later

• Skhul & Qafzeh (Levant) – 120–90 ka → earliest remains ever called Caucasoid

• Oase 1 (Romania) – ~40 ka → transitional, mixed

• Cro-Magnon & Upper Paleolithic Europeans – 40–30 ka → classic typological reference

---

Bottom line

If one accepts “Caucasoid” as a valid category for the sake of argument, then:

The earliest human remains classified as Caucasoid are the Skhul and Qafzeh early modern humans of the Levant (~120–90 kya).

Later European Upper Paleolithic populations supplied the canonical examples, but not the earliest ones.

Have any "Caucasoid" skulls/remains been found in Africa itself?

Jebel Irhoud (Morocco)

• Date: ~315,000 BP

• Status: Early Homo sapiens

These skulls were not usually labeled Caucasoid (they predate the concept’s applicability), but they:

• Were sometimes retroactively described as showing “incipient Caucasoid traits”

• Played a role in arguments that Caucasoid morphology originated in Africa

This was especially common in mid-20th-century literature.