Ok

En poursuivant votre navigation sur ce site, vous acceptez l'utilisation de cookies. Ces derniers assurent le bon fonctionnement de nos services. En savoir plus.

vendredi, 11 novembre 2011

Les derniers néandertaliens près du cercle polaire?


Localisation du site de Byzovaya

Les derniers néandertaliens près du cercle polaire?

Ex: http://tpprovence.wordpress.com/

Publié dans la revue américaine Science du 13 mai 2011, l’étude réalisée par une équipe internationale, sur des vestiges retrouvés à proximité du cercle polaire arctique et caractéristique de la culture moustérienne, bouscule les théories établies.

Une équipe pluridisciplinaire de chercheurs français du CNRS (1), en collaboration avec des scientifiques norvégiens et russes, s’est intéressée au site préhistorique de Byzovaya, localisé en Russie, dans l’Ouest de l’Oural, juste au dessous du cercle polaire, sur l’actuel emplacement de la république des Komis. C’est là que, depuis 1996, des archéologues ont exhumé plus de 300 objets en pierre et 4 000 os d’animaux – mammouth, renne, ours brun, rhinocéros laineux, bœuf musqué, loup et renard polaire – portant des traces de dépeçage dues à des chasseurs. Mais aucun reste humain.

Les outils sur éclats découverts ressemblent aux grattoirs et aux instruments de découpe caractéristiques du Moustérien. Effectivement, la culture moustérienne, qui s’est épanouie au cours du Paléolithique moyen (-300 000 à – 33 000 ans), se caractérise par l’utilisation d’une grande variété de tels outils. En Europe, l’usage de ces objets a été exclusivement associée à Homo neanderthalensis, même si des fouilles démontrent que cette technologie a aussi été utilisée par Homo sapiens, l’homme moderne, au Proche-Orient entre – 200 000 et – 40 000 ans. Jusqu’à présent, les scientifiques estimaient que cette culture lithique archaïque n’aurait pas permis à Néandertal la colonisation des espaces nordiques les plus extrêmes et lui aurait été fatale il y a 33 000 à 36 000 ans. Il aurait alors cédé la place à l’Homme moderne, qui aurait occupé l’ensemble de l’Eurasie grâce à sa plus grande maîtrise technique.

Outils moustériens de Byzovaya

Le professeur Trinkaus, anthropologue à l’Université Washington de Saint-Louis, souligne qu’il s’agit de vestiges « très intéressants en termes d’informations sur des hommes présents si loin au nord au cours du Paléolithique moyen ».

Une datation surprenante

Grâce à la datation au radiocarbone – ou carbone 14 – et à l’utilisation de la technique de « luminescence optique simulée », qui permet de savoir quand des sédiments ont été exposés à la lumière pour la dernière fois, les chercheurs ont pu dater avec précision les vestiges. Les résultats indiquent qu’ils remontent à 28 500 ans, 8 000 ans après la supposée disparition de l’homme de Néandertal. « A cette période on ne trouve, dans toute l’Eurasie, que des cultures du paléolithique supérieur propres à l’Homo sapiens » explique l’un des membres de l’expédition, le Français Ludovic Slimak.

Ces résultats, qui contredisent la vulgate jusqu’alors admise par le monde scientifique, étonnent donc les chercheurs. D’abord, ils montrent que la culture moustérienne aurait survécu plus longtemps que l’on ne pensait. En outre, aucune société du Moustérien n’avait encore été découverte à proximité directe du cercle polaire. Dans la revue Science, ce même Slimak, remarque que la présence de cette culture est « localisée à 1 000 kilomètres plus au Nord que la limite connue jusqu’à présent » ! Enfin, le site de Byzovaya n’aurait été occupé qu’une seule fois, il y a 28 500 ans environ .

Homo neanderthalensis ou Homo sapiens ?

Cette découverte pose donc de nombreuses questions sur les utilisateurs de cette culture moustérienne à proximité du Pôle. Selon l’archéologue John Shea, de l’Université Stony Brook de New York, il n’est pas totalement exclu que les outils de Byzovaya soient l’œuvre d’un « cousin » de Néandertal, identifié récemment, l’Homme de Denisova. Pour sa part, John Hoffecker, de l’Université du Colorado, partisan de la thèse Homo sapiens, estime que les artefacts ressemblent à des outils de pierre utilisés par certains chasseurs-cueilleurs récents : « Byzovaya offre probablement plutôt des preuves que les hommes modernes, à l’âge de pierre, ont rapidement poussé jusqu’à l’Arctique à partir de latitudes plus basses, en Asie occidentale, au moins sur une base saisonnière ».

Toutefois, les auteurs de l’étude penchent plutôt pour l’hypothèse néandertalienne, insistant sur le fait qu’ils n’ont découvert sur le site aucune lame ou lamelle, pourtant caractéristiques de l’industrie lithique sapiens de l’époque. Pour eux, attribuer les outils de Byzovaya à l’Homme moderne, « cela impliquerait que des groupes Homo sapiens de l’Arctique aient conservé une culture bien plus ancienne de l’âge de pierre, après l’expansion des sociétés d’hommes modernes dans le reste de l’Eurasie ».

L’équipe internationale suppose donc que les Néandertaliens, même disparus d’Eurasie, pourraient bien avoir survécu dans cette région reculée proche du cercle polaire. « Nous considérons qu’il est extrêmement probable que la technologie moustérienne que nous décrivons a été réalisée par les Néandertaliens et donc qu’ils ont en effet survécu plus longtemps – soit jusqu’à 33 000 ans BP – que la plupart des autres scientifiques ne le croient » précise Jan Mangerud, professeur à l’Université de Bergen et co-auteur de l’étude. Une hypothèse pourtant contredite par la récente redatation d’os néandertaliens trouvés dans le Caucase, selon laquelle cette espèce y aurait disparu après 40 000 BP (2).  Pour l’auteur de cette redatation caucasienne, le professeur Thomas Higham, de l’Université d’Oxford, il se peut que la découverte de Bizovaya « revienne à déconsidérer la supposition selon laquelle outils moustériens = occupation néandertalienne ». Il concède cependant qu’ « il se pourrait que les derniers Néandertaliens dans la région survivaient dans des refuges de l’Arctique comme Byzovaya, longtemps après que leurs frères plus au Sud aient disparu ». Pour rajouter à la confusion, rappelons que les travaux de Clive Finlayson ont conclu à la survivance encore bien plus récente de Néandertaliens – 24 000 ans -, bien plus à l’Ouest, dans la caverne de Gorham, à Gibraltar.

La disparition des Néandertaliens

L’Homme de Néandertal aurait-il vécu plus longtemps que présumé ? Ou bien les porteurs de cette ultime culture moustérienne auraient-ils été des Homo sapiens dépositaires de l’héritage culturel néandertalien ? Dans ce dernier cas, les théories expliquant l’extinction des Néandertaliens par l’archaïsme de leur culture, leur incapacité à s’adapter et à coloniser les environnements nordiques les plus extrêmes de la planète, seraient remises en cause. « L’absence de fossiles humains ne permet pas de trancher cette question » regrette Ludovic Slimak. La réponse attesterait soit de la persistance d’un foyer de Néandertaliens dans une zone septentrionale, soit de la persistance d’une culture des milliers d’années après l’extinction du groupe biologique qui lui est associé.

Ludovic Slimak et Pavel Pavlov examinant une défense de mammouth du gisement de Byzovaya

Quoi qu’il en soit, « la présence de traces de culture moustérienne toute proche du Pôle remet en cause cette hypothèse climatique de même que sa supposée infériorité technique », estiment les auteurs de l’étude sur Byzovaya. Pour Ludovic Slimack, il ne faut pas chercher une cause unique à la disparition de Néandertal : « Il est plus que probable qu’il y ait eu des causes d’extinctions variées en fonction de la localisation des divers groupes de Néandertaliens ». Il conclut : « Les Néandertaliens n’ont pas disparu en raison de changements climatiques ou d’une infériorité culturelle. Il est clair que, montrant sa capacité d’adaptation, la culture moustérienne ne peux plus être considérée comme archaïque ».

Les enjeux scientifiques de cette découverte sont immenses, comme l’écrivent les chercheurs dans la revue Science : « Cette découverte remet en question l’hypothèse la plus souvent avancée selon laquelle l’Homo sapiens aurait complètement remplacé les Néandertaliens dans toute l’Europe il y a environ 37 000 ans ». Encore un dogme scientiste qui vole en éclat. Au suivant !

Jean-François Vilhet, Hyperborée, automne-hiver 2011, n°12.

Références : L.Slimak, J.I.Svendsen, J.Mangerud, H.Plisson, H.P.Heggen, A.Brugère et P.Y.Pavlov « Late mousterian persistence near the Arctic Circle », Science, 13 mai 2011.

Notes

(1) Laboratoire travaux et recherches archéologiques sur les cultures, les espaces et les sociétés (CNRS, Université Toulouse-Le Mirail, ministère de la Culture et de la communication, INRAP, EHESS), Laboratoire de la préhistoire à l’actuel : culture, environnement et anthropologie (CNRS, Université Bordeaux I, ministère de la Culture et de la communication, INRAP), Laboratoire archéologies et sciences de l’Antiquité (CNRS, universités Paris I Sorbonne et Paris Ouest Nanterre-La Défense, ministère de la Culture et de la communication,).

(2) L’expression « avant le présent » (en anglais, Before Present : BP) est utilisée en archéologie pour désigner les âges exprimés en nombre d’années comptées vers le passé à partir de l’année 1950 du calendrier grégorien. Cette date a été fixée arbitrairement comme année de référence et correspond aux premiers essais de datation au carbone 14.

vendredi, 21 octobre 2011

L'Afrique Réelle N°22

L'Afrique Réelle N°22 - Octobre 2011

 
 
 
SOMMAIRE :

Numéro spécial : Les Berbères

- Un peuple aux origines multiples
- L'Egypte : une création berbère ?
- Les pharaons berbères
- Les Berbères durant l'antiquité
- Comment les Berbères furent-ils arabisés ? Entretien avec Bernard Lugan
 
EDITORIAL :
 
 

La guerre de Libye a replacé les Berbères au coeur de l’actualité. Le contentieux les opposant au régime du colonel Khadafi était à ce point fort qu’ils furent parmi les premiers à se soulever, juste après les Arabes de Benghazi en Cyrénaïque. Sans les Berbères, le régime libyen ne serait pas tombé puisque c’est en effet le front qu’ils ouvrirent depuis le djebel Nefusa, sur les arrières du bastion régimiste tripolitain, qui permit de couper la frontière avec la Tunisie, puis d’isoler Tripoli, ce qui permit ensuite la prise de la ville. Tout à son nationalisme arabo-islamique, le colonel Khadafi niait la question berbère. En 2007 il déclara ainsi :

« (…) les tribus amazighs (berbères) se sont éteintes il y a longtemps, depuis le temps du royaume de Numidie. Personne n’a le droit de dire « je viens d’ici ou de là-bas ». Celui qui le fait est un agent du colonialisme, qui veut diviser pour régner ». (Mouammar Khadafi, Discours à la Nation, le 2 mars 2007).

Les Berbères qui se désignent sous le nom Imazighen (Amazigh au pluriel), ce qui signifie « homme libre », constituent le fond ancien de toute la population de l’Afrique du Nord, depuis le delta du Nil jusqu’à l’Atlantique et de la Méditerranée jusqu’au Sahel. Les berbérophones ne subsistent plus aujourd’hui en tant que groupes homogènes que dans quelques isolats généralement montagneux ou dans des oasis.
Le monde berbère a eu son histoire propre durant plusieurs millénaires. A la différence de ceux de l’Est, les Berbères de l’Ouest ont constitué des Etats qui s’étendirent sur tout le Maghreb. A partir du VIIe siècle, l’islamisation, avec l’arabisation linguistique qu’elle implique, modifia en profondeur la berbérité, au point de lui faire perdre sa mémoire et ses racines.

Après les indépendances, les nouvelles autorités gouvernementales développèrent une extrême méfiance à l’égard de la langue berbère, le fait berbère lui-même étant vu comme un ferment de division, sa propre existence contredisant le mythe de l’ « arabité » du Maghreb. L’enseignement du berbère disparut ainsi au Maroc avec la suppression en 1956 de la chaire de berbère de l’Institut des hautes Etudes Marocaines de Rabat, et en 1962 avec la suppression de celle de l’université d’Alger.

Au Maroc, le nationalisme s’affirma initialement contre la berbérité, son adversaire principal n’étant pas tant la France que la montagne féodale et berbère. Comme l’amazighité affirmait la double composante du pays, arabe et berbère, le parti Istiqlal représentant les Arabes et les arabo andalous des villes, parla alors de dérive « ethnique », « raciste » et « xénophobe » menaçant de détruire l’Etat. L’inquiétude des élites arabo-musulmanes pouvait être compréhensible face aux déclarations de certains berbérophones. Aussi tard qu’en 2004, le grand intellectuel berbère Mohammed Chafik publia ainsi un article dont le titre explosif était « Et si l’on décolonisait l’Afrique du Nord pour de bon ! »,[1] et dans lequel il écrivait que « Les Imazighen en sont réduits à se sentir étrangers chez eux (…) Au fait, pourquoi le Maghreb arabe n’arrive-t-il pas à se former ? C’est précisément parce qu’il n’est pas arabe ».

En Algérie, figé dans sa gangue idéologique, le régime demeure aujourd’hui encore un jacobinisme arabo-musulman fondant sa légitimité à la fois sur la négation de l’histoire du pays et sur celle de sa composition ethnique. Ici, la question kabyle s’est posée avec une acuité particulière dès l’indépendance de 1962, rythmée par des épisodes sanglants ayant débuté par la guérilla du FFS en 1963, suivie par le mouvement du « Printemps berbère » en 1980, puis par la « grève du cartable » durant les années 1994-1995, par les émeutes de 1998 qui suivirent l’assassinat du chanteur Matoub Lounès et enfin par le mouvement dit des « Aarchs » en 2001 et 2002. Ces derniers mois, la tension n’est pas retombée.

Bernard Lugan
 
[1] Le Monde amazigh, n° 53, novembre 2004.

lundi, 10 octobre 2011

Ötzi, l’homme des glaces alpines: extraordinaires révélations sur la vie quotidienne des Européens proto-historiques

 

otzi001.jpg

Harald WINTER:

Ötzi, l’homme des glaces alpines: extraordinaires révélations sur la vie quotidienne des Européens proto-historiques

Le paléolithique, de même que les débuts de l’âge du bronze en Europe centrale, n’ont pas été des époques étudiées de manière optimale jusqu’ici. Les esprits se sont longtemps focalisés sur l’Asie Mineure et sur l’Egypte donc bon nombre d’archéologues ont négligé leur propre patrie européenne. Le dogme “ex oriente lux” n’a cessé de troubler les esprits et les a empêchés de chercher à comprendre le développement de la culture autochtone européenne. On entend encore trop souvent parler des “sauvages en peau de bête” quand on évoque les habitants d’Europe centrale avant et pendant les migrations des peuples, consécutives à la chute de l’Empire romain.

Mais l’étonnement est venu quand on a constaté qu’Ötzi, l’homme des glaces alpines, portait des chaussures fermées qui n’étaient pas, comme on l’avait cru jusqu’ici, en peau de cerf ou de chevreuil mais avaient été confectionnées avec de la peau de bovidé. Les réalisations culturelles en Europe centrale à cette époque étaient donc beaucoup plus avancées et complexes que les archéologues conventionnels ne l’avaient cru jusqu’alors. En effet, pour pouvoir fabriquer de telles chaussures, avec un tel matériau de base, cela implique qu’il y avait élevage d’animaux, fonctionnant bien, c’est-à-dire un élevage suffisamment sophistiqué où l’on prévoit du fourrage que l’on fauche puis que l’on stocke. C’est là une technique de vie qui n’est pas aisément applicable dans une région qui connaît des hivers durs.

Mais ce qui est particulièrement imporant, c’est la découverte de tatouages sur l’épiderme de l’homme des glaces. Sur la peau de la momie du glacier alpin, on a trouvé quarante-sept marques tatouées (sous la forme d’un trait), qui sont classables en quinze groupes différents. Neuf des quinze tatouages se trouvent exactement sur les points (ou à proximité de ceux-ci) que retient l’acupuncture classique. La position et surtout les combinaisons possibles de chacun de ces points sont encore utilisées aujourd’hui en acupuncture pour soigner les maladies dérivées de l’arthrose. Le corps d’Ötzi est étudié sous toutes les coutures depuis vingt ans maintenant et les scientifiques ont découvert que notre homme de la proto-histoire souffrait de modifications arthriques des vertèbres lombaires de la colonne vertébrale et de dégénérescences des articulations des jambes. Outre les modifications observées de la colonne vertébrale et des articulations des jambes, les médecins proto-historiques d’Europe centrale, qui se sont penchés sur le cas d’Ötzi, ont apparemment soigné aussi des complications de l’appareil digestif, dues très probablement à des parasites. Les tatouages aux niveaux de la vésicule biliaire, de la rate et du “méridien du foie” plaident en faveur d’un traitement pareil à celui de l’acupuncture. L’acupuncture repose sur le phénomène suivant: des excitations par piqûres en des endroits spécifiques de l’épiderme entraînent des modifications dans la fonction des organes internes. Plusieurs effets de l’acupuncture sont scientifiquement attestés aujourd’hui, comme par exemple la diminution du tonus musculaire ou des effets ralentissant l’inflammation ou encore des influences sur le système nerveux central, dans la mesure où l’endorphine se produit alors en quantité supérieure.

Le fait est désormais patent: l’acupuncture était connue dès 3200 avant l’ère chrétienne en Europe centrale et non pas seulement pour jouer sur les seuls symptômes. Elle était bel et bien pratiquée, ce qui laisse supposer qu’elle émanait d’une tradition plusieurs fois centenaire. Cela signifie aussi que la pratique de l’acupuncture est beaucoup plus ancienne que Ötzi lui-même, car le fait qu’il en ait bénéficié implique une longue expérience antérieure de cette pratique médicale. Ensuite, on sait désormais que la pratique de l’acupuncture ne trouve pas seulement ses origines en Chine.

Au début des recherches sur le cadavre d’Ötzi, les archéologues avaient nié que les tatouages avaient pour but de guider un acupuncteur. Il a fallu que des journaux médicaux réputés, comme “The Lancet” et “Science”, publient des articles sur la question pour que les avis des archéologues s’alignent sur ceux des médecins. Comme jadis, les dogmes ont la vie dure, surtout celui de l’ “ex oriente lux”. Tenir à ces dogmes semblent pour beaucoup  de nos contemporains plus important qu’accepter les observations dérivées de l’intelligence et de la logique humaines et les faits objectifs que celles-ci mettent à jour. Cette vérité ne vaut pas que pour les études préhistoriques et protohistoriques.

Harald WINTER.

(article paru dans “zur Zeit”, Vienne, n°38/2011 – http://www.zurzeit.at ).

samedi, 08 octobre 2011

Hermann Parzinger: "Die frühen Völker Eurasiens"



Die frühen Völker Eurasiens

Der international renommierte Vor- und Frühgeschichtsforscher Hermann Parzinger legt mit diesem höchst informativen, reich bebilderten Band ein Grundlagenwerk über Geschichte und Kultur der frühen Völker zwischen Ural und Pazifik vor.
Die Ausstellungen über Skythen und Mongolen haben das Interesse von Hunderttausenden Besuchern auf sich gezogen, und doch stellen diese beiden Völker nur einen kleinen Ausschnitt der zahlreichen Kulturen dar, die in dem gewaltigen Territorium zwischen Ural und Pazifik von der Jungsteinzeit bis zum Mittelalter entstanden sind. Den Völkern in diesem Gebiet kommt eine entscheidende Bedeutung für die Frühgeschichte der Alten Welt insgesamt zu, und so erscheinen sie als ein fester Bestandteil unseres gemeinsamen kulturellen Erbes. Nach dem Fall des Eisernen Vorhangs konnte der Austausch zwischen westlichen Wissenschaftlern und den Forschern auf dem Gebiet der ehemaligen Sowjetunion intensiviert werden, so daß mit dem Werk von Hermann Parzinger erstmals eine große Synthese des heutigen Wissensstandes über die archäologische Erforschung dieses Gebiets vorgelegt werden kann. Im Zentrum der Darstellung stehen die Verbreitungsgeschichte der Völker, ihre materielle Kultur, ihre Siedlungs- und Wirtschaftsweise, ihre Bestattungsbräuche und ihre künstlerischen Ausdrucksformen. All dies wird systematisch erschlossen und in enger Verbindung von Text und Bildern präsentiert. Auf diese Weise ist eine differenzierte und zugleich anschauliche Darstellung eines bedeutenden Kulturraums der Menschheitsgeschichte entstanden.

Afbeelding en tekst: Verlag C.H. Beck.

dimanche, 18 septembre 2011

Ainu, il popolo dell'orso. Antica spiritualità giapponese

ainu woman.jpg

Ainu, il popolo dell'orso. Antica spiritualità giapponese

di Italo Bertolasi


Fonte: enciclopediaolistica

Il genocidio. Mi hanno accolto nei loro "kotan", i villaggi fatti di baracchette coi tetti di latta e il nylon al posto delle finestre, mostrandomi le loro ferite: le terre rubate, i boschi tagliati. Ma anche la loro ricchezza: l' "Ainu Moshir", una terra ancora in gran parte selvaggia che venerano come Dio e Madre. Per cinque volte sono stato tra gli Ainu, aborigeni del Giappone, che una volta abitavano il nord del Tohoku, l'isola d'Hokkaido e l'isola di Sakhalin. Oggi di quest'antica e popolosa tribù non rimane che la minoranza discriminata di diecimila Ainu "full blooded". Purosangue.

La storia del loro genocidio ricorda quello degli Indiani d'America. Lo sterminio inizia cinque secoli fa per mano di sanguinari samurai. Dal 1822 al 1854 la popolazione Ainu si dimezza falcidiata dal colera, dalla sifilide e dalla tubercolosi importata dai "repunkun", gli odiati nemici che venivano dai mari del nord, e dai "shamo", i giapponesi. Alla fine dell'ottocento, nell'era Meji, decolla il capitalismo industriale e i sentimenti nazionalistici: la terra degli Ainu è confiscata come "terra di nessuno" e gran parte delle foreste è distrutta per il profitto dell'impero del Giappone. Nel 1899 è promulgato l' "Aborigenes Protection Act" e inizia una violenta campagna di acculturazione. Agli Ainu è proibito l'uso della lingua natale. E' stravolta la toponomastica. Si costruiscono strade militari costringendo i giovani Ainu ai lavori forzati. Una perfetta operazione di "pulizia etnica" conclusa solo pochi decenni fa. Nel 1955 solo 20 vecchi ricordano l' "Ainu itak" - l'antica lingua.

Un inatteso "rinascimento Ainu" esplode alla fine degli anni '60 quando in Giappone nasce l'arte moderna del gruppo "Gutai", la controcultura e la ribellione degli studenti di Tokyo e Osaka nel "magico 68". Finalmente una stampa libera e insolente mostra al mondo l'altra faccia del "civilissimo" Giappone. Paese del miracolo economico, dei ciliegi sempre in fiore e dello zen che nasconde però nei suoi "slum" di Kobe e Osaka tre milioni di fuoricasta. I "burakumin", eredi di una discriminazione feudale contro chi praticava mestieri "impuri", come macellai e conciatori di pelle. Invisibili e discriminati razzialmente sono anche quelle migliaia di "giapponesi" che appartengono alle minoranze degli Ainu e della popolazione d'Okinawa.

A difendere gli Ainu c'é lo scrittore Ryu Ota, "guru" del movimento dei verdi giapponesi. Nel suo libro "Ainu Kakomei Ron" incita apertamente gli Ainu alla rivolta per fondare una repubblica indipendente. Lo incontro la prima volta in una "scuola di selvaggità" che ad ogni estate si inaugura nel cuore segreto della foresta di Shizunai. Qui si ritrovano ecologi giapponesi, ambientalisti provenienti da ogni parte del mondo e giovani ainu guidati dai loro sciamani - i mitici Tusu Guru. Ryu Ota è ottimista: il messaggio degli Ainu è universale e straodinariamente moderno. Questo popolo conserva ancora la purezza e la forza dell'uomo selvaggio. "Ainu puri" - la "Via" degli Ainu - proclama quell' "egualitarismo biosferico" che è anche l'idea fissa dell'ecologia profonda, che afferma il diritto di ogni creatura a vivere secondo i propri fini. Per gli Ainu non c'é nessuna differenza tra uomini e animali e piante che diventano nostri "maestri" quando ci insegnano a vivere in modo più libero, spontaneo, estatico e armonico.

Ryu Ota è convinto che gli Ainu sono un "patrimonio dell'umanità " che il governo giapponese dovrebbe tutelare. Oggi il 70% degli Ainu è povero e l'altro 30%è indigente. Gli Ainu controllano solo lo 0,15% del territorio natale. Il reddito annuo di un capofamiglia Ainu è inferiore di duemila dollari a quello di un giapponese che lavora in Hokkaido. Per queste ingiustizie è nato negli anni '70 un "braccio armato" che si è scagliato contro i bersagli simbolici della colonizzazione giapponese. All'università di Sapporo salta in aria il dipartimento d'antropologia. Si accusano gli antropologi d'aver rapinato oggetti rituali, d'aver dissepolto nei cimiteri i crani degli avi per folli misurazioni. Gridano gli Ainu: "Siamo vivi e non finiremo imbalsamati nei vostri musei". Poi salta in aria il quartier generale della polizia e un tempio scinto. E a Asahikawa è distrutta la statua che raffigura un Ainu schiavizzato che si inginocchia ai piedi di un "eroe" giapponese.

Ryu Ota mi ricorda che proprio da Shizunai era partita una folla di ecologi e ainu per la prima "Marcia per la Sopravvivenza: Seizo E - No - Koshin". Un pellegrinaggio a piedi attraverso tutto il Giappone che riuniva simbolicamente due popoli "schiavi": gli Ainu e il popolo di Okinawa. Una svolta politica si ha solo nel 1994 con l'elezione al parlamento dell'ainu Shigeru Kayano, animatore del museo di Nibutani e autore del libro: "Our Land was a Forest". E finalmente nel 1997 viene proposto al parlamento giapponese il primo progetto legge per la tutela della "minoranza" Ainu.

 

A scuola di selvaggità

Nel bosco scuola incontro anche Pon Fuchi, attivista dell' "Ainu Culture Association" di Shizunai. Mi dice: "Questa gente ci insegna a vivere in modo meno consumista e distruttivo. Il patrimonio culturale degli Ainu, come quello delle altre popolazioni aborigene ha un valore tremendo per tutta l'umanità". Le chiedo di spiegarmi l'idea di questa scuola nella natura. Mi risponde che tutto è nato quando il bosco è stato restituito alla sciamana ainu Kohana, dopo una lunga battaglia legale finita su tutti i giornali giapponesi. Una vittoria simbolica, estremamente importante perché ha indicato a tutti gli Ainu la via legale per riacquistare la propria terra. Nel bosco si è voluto ricreare un "kotan" scuola, fatto di capanne di paglia tradizionali, per rieducare gli Ainu alla selvaggità, lontano da turisti e giornalisti che li fotografano come "animali da zoo". Un ritorno alla vita com'era una volta ma anche una nuovissima idea di ecologia esperenziale. L'uomo d'oggi - Ainu compresi -è disorientato: ha perso le sue radici e per curarsi ha bisogno di selvaggità. Ridiventando "non concimato, non potato, forte, elastico e ad ogni primavera fiorente di una bellezza selvaggia" come "canta" il poeta della natura Gary Schneider che ha avuto come compagni di viaggio "Budda Maratoneti" e asceti delle Alpi giapponesi.

Ainu_old_man_circa_1930.jpg



Prima di essere ammesso alla scuola dove si insegna il "galateo della selvaggità " vengo messo alla prova con un po' di sveglie all'alba e faticose giornate di lavoro. Finalmente vengo accettato dal "capo" Fukushima San, figlio adottivo della famosa sciamana Kohana. La mia giornata tipo inizia all'alba con un bagno ghiacciato di torrente. La colazione è servita alle sette: zuppa di erbe selvatiche condita con "miso" e un buon te' di "kumasasa" - l' "erba dell'orso" - un bambù nano che cresce in montagna. Lavoro con gli uomini che costruiscono una "ciset", la capanna tradizionale fatta di paglia e di bambù, mentre le donne gironzolano nel bosco a "caccia" di funghi e gustose radici selvatiche. A mezzogiorno ci si ritrova tutti assieme a tavola davanti a una tazza di brodo caldo in cui galleggiano dei gnocchi di farina integrale. Poi si fatica ancora fino al tramonto. Prima di cena si fa il canonico bagno caldo - l' "ofuru" - tutti nella stessa tinozza: prima le donne con i bambini. Il menù serale si arricchisce di riso, tofu e alghe. Poi davanti al fuoco inizia la "classe" di danza. Un vecchi Tusu Guru dalla barba bianca, uno sciamano, ci insegna a danzare e a "volare" come aironi, a saltare come orsi. La danza è un "viaggio", una metamorfosi sacra, un orgasmo del corpo e dell'anima; il ritmo è scandito dal canto di vecchie patriarche, le "fuchi". Qualcuna ha ancora i "baffi" tatuaggio attorno alla bocca e al collo indossa preziosi gioielli a specchio - gli antichi "tamasai". Le donne danzano scuotendo la testa e le lunghe chiome nere. Muovono le braccia come fossero ali, i loro corpi ondeggiano con eleganza e fluidità. La danza dell'orso è più energica: mima il " respiro della terra", il ritmo di vita e morte. Inspirando si espande il corpo che salta e "vola" verso il cielo, espirando invece ci si piega su sé stessi come embrioni, ritornando così nella culla accogliente della nostra "notte uterina" prenatale.

Per gli Ainu il bosco è vivo. Le betulle col loro tronco lucente sono corpi adolescenti di fate. Le rocce antropomorfe sono troni dei "Kamui" - le energie spirito che popolano l'universo. L'intera montagna è una madre: i suoi seni sono i suoi boschi gonfi di "Qi". Energia cosmica e "latte" verde, che si può "ciucciare" dai pini centenari con una "danza" di abbracci e strusciamenti che assomiglia a un "massaggio arboreo". Si avvicina il viso al tronco per ascoltarne il "respiro". Lo si accarezza con le mani e poi con il corpo. Con la sensualità di un amante.

Mi insegna Fukushima che tutte le creature del bosco sono "Kamui", sacre, perché "l'animale selvaggio è puro, intuitivo e ha una forza tremenda. L'orso non può essere che un Dio incarnato per sopportare il gelo degli inverni d'Hokkaido. E' Kimmun Kamui, il Dio della Montagna, che quando fa visita a noi mortali indossa una pelle d'orso trasformandosi nell'animale più forte della foresta". La caccia dell'orso è per gli Ainu un rito magico per conquistare carne e pelo che gli dei ci regalano in cambio di saké e dolci di riso. L'orso sacro sceglierà il suo killer tra gli uomini più generosi. Dopo l'uccisione rituale il dio dei monti può uscire dalla scomoda pelliccia per ubriacarsi e ritornare ai suoi cieli. Perciò la "festa" del sacrificio dell'orso è chiamata "Iyomande". Che vuol dire scambiarsi doni.

 

Monti sacri, monti "fallo" e "vagina"

Dopo due mesi di vita nei boschi sono pronto all'esame finale: la scalata del monte Horoshiridake, ombelico del "Kamui Moshir" - la terra degli Dei. Horoshiri, la Grande Montagna, svetta sola in mezzo a un oceano verde di foreste: per gli Ainu è un "paradiso" e il luogo archetipo di apprendimento e di sfida, dove si sprigionano vortici d'energia mistica. Ma prima del "Viaggio", Fukushima San ci prepara il nostro "tempio del sudore": una capanna di frasche che assomiglia a un "taipé" indiano con al centro un buco-cratere che verrà riempito con pietre roventi. E' così magicamente riprodotto l' "utero cosmico" e il fuoco al centro della terra. Il nostro bagno di vapore inizia con la svestizione rituale: nudi si entra nel "tempio" da una fessura "vulva" e quando si è dentro ci si dispone in cerchio. E' buio pesto. Si getta acqua ghiacciata sulle pietre roventi: l'aria satura di vapore bollente è irrespirabile. Osamu suona il tamburo:è un giramondo giapponese che ha vissuto con gli Apaches ed è considerato un mezzo sciamano. Nel suo zaino, che ha sempre con sé, nasconde un armamentario di pipe sacre, nastri colorati, foglie di tabacco e penne d'aquila. Il caldo diventa ben presto insopportabile: c'é chi grida dal dolore e chi invece "muore" e cade in trance. Una ad una cascano le nostre inibizioni:è il momento del coraggio e della verità. Il tamburo passa di mano in mano: ognuno si "confessa". C'é anche chi parla con voce angelica regalando le sue visioni. Poi si esce alla luce:è una vera rinascita. Puri, sensibili e più consapevoli siamo così pronti a scalare il monte sacro. Per raggiungere le falde di Horoshiridake risaliamo la valle del fiume Saru fino al villaggio di Nukibetsu e poi il corso del freddissimo rio Nukapia. Adesso non ci sono più sentieri. Si cammina nell'acqua gelida risalendo il fiume che taglia in due la foresta. E' una specie di alpinismo acquatico: anch'io calzo le "cikatabi", una pantofola a zampa d'anitra usate dai carpentieri giapponesi, con sopra un sandalo di paglia antisdrucciolo. Salgo vestito di bianco - il colore della purezza - e in digiuno. Dopo qualche ora di marcia siamo rimasti in tre: con me c'é Fukushima San e la fortissima Fusako Nogami, piccola e battagliera ecologa di Tokyo. Finalmente in cima a Horoshiri ammiro un oceano verde e infinito di foreste che ondeggia ai venti. Non si vedono case, strade: tutto è natura e silenzio. Fukushima mi dice che i laghi, i boschi che ci circondano sono occhi, peli e capelli e il corpo del Dio Madre e Terra. Poi accendiamo un fuoco e preghiamo in silenzio.

Dopo questo "bagno di foresta" voglio visitare l'Akan National Park con i suoi laghi: Akan-ko, Kusharo e Mashu-ko. Ho una lettera di presentazione per l' "Ekashi" Nukanno Akibe, capovillaggio dell'Akan Kotan. E' un omone barbuto che mi accoglie con gran sorrisi: mi invita alla festa del "Marimo Mazuri" per onorare l'alga sferica Marimo che cresce solo nelle acque limpidissime dell'Akanko. Poi mi invita a scalare i due "monti amanti" che si riflettono nel lago: uno di questi è il monte "maschio" e l'altro è il monte "femmina". Salgo allora in cima al virile e solitario "O - Akan". Un vulcano spento che si drizza in alto come un fallo. Poi scendo a valle, attraverso una bella foresta e risalgo il cratere profumato di zolfo della vulcanessa "Me - Akan". "Vagina" del mondo che sprigiona fuoco e calore fecondante. Mi spiega Nukanno che con quel mio salire, scendere e risalire ho creato un "sentiero vivente" e una magia d'amore che riunisce due monti "amanti", crea pace e armonizza l'energia del mondo.

 

 

Hokkaido: l'ultima terra degli Ainu.

Hokkaido, chiamata anticamente "Ezo" - la terra dei barbari -è l'isola più settentrionale del Giappone. E' una terra di frontiera, ricca di foreste e di wilderness montane, che occupa un quinto dell'intera superficie del Giappone, ma che ospita solo il 5% dell'intera popolazione giapponese. Qui vivono gli ultimi Ainu nei "kotan" di Asahikawa, Kamikawa, Shiraoi, Akanko e Kushiro. Dopo i disboscamenti e la trasformazione di migliaia di ettari di bosco in terreni agricoli Hokkaido e, frutta. L' "oro verde" è costituito dal legname pregiato e dai prodotti della pesca: tra questi i pregiatissimi salmoni e le alghe.

Hokkaido è la mecca del turismo "verde" giapponese che attrae ogni anno milioni di trekkisti e campeggiatori. I periodi migliori per visitare l'isola sono da giugno ad ottobre, e per gli amanti degli sports invernali da dicembre a gennaio. Per saperne di più del "Popolo dell'Orso" si può visitare l' "Ainu Materials Display Room" presso il giardino botanico di Sapporo, il "Kawamura Ainu Memorial Museum" di Asahikawa e gli "Ainu Kotan" di Shiraoi e di Akanko, dove di sera si può assistere a performance di danze tradizionali. Il turista occidentale è accolto dagli Ainu con gran simpatia e generosa ospitalità specialmente durante i festival che si celebrano nella stagione del "koyo" - delle metamorfosi - quando le foreste si tingono coi caldi colori autunnali. A fine settembre si celebra il "mazuri" per onorare Samkusayun, un capo ribelle che combattuto con gran coraggio contro le armate mercenarie di Matsumae nel 1669. E' un festival "politico" promosso dagli Ainu di Shizunai che si radunano davanti alla statua bronzea del loro eroe per danzare, ricordare i soprusi e il genocidio della loro tribù, e inviare doni e preghiere agli avi. All'inizio di ottobre all'Akan Kotan, che è anche un famoso centro termale, si celebra il "Marimo Mazuri". Questa volta tutti i clan Ainu d'Hokkaido si ritrovano per tre giorni di feste dedicati all'alga "marimo", che per loro è "Kamui" - dio - e un miracolo di Madre Natura.

 

 

 


Tante altre notizie su www.ariannaeditrice.it

The Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-European World

 
 
The Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-European World
  • Written to fulfil the needs of students, specialists, and the general readers
  • Provides a complete account of Proto-Indo-European by subject and location
  • Offers unique insights into a lost civilization
  • Accessible and entertaining style
This book introduces Proto-Indo-European and explores what the language reveals about the people who spoke it. The Proto-Indo-Europeans lived somewhere in Europe or Asia between 5,500 and 8,000 years ago, and no text of their language survives. J. P. Mallory and Douglas Adams show how over the last two centuries scholars have reconstructed it from its descendant languages, the surviving examples of which comprise the world's largest language family. After a concise account of Proto-Indo-European grammar and a consideration of its discovery, they use the reconstructed language and related evidence from archaeology and natural history to examine the lives, thoughts, passions, culture, society, economy, history, and environment of the Proto-Indo-Europeans. Our distant ancestors had used the wheel, were settled arable farmers, kept sheep and cattle, brewed beer, got married, made weapons, and had 27 verbs for the expression of strife. The subjects to which the authors devote chapters include fauna, flora, family and kinship, clothing and textiles, food and drink, space and time, emotions, mythology, religion, and the continuing quest to discover the Proto-Indo-European homeland.

Proto-Indo-European-English and English-Proto-Indo-European vocabularies and full indexes conclude the book. Written in a clear, readable style and illustrated with maps, figures, and tables, this book is on a subject of great and enduring fascination. It will appeal to students of languages, classics, and the ancient world, as well as to general readers interested in the history of language and of early human societies.



Readership: Students of the Indo-European languages, ancient societies, and comparative philology and historical linguistics in departments of classics, archaeology, cultural anthropology, and linguistics. General readers interested in the history of language and early human societies. The book can be used as a handbook for anyone involved in studying Indo-European or comparative classical languages, and as a basic introduction to Proto-Indo-European comparative philology and lexical studies.

dimanche, 21 août 2011

Out of Africa? Races are more different than previously thought

Out of Africa?

Races are more different than previously thought.

Researchers led by Prof. Svante Pääbo at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig have placed a very large question mark over the currently fashionable “out-of-Africa” theory of the origins of modern man. They have done this by producing a partial genome from three fossil bones belonging to female Neanderthals from Vindija Cave in Croatia, and comparing it with the genomes of modern humans.

Neanderthal skull
Neanderthal Man: Our ancestor after all.

Their initial results show that Neanderthals interbred with anatomically modern humans, mainly with the ancestors of peoples now found in Europe and Asia. This discovery both underlines the genetic differences between African and non-African populations and contradicts the pure, “out-of-Africa” version of human evolution, according to which all non-Africans living today are descended exclusively from migrants that left Africa less than 100,000 years ago. These migrants are said to have out-competed and eventually driven to extinction all other forms of homo and to have done so without interbreeding.

The authors of the Max Planck study note that Neanderthals, who lived in Europe and western Asia, were the closest evolutionary relatives of current humans, but went extinct about 30,000 years ago. They go on to note:

“Comparisons of the Neanderthal genome to the genomes of five present-day humans from different parts of the world identify a number of genomic regions that may have been affected by positive selection in ancestral modern humans, including genes involved in metabolism and in cognitive and skeletal development. We show that Neanderthals shared more genetic variants with present-day humans in Eurasia than with present-day humans in sub-Saharan Africa, suggesting that gene flow from Neanderthals into the ancestors of non-Africans occurred before the divergence of Eurasian groups from each other.” (Richard E. Green, Johannes Krause, et. al., A Draft Sequence of the Neanderthal Genome, Science, May 7, 2010).

In other words, Neanderthal genes remained in the human genome because they were beneficial, and are mainly found in non-African groups.

The traditional alternative to the “out-of-Africa” theory has been that different races evolved from earlier forms of homo in different parts of the world. That theory allows for a far longer period for the evolution of races. The great obstacle to this multi-regional theory has been genetic evidence taken from modern humans that points to a common ancestor who left Africa about 100,000 years ago. However, this judgment is based on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) — the DNA outside the nucleus — which shows no evidence of interbreeding. The Max Planck team, however, was the first to do a large-scale comparative study of nuclear DNA which, as they point out, “is composed of tens of thousands of recombining, and hence independently evolving, DNA segments that provide an opportunity to obtain a clearer picture of the relationship between Neanderthals and present-day humans.”

champanzee skull
Chimpanzee: Our closest living relative.

The researchers note that their conclusions are tentative because they were able to reconstruct only about 60 percent of the Neanderthal genome. Much of this had to be carefully sifted because of contamination, especially by bacterial DNA. Nonetheless, where the Neanderthal genome could be compared to that of modern humans, the researchers found an estimated 99.7 percent match. They also found that the Neanderthal and modern genomes shared exactly the same degree of genetic similarity — 98.8 percent — with chimpanzees.

Of particular significance, however, is the result of comparing the Neanderthal genome with representatives of different modern races: “one San from Southern Africa, one Yoruba from West Africa, one Papua New Guinean, one Han Chinese, and one French from Western Europe.”

Non-Africans got a far larger genetic contribution from Neanderthals than Africans did:

“[I]ndividuals in Eurasia today carry regions in their genome that are closely related to those in Neanderthals and distant from other present-day humans. The data suggest that between 1 and 4 percent of the genomes of people in Eurasia are derived from Neanderthals. Thus, while the Neanderthal genome presents a challenge to the simplest version of an ‘out-of-Africa’ model for modern human origins, it continues to support the view that the vast majority of genetic variants that exist at appreciable frequencies outside Africa came from Africa with the spread of anatomically modern humans.”

Although the Neanderthal contribution is small, the fact that it survived at all suggests that it conferred an evolutionary advantage. The Max Planck team notes that those contributions were “involved in cognitive abilities and cranial morphology.” Neanderthals passed on to non-Africans whatever genetic advantages they had in these important areas.

It is possible that Neanderthals contributed more than the 1 to 4 percent calculated by the Max Planck researchers. Their Neanderthal genome was incomplete and the missing 40 percent may contain more genes present in modern humans. Even if Neanderthal genes form only a very small part of the modern non-African genome, small genetic differences can have important consequences. We share almost all of our DNA with chimps, yet are very different from them. It has become clear since the mapping of the human genome that the central importance of genes lies not in their quantity but in the way they interact. Many scientists expected that sequencing or decoding the human genome would lead to an understanding of how it works, but that has not been the case. Many mysteries remain, but it is clear that small differences can have profound effects.

Homo erectus
Homo erectus: bred with modern humans?

If modern humans bred with Neanderthals could there have been other mixtures of the varieties of homo throughout evolution? There was ample opportunity. Homo habilis is estimated to have existed from 2.3 to 1.4 million years ago, homo erectus to have lived between 1.9 million and 300,000 years ago (and possibly much later in isolated areas), Neanderthals from 400,000 years until 30,000 years ago, and homo sapiens from 250,000-150,000 years ago to the present. One promising candidate for interbreeding with modern humans is homo erectus. As the online encyclopedia science.jrank.org explains:

“Fossils of the species have been collected from South Africa, Tanzania, Kenya, Ethiopia, Algeria, Morocco, Italy, Germany, Georgia, India, China, and Indonesia. The oldest specimens come from Africa, the Caucasus, and Java and are dated at about 1.8 million years. These very early dates outside of Africa indicate that H. erectus dispersed across the Old World almost instantaneously, as soon as the species arose in Africa ... Homo erectus persisted very late in the Pleistocene epoch in Indonesia to possibly as late as 30,000 years ago, which suggests that the species survived in isolation while modern humans spread everywhere in the Old World.”

Neanderthal woman
National Geographic's Neanderthal woman.

Just as this article was going to press, there were reports on the analysis of 30,000-year-old bones found by the Russians in a cave in Denisova in Siberia in 2008. The DNA, whose state of preservation has been called “miraculous,” proved to be distinct from both Neanderthals and modern humans, and researchers called the newly discovered hominids Denisovans. Svante Pääbo of the Max Planck Institute studied this DNA as well, and determined that Denisovans also bred with modern humans — though not with those that remained in Africa.

The Denisovans were related to Neanderthals, and their common ancestors are thought to have left Africa some 400,000 or more years ago. One branch became Neanderthal in Western Eurasia and another became Denisovan in the East. Modern man appears to have encountered and bred with both groups, but only after leaving Africa. Specialists greeted the news about Denisovans with the expectation that yet more missing members of the human family tree could be rediscovered.

Indeed, the complexity and variety of the fossil record hints at what could have been considerable interbreeding. There has been a huge number of discoveries during the last century, but hominid remains are still very scarce and are often only a small fragment of a skeleton. Complete skeletons are like hens’ teeth. Moreover, when new fossils turn up, rather than clarify the record by filling in missing branches on the evolutionary tree, they tend to complicate matters. For example, they may show that a variety of homo was much older than previously thought or appeared in an unexpected place. Variability of fossils can also suggest intermediate forms that had not been anticipated, such as a specimen with traits characteristic of both homo erectus and Neanderthals. The difficulty in classifying human fossils and especially the existence of intermediate forms suggest interbreeding.

We are only now beginning to learn of some variants of homo that could have contributed genes to modern humans. In 2004, fossils of a dwarf species of homo — “Flores man,” who has been nicknamed “hobbit” — were found on the Indonesian island of Flores. Flores man is thought to have gone extinct about 12,000 years ago, so he certainly coexisted with modern humans.

Interbreeding between related varieties of homo would be more likely than that between related animals because even primitive homo had a large brain, which suggests self-consciousness, and, most probably, language. Animals mate in a largely automatic process prompted by various triggers: aural, chemical, condition of feathers and so on. Man, although not entirely without such triggers, adds conscious thought to mate selection. This allows humans to overcome the barriers of behavior and biology, and mate outside their subspecies or even species.

Vindija cave in Croatia
The Vindija cave in Croatia. The bones that
yielded the Max Planck Institute’s first
Neanderthal genome were found here.

Even today, tribal peoples may take women by force from other groups, often by organized raiding. Prehistoric man may have done the same, raising the possibility that interbreeding took place without the willing participation of the females.

At some point, of course, separate evolution would have produced separate species that were not mutually fertile. However, the social nature of homo and his probable ability to speak would tend to counteract the tendency to remain isolated from others for so long that breeding became impossible. It is worth adding that judging from the rapid spread of homo throughout Eurasia, man has been a very mobile animal. Such mobility would also make isolation difficult because even in a very sparsely populated world, the likelihood of encountering other bands of homo would be reasonably high.

How would different varieties of archaic humans have appeared to one another? Probably not so strange. There are certainly combinations of current-day racial types that appear more alien to each other than that would have Neanderthals and modern men.

In 2008, National Geographic released a likeness of a Neanderthal woman based on DNA from 43,000-year-old bones. The findings suggested that at least some Neanderthals had red hair, pale skin, and possibly freckles. These are particularly interesting traits because these were commonly noted by Romans who wrote about the inhabitants of Northern Europe. Today, many scientists would argue that if a Neanderthal were dressed in modern clothes he could walk down a busy street without attracting much attention.

If interbreeding did occur within the homo genus over several million years or even over hundreds of thousands of years, it would help explain the evolution of the group differences that now distinguish the different races. The purest “out-of-Africa” theory has always been implausible to those who think it does not allow enough time for races to emerge. There are differences of opinion among experts about time scales but the consensus is that modern man emerged from Africa at most 200,000 years ago. At 20 years per generation, this allows for only 10,000 generations to produce the enormous human variety that includes everything from Pygmies to Danes. Is that enough? Whites are supposed to have begun evolving independently for only 2,000 generations. Again, is that enough?

Realistic depictions of human beings go back to at least 3000 BC, and mummies, created deliberately or naturally, are often preserved well enough to determine racial type. The oldest North American mummy, for example, is of a 45-year-old male found in Churchill County, Nevada, and estimated to date from 7420 BC. These artifacts show that racial types have been stable for 5,000 to 10,000 years. If they have not changed in this time, it is reasonable to doubt that evolution could have changed migrants from Africa rapidly enough to produce today’s races.

Conclusion

The Max Planck Institute’s findings clearly show that the “out of Africa with no interbreeding” theory is incorrect. However, that does not necessarily mean that the ultimate origins of man do not lie in Africa or that the modern humans whose origins lie outside of Africa do not have a predominantly African heritage. What the Neanderthal and Denisovan genome research does confirm is that the human story is complicated.

The distribution of hominid fossil finds to date, the paleontological evidence, and the growing knowledge acquired through DNA analysis suggest that a plausible scenario for evolution is this: The story probably began in Africa, because this is the continent with the largest number of the most ancient fossils. Africans also show the greatest genetic variety, which suggests human evolution has been taking place there longer than anywhere else. However, early versions of homo moved out of Africa, perhaps as much as several million years ago. Some of these early versions evolved into creatures that approximated modern man, while at the same time evolution among African populations also brought them closer to modern man. At various points, African migrants emerged into Eurasia and interbred with forms of homo already there. There was no equivalent migration of Eurasians into Africa, or at least none that resulted in known interbreeding. The fossil record of mixtures of features from different hominids also suggests interbreeding.

Neanderthal bones
Neanderthal bones.

Why was the rigid “out-of-Africa” theory so widely believed? Probably because it gave rise to the claim that “we are all Africans,” and because it suggested there were few biological differences between races. At the same time, the emphasis until recently on mtDNA rather than nuclear DNA, gave rise to dogmatic statements about distinct lineages and leant scientific backing to the idea.

“Out of Africa” supported the modern liberal view that race is a social construct and that the physical differences between races are trivial. In fact, racial differences are more dramatic than the differences between many closely related species of animals. There are objective racial differences in physiology, such as testosterone level, as well as differences in behavior and in average IQ. When we add to these differences the mix of genetic contributions from extinct or absorbed forms of homo, the liberal argument becomes even weaker. If homo sapiens were viewed as any other organism is viewed, it would no doubt be classified as several species rather than as a single species.

The group at the Max Planck Institute hopes to have decoded the entire Neanderthal and Denisovan genomes soon, and similar work is being done on other forms of ancient homo such as the “hobbits” from Flores. Decoding ancient DNA is difficult, but it is probable that the genomes of other early hominids, particularly that of homo erectus — the longest surviving and most widely dispersed ancient form of homo — will be decoded in the foreseeable future.

If such research shows that interbreeding was present throughout hominid evolution, or at least for substantial periods, then the multiregional theory is true to the extent that different races received genetic contributions from populations that developed outside of Africa for immense periods of time. If the genotypes of such ancient varieties such as homo erectus and homo heidelbergensis are mapped successfully, it may be found that Eurasians have a substantial selection of genes that are distant from those of Africans.

Even if that is not the case, a better understanding of genetics increasingly shows that small genetic differences cause significant physical differences. Whatever the case, the claim that “we are all Africans” has been significantly weakened, and a potent propaganda tool has been taken from the hands of the politically correct. AR

vendredi, 15 juillet 2011

Herman Wirth en de Indo-Europese voorgeschiedenis

Herman Wirth en de Indo-Europese voorgeschiedenis

door Marc. EEMANS

Ex: http://marceemans.wordpress.com/

herman-wirth.jpgToen het Derde Rijk ineengestort was hebben heel wat gezellen van het eerste uur gepoogd zich – met min of meer sukses – als slachtoffers van het nationaal-socialisme voor te doen. Anderzijds had de regelrechte nazi-jacht die de overwinnaars ontketenden tot gevolg dat een aantal persoonlijkheden die tot de konservatieve revolutie behoorden en vanaf het begin duidelijk afstand hadden genomen van Hitler, toch werden verdacht, vervolgd en soms zelfs gedood.

Dat was onder meer het geval met de jurist Carl Schmitt, de schrijvers Ernst en Georg Jünger en Ernst von Salomon, de wijsgeren Martin Heidegger en Hermann von Keyserling, Rudolf von Sebottendorf, een der meest eminente leden der Thule-Gesellschaft, of nog de geleerden Friedrich Hielscher en Herman Wirth.

 

Ernst Jünger bracht de oorlog door te Parijs, als Duits officier. Hij had kennis van het tegen Hitler gerichte komplot van 20 juli 1944, maar was een van de weinige, zoniet de enige samenzweerder die werd gespaard. Hoe Heidegger vervolgd werd door de fanatici van het regime hebben wij hier reeds beschreven (zie: Martin Heidegger en de traditie van het Westers denken, in TK&S afl. 12, november 1980, pag. 150/11-20). Met opmerkelijke waardigheid en een stoïcisme dat dat der Oudheid evenaart, verdroeg hij zowel deze vervolging als, na 1945, die door linksen van allerlei pluimage.

Men kent Ernst von Salomons boek Der Fragebogen (1951), waarin hij de soms lachwekkende, maar altijd hatelijke aard van de “denazifikatie-riten” aanklaagt. In feite trad von Salomon nooit tot het nationaal-socialisme toe, dat hij – net als o.m. Julius Evola – zijn demagogische en plebeïsche aard verweet. Zijn vriend uit de dagen van de Brigade Ehrhardt, Hartmut Plaas, werd in 1944 omgebracht in het KZ Ravensbrück.

Datzelfde misprijzen vinden we bij Hermann von Keyserling, stichter van de School der Wijsheid, die echter toch, na de anarchie van de Weimar-republiek, de opkomst van het nationaal-socialisme begroette als een zegen voor Duitsland, maar zich dan weer plots uit alle politieke aktiviteit terugtrekt.

Rudolf von Sebottendorf kreeg last met de nazi-autoriteiten na de publikatie van zijn boek Bevor Hitler kam: het werd meteen verboden en bijna alle beschikbare eksemplaren vernietigd. Maar ook na 1945 blééf het door de Geallieerden verboden, zodat dit boek, dat voor de genesis van het nationaal-socialisme van kapitaal belang is, omzeggens onvindbaar werd, vermits het nooit heruitgegeven of vertaald werd. (1) De schrijver zelf verliet Duitsland en verdronk in 1945 in de Bosporus, in geheimzinnige omstandigheden.

Een geheimzinnig personage is ook Friedrich Hielscher. Men kent zijn naam doorgaans nog enkel omdat hij Wolfram Sievers, sekretaris-generaal van het wetenschappelijk instituut Ahnenerbe bijstond, toen die op 2 juni 1948 als “oorlogsmisdadiger” in Landsberg werd opgehangen. Hielscher zélf werd door de denazificeerders niet verontrust. Men beweerde dat hij lid zou zijn geweest van de Thule-Gesellschaft, maar in de ledenlijst van dit genootschap (opgesteld door Rudolf von Sebottendorf en door René Alleau gepubliceerd in zijn Hitler et les sociétés secrètes, Grasset, Parijs, 1969) vinden we zijn naam niet terug.

Ernst Jünger, die hem goed moet hebben gekend, noteert in zijn Parijs’ dagboek op 14 oktober 1943 “Hielscher bevestigde het vermoeden – dat ik al lang koesterde – dat hij een Kerk zou gesticht hebben. De dogmatiek is hij al voorbij en in de liturgie is hij ver gevorderd. Hij heeft mij een reeks gezangen getoond en een cyclus feesten, het heidens jaar, die een ganse ordening godheden, kleuren, dieren, spijzen, edelstenen, planten … omvat.” De konfrontatie Hielscher-Sievers, tijdens diens laatste ogenblikken, lijkt de thesis “Hielscher, kerkstichter” te bevestigen, als men tenminste geloof mag hechten aan hen die Wolfram Sievers’ martelgang beschreven. Jean-Claude Frère schrijft in zijn boek Nazisme et sociétés secrètes (Grasset, Parijs, 1974): “Toen Sievers zijn vonnis vernam, vroeg hij in zijn laatste ogenblikken te worden bijgestaan door Hielscher. Dit werd hem toegestaan; en toen kon men, aan de voet van de galg, het verbazend, krankzinnig schouwspel beleven van twee mannen die een onbekende ritus voltrokken, onbegrijpelijke formules spraken, en alle aanwezigen – tot de beul toe – zenuwachtig maakten. Tenslotte drukte Hielscher Sievers tegen zich aan, de veroordeelde trad achteruit, boog voor zijn meester en leverde zich dan, onbewogen, aan de beul over.”

In het spoor van de studie der geschiedenis van onze voorouders zullen we straks Herman Wirth ontmoeten, maar blijven we nog even bij Friedrich Hielscher stilstaan. Hij werd geboren in 1902, studeerde rechten en bewoog zich in de jaren twintig in zgn. nationaalrevolutionaire kringen, op een behoorlijke afstand van het nationaal-socialisme. Hij schreef diverse boeken, waaronder Das Reich (1931) en raakte bevriend met Sievers, die hem het werk leerde kennen van Herman Wirth, wiens leerlingen ze beide werden. Hun wegen liepen echter weldra sterk uiteen: terwijl Sievers het nationaal-socialisme vervoegde ging Hielscher in de oppositie. Das Reich werd verboden en hij kreeg bij herhaling last met de nazi-autoriteiten. Hij werd de ‘ideoloog’ van een verzetsgroep die men best als Widerstandsgruppe Hielscher kan aanduiden. Toch bleef hij met Sievers bevriend, werkte aan de rand van het Ahnenerbe met hem mee en zou hem zelfs in zijn verzetsaktiviteiten hebben betrokken – wat hij tevergeefs, om Sievers van de strop te redden, voor het Nürnbergtribunaal trachtte te bewijzen.

Carl Schmitt werd er door zijn tegenstanders van beticht te hebben meegewerkt aan het opstellen van wetten, ten tijde van het Derde Rijk: ongetwijfeld deed hij dat ook. Vanaf 1935 werd hij echter de schietschijf van een aantal aan het nazi-regime onderworpen juristen en een aanval tegen hem in het officiële SS-blad Das schwarze Korps bracht hem ertoe zich volledig terug te trekken uit het openbare leven. Na 1945 hield een geallieerde onderzoekskommissie zich met hem bezig, klasseerde de aantijgingen “zonder gevolg” en rehabiliteerde hem.

Alvorens we nu de idee en het werk van de protohistoricus Herman Wirth behandelen, schetsen we eerst zijn levensloop. Herman Wirth Roeper Bosch, Nederlander, werd in 1885 te Utrecht geboren, als zoon van een turnleraar. Hij studeerde Germaanse filologie, volkskunde, geschiedenis en muziekwetenschap aan de universiteiten van Utrecht, Leipzig en Bazel. In 1910 doktoreert hij op de thesis De ondergang van het Nederlandse Volkslied, die een jaar later in Den Haag als boek verscheen. In 1909 was hij al tot lektor benoemd aan de universiteit van Berlijn, voor het vakgebied Nederlandse filologie.

Hij meldt zich in 1914 als oorlogsvrijwilliger in het Pruissische leger en wordt kort daarop verbindingsofficier te Brussel. Hij onderhield de kontakten met de groep Jong Vlaanderen, die de motor was van het aktivisme, en nam ook aktief deel aan de proklamatie van de Raad van Vlaanderen in 1917 en de kortstondige Vlaamse zelfstandigheid , die in 1918 met de nederlaag van het Duitse keizerrijk ter ziele ging (2). Intussen was hij, in 1916, aan de Berlijnse universiteit tot professor benoemd.

ln 1920 probeerde Wirth in Nederland onder de benaming Dietse Trekvogels een jeugdbeweging van de grond te krijgen, naar het model van de Wandervogel in Duitsland en de Blauwvoeterie in Vlaanderen. In 1923 vestigt hij zich dan in Marburg an der Lahn, als zelfstandig ethnograaf en begint met zijn diepgaand onderzoek naar de Europese pre historie. In 1925 werd hij lid van de  N.S.D.A.P., maar in juli 1926 stapt hij er weer uit. In 1928 laat hij bij Diederichs in Jena zijn bekend werk Der Aufgang der Menschheit verschijnen. In die periode behoorden Friedrich Hielscher en Wolfram Sievers tot zijn trouwste leerlingen. Net ais Wirth zelf werkten ze, op diverse vlakken, aan Ahnenerbe mee, ook al was alleen Sievers een partijman. Wirth was trouwens een van de oprichters van Ahnenerbe en moet er één der invloedrijke leden van zijn geweest, vermits hem meteen de sektie Studie van voorhistorisch schrift en symbolen werd toevertrouwd. In 1935 en 1936 was hij vele maanden op studiereis in Skandinavië. In 1938 brak hij met Ahnenerbe, wei onder de dubbele druk van de vakhistorici, die hem voor een dilettant hielden, en van de nazi•ideologen die hem hoogst kwalijk namen dat hij niet ophield te proklameren dat elke Führerkultus historisch gezien een vervalverschijnsel is…

De eerste bekende anti-Wirth brochure was van de hand van Prof. Dr. Paul Hambruch en droeg de alleszins niet dubbelzinnige titel: Die Irrtumer und Phantasien des Prof. Dr. Herman Wirth/Marburg, Verfasser von “Der Aufgang der Menschheit” und “Was heisst deutsch”. Dit denunciërende geschrift werd dan nog uitgerekend door het Deutscher Polizeiverlag uitgegeven (Lübeck, 1931). De latere Berlijnse n.s.-rektor Alfred Baeumler, bekend o.m. om zijn even perfide als doldrieste aanvallen tegen Heidegger, volgde weldra met het boekje Was bedeutet Herman Wirth für die Wissenschaft? (1932).

ln datzelfde jaar volgde van de geoloog Prof. Dr. Fritz Wiegers Herman Wirth und die deutsche Wissenschaft, waarin Wirth openlijk van dilettantisme werd aangeklaagd: “De geschriften van deze ethnoloog vormen slechts een weefsel van valse besluiten, van onbewezen beweringen en van ontkenningen van wetenschappelijke evidenties” … En verder: “De ‘ontdekkingen’ van Wirth zijn niets meer dan de fantazieën van een door de religieuze gedachte geobsedeerde geest”. In 1934 verscheen dan van Rudolf Glaser een brochure die Herman Wirth kategorisch verwierp, ditmaal niet in naam van de wetenschap, maar in naam van het nationaal-socialisme: Wer ist Herman Wirth? Volkstümliche Aufsatze über die Forschungen Herman Wirth’s von Rudolf Glaser. In de bibliografie vindt men al 62 pro- en contra-Wirth geschriften.

Natuurlijk verschenen er ook artikels en werken die van sympathie en belangstelling getuigden, maar de (tegen)partij had een veel grotere invloed, vooral toen Prof. Dr. Wiegers het argument hanteerde dat Wirth nog in 1932 relaties onderhield met de vrijmetselarij en Bolko Freiherr von Richthofen, de voorzitter van de Beroepsvereniging der Duitse Prehistorici, de aandacht trok op Wirth’s vriendschappelijke betrekkingen met bepaalde Joden… In een brief aan Prof. Hans F.K. Günther schreef Richthofen dat hij “niet begreep waarom men Wirth zou moeten ontzien omwille van taktische en humanitaire redenen” en op 16 januari 1934 liet hij aan Ministerialrat Sunkel weten: “Herr Wirth weiss genau, dass ihm führend besonders kiimpferische Nationalsozialisten gegenüberstehen. Mit Heil Hitler und deutschem Gruss, Ihr ergebenster gez. B. Frhr. v. Richthofen”.

Ook voor de grote kampagne tegen zijn ideeën en zijn persoon moet Herman Wirth binnen Ahnenerbe wel aanstoot gegeven hebben, door zijn onderzoekingen naar een oerkultuur en een oerreligie, die op een heel andere man-vrouw-relatie steunde, als hoogste godheid een “Almoeder” zou gekend hebben en eerder “demokratisch” van inslag was, in de zin van de latere IJslandse demokratie dan.

Wirth verdedigde de stelling dat de overheersend mannelijke trekken in de late kultuur, met hun overwaardering van het militaire leiderschap, typische dekadentieverschijnselen waren uit een periode van kulturele laagkonjunktuur zoals de tijd van de grote volksverhuizingen en de Vikingerperiode. De pogingen van het nationaal-socialisme om precies met deze periodes terug aan te knopen waren hem dan ook een politieke gruwel én kulturele nonsens.

In zijn studie Die Frage der Frauenberge – eine europäische Gegenwartsfrage (1972) komt Herman Wirth nog eens terug op zijn oude thesis: “De Vrouwenberg bij Cappel, nabij Marburg, is een van de meer dan honderd vrouwenbergen, maagden-, jonkvrouwen- enz. – bergen, -burgen, -stenen van het Duitse taalgebied en volksgebied. Wat hun ontstaan en hun bloeitijd betreft behoren deze Vrouwenbergen tot een bepaalde grote periode van het Avondland, gaande van de periode der grote stenen graven en de rotstekeningen in de Jongsteentijd tot bij het begin van de Volksverhuizingen. Over de geschiedenis en de betekenis van deze “Vrouwenbergen” is niets bekend. Dat er niets over geweten is, dat men niet eens geprobeerd heeft op het vraagstuk van de “Vrouwenbergen” enige vat te krijgen, heeft een tweeledige reden. De eerste reden is van psychologische aard: in een nog altijd mannelijk-ideologisch gericht wetenschapssysteem kan het probleem van een blijkbaar verheven plaats van de vrouw op religieus, kultureel en sociaal vlak geen geschiedkundige betekenis en belangrijkheid worden toegekend. En de tweede reden was dat de “Vrouwenbergen” tot de zgn. voorgeschiedenis behoren, d.w.z. dat er over dit onderwerp geen historische bronnen, geen schriftelijke overlevering (inskripties, berichten) bestaat. Dat er daarover toch een schriftelijke overlevering bestond en bestaat, niet in letterschrift maar in symboolschrift, daarvan hadden en hebben de totnogtoe bevoegde wetenschappen tot op de dag van vandaag geen idee: de prehistorici niet, maar evenmin de volkskundigen, de germanisten, de godsdiensthistorici, de mythologen enz.”

oera_linda.jpgZijn vriend Dr. Joachim Weitzäcker schrijft: “Na Herman Wirth’s “verwijdering” uit Ahnenerbe, dat hij gesticht had (3), verloor hij in 1938 zijn leerstoel aan de Berlijnse universiteit, omwille van zijn op gewetensbezwaren gegrondveste oppositie en zijn eis tot vrij onderzoek. Hij moest terug naar Marburg en kreeg verbod om nog onderricht te geven, te publiceren en in het openbaar te spreken. Tenslotte leverde de wet van het stilzwijgen zijn naam aan de vergetelheid over…”

Maar Wirth was niét helemaal vergeten: in 1945 namen de Amerikanen zijn bibliotheek en zijn omvangrijke dokumentatie in beslag; hij bleef aan dezelfde verbodsbepalingen onderworpen als tijdens de laatste zeven jaren van het Hitlerregime.

Zonder dokumentatie en bijna zonder bestaansmiddelen, herbegon hij, bijgestaan door zijn echtgenote Margarete Schmitt, en enkele vrienden, met bewonderswaardige moed aan zijn levenswerk. In 1960 verscheen in Wenen Um den Ursinn des Menschseins. Hij stichtte de Europaische Sammlung für religionsgeschichte en, in 1979 begon hij – 94 jaar jong! – in de ruïnes van een oud slot te Lichtenberg nabij Kusel, met de installatie van een museum en van archieven, die al zijn geschriften en zijn verzamelingen zou herbergen.

De allerlaatste jaren, haast volledig verlamd, werkte hij onverdroten verder, geholpen door enkele trouwe vrienden, en in leven gehouden met wat schaarse subsidies. Begin van dit jaar is hij er overleden.

Laat ons nu (noodgedwongen oppervlakkig) onderzoeken, wat Herman Wirth’s werk betekent. In zijn paleo-epigrafische opzoekingen, die de historische rekonstruktie van een oerreligie beogen, waagt Wirth zich in feite erg ver in de voorhistorie. In zijn opvatting zouden de Indo-europeërs slechts de vertegenwoordigers zijn van een erg late, hoogstens protohistorische periode.

Inderdaad, al wat de voorstanders van de “primordiale traditie”, waarvan René Guénon en Julius Evola de meest eminente vertegenwoordigers zijn, als positief d.i. kontroleerbaar kunnen bevestigen, gaat niet verder achteruit dan de eerste geschriften, waarmede volgens hen in feite de geschiedenis begint. Al de rest is slechts gissing, die op – weliswaar konvergerende – tradities steunt … doch het blijven tradities, om niet het woord ‘legenden’ te gebruiken. De meeste van Wirth’s werken moeten ook tot deze konjekturale wetenschap gerekend worden, en al zijn opsommingen van tekens en symbolen, waarvan hij de uitleg geeft, steunen (althans volgens zijn criticus Fritz Wiegers) slechts op vaak vernunftige interpretaties, die niet of moeilijk kontroleerbaar zijn. Dat er naast het “letterschrift” ook een koherent “symboolschrift” bestaat, word t intussen minder betwist dan ten tijde van Wirth’s eerste werken: het probleem ligt op het vlak van de duiding.

Vermelden we terloops dat de klassieke prehistorici wantrouwig staan tegenover elke subjektieve interpretatie. Ze doen opgravingen, ontdekken fossielen of voorwerpen van aile aard, klasseren ze en situeren ze meestal naar gelang de vindplaats. Uit hun ontdekkingen kunnen we afleiden, dat in deze of gene periode de Homo sapiens die of deze stap zette in de langzame opgang der mensheid naar wat we prozaisch “beschaving” noemen. Zo spreekt men over lager-, midden-, en lioger-paleoliticum, mesoliticum, neoliticum, bronstijdperk en ijzertijdperk, mét hun onderverdelingen, die ais “beschavingen” bestempeld worden, en waarvan de recentste die van Hallstatt en die van La Tène zijn. Om die periodes te dateren gebruikt men heden de radio-carbonmethode. Intussen ontdekken de prehistorici aanwijzingen omtrent de religie, de technologie, de begrafenisriten, zonder de eerste kunstuitingen te vergeten.

Onder de resten van een tamelijk geëvolueerde beschaving vermelden we de rotstekeningen van Altamira en Lascaux, die volgens de klassieke prehistorici uit het laag-neoliticum stammen (zowat tussen 35.000 en 10.000 v.o.j.). Vermits ze in een geografische ruimte liggen die zich ver van Noord-Europa bevindt, konden ze noch Wirth, noch de geleerden van Ahnenerbe interesseren, vervuld ais ze waren van die Indo-europese beschaving, waarvan de oudste sporen niet vroeger te situeren zijn dan in het 5de of 4de milennium vóór onze tijdrekening. Eerder zou men van het 3de of zelfs het 2de milennium moeten spreken, wat onze Europese primordiale traditie wei érg dicht bij ons legt. Werkt een kenner van de Indo-europese traditie ais Georges Dumézil trouwens niet bij voorkeur op geschreven bronnen? En nu weten we, dat het schrift van tamelijk recente datum is.

De klassieke prehistorici struikelen nog over raadsels, zoals die van de megalithen. Ze stellen hun bestaan vast, wagen een interpretatie, maar trekken geen besluiten: dat laten ze liever over aan geleerden als Wirth, die ze voor het overige wantrouwen. En wat raadsels ais Atlantis of het verloren kontinent Mu betreft, verkiezen ze er niet aan te raken en laten gissingen omtrent die vraagstukken over aan mensen die ze ais specialisten van “science-fiction” beschouwen.

Wij moeten toegeven dat de klassieke prehistorici al wat wij onze “primordiale Traditie” noemen, ignoreren; het vertrekpunt van deze benaming en van de vraagstukken die er verband mee houden, vindt men in een werk van de Duitse taalkundige Franz Bopp Vergleichende Grammatik des Sanskrit, Zend, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Lithauischen, Gotischen und Deutschen, dat uit de jaren 1833-52 stamt. Het vraagstuk van de Indo-europeërs breidde zich vlug uit van de taalkunde naar het probleem van het woongebied der volkeren die Indo-europese talen spraken en schreven, zonder dat de geleerden het eens konden worden over het vertrekpunt en de datering van deze verspreiding. Het zou interessant zijn dit probleem te bestuderen: men zou dan vaststellen dat op dit vlak de grootste verwarring heerst. Wat zeker is: overal waar de Indo-europeërs zich vestigden, overvleugelden ze de bevolking die al in dat gebied woonde, en onderwierpen ze hen (de Dravida’s in Indië b.v.).

Overal, zowel in Europa ais in Azië, vormden ze de twee overheersende kasten, die de geestelijken en die der strijders of ridders.

Om naar Herman Wirth te rug te keren, stellen we vast dat hij, al zat hij dan min of meer in de lijn van Bachofen, de theoreticus van het matriarchaat, toch niet afkerig was van de Odinistische mythologie, die hij uit de graffiti op de rotswanden van Noord-Europa meende te mogen afleiden en die hij poogde in te voegen in zijn konstrukties omtrent een matriarchale godsdienst. Ook de runen horen daar ergens bij, zodat men in zijn theorieën een soort mythisch-godsdienstig synkretisme mag zien, waarvan het “Mutter Erde”-begrip het sluitstuk is. Het is onbetwistbaar (de klassieke prehistorie bévestigt het ons) dat er in het Atlantisch Europa van het derde millenium een “megalitische” godsdienst bestond, met aanbidden van een vruchtbaarheidsgodin, die tegelijk de begrafenis-riten voorzat. Maar even zeker is dat er sinds het neoliticum (wellicht zelfs sinds het paleolitieum) een verering van de vrouwelijke godheid bestond: dit wordt bevestigd door talrijke beelden, als de “Venus” van Savignano (Italië), Gargarino (USSR) en Willendorff (Oostenrijk); of door de vrouwenkoppen van Dolmi Vestaniee (Tsjeehoslovakije) en Brassempuy (Frankrijk), wat ons zéker tot zowat 30.000 jaren vóór onze tijdrekening terugvoert.

Wirth’s onderzoeken waren vooral op Noord-Europa gericht, zoals zijn reizen uit 1935-36 aantonen. Wij moeten er, om met de klassieke prehistorici te spreken, uit besluiten dat zijn onderzoek vooral het zogenaamd mesoliticum betrof, dat aanvangt rond 10.000 v66r onze jaartelling en zich uitstrekt over het neoliticum en de twee metaaltijdperken, tot de eerste eeuwen van onze jaartelling, voor de kerstening van Noord-Europa.

Volgens de primordiale Traditie moet er echter, vóór die tijd, een ander, veel zachter klimaat geheerst hebben, toen Groenland en Spitzbergen groene en vruchtbare gebieden waren , (de naam Groenland wijst er op!). Hoe dit tijdperk situeren ? Laat ons het antwoord afwachten van de geologen, de prehistorici of de historici van de primordiale Traditie. Immers, in welke periode van het Pleistoceen de groene velden van het aloude Ultima Thule situeren ? Wie weet gaat het om een vrij recente periode, uit het zesde tot derde milennium vóór onze jaartelling, en die men in de geologie de Atlantische periode noemt. Toen was het legendarische Mu-gebied allang, rond 12.500 of 12.000 jaar voor onze jaartelling, in de golven verdwenen (4). Waarschijnlijk verdween, tijdens dezelfde natuurramp, Atlantis, dat andere hypothetische land .

Wat er ook van zij, doorheen heel zijn lange loopbaan heeft Wirth niet opgehouden, zijn studies over Europa’s voorgeschiedenis voort te zetten, daarbij vooral de aandacht vestigend op de paleo-epigrafie.

In zijn speurtocht naar al wat de voorhistorische Moeder Aarde-kultus kan bevestigen, heeft hij het onmetelijk belang onderstreept van de pre-Indo-europese beschaving voor het kultureelleven én de religie in Europa. Het magisch-religieuze leven in die periode hield hem voortdurend bezig, en hij bewees dat vóór de stroom Indogermaanse veroveraars, die over heel de antieke wereld van de Atlantische oceaan tot het Nabije- en Verre-Oosten neerstortte, er hier reeds mensen leefden die zich even zeer als de nieuwkomers om geestelijke zaken bekommerden.

Mogelijk zijn Wirth’s werken getekend door een zeker dilettantisme, maar loopt niet iedereen die zich in de kronkelingen van ons oudste verleden waagt, dit risiko ? Hoeveel bewonderaars van dat geheimzinnig verleden goochelen niet met min of meer fantaisistische gevolgtrekkingen en benaderingen, zich tegelijk als “gezaghebbend” voordoend ? Zij weten, wat u, de lezer, niet weet; zij zijn ingewijd en u bent het niet. Zij halen hun ‘wetenschap’, rechtstreeks of onrechtstreeks, bij een of ndere Tibetaanse monnik, of bij een of andere, min of meer geheimzinnige Goeroe, die de sleutel tot een eeuwenoud mysterie bezit…

Laat ons maar toegeven: hoeveel pretentieuze domheden vinden we niet onder de dekmantel van wat onze vrienden van de Traditie, de ‘Primordiale Traditie’ noemen ? René Guénon en Julius Evola hebben zich veel moeite getroost, de kwakzalvers van de – zogezegd – traditionele wetenschappen te ontmaskeren. Desondanks lopen ze nog rond en staan ze voortdurend klaar, u om het even welke valse ‘revelatie’ of welk produkt van hun op hol geslagen verbeelding ook aan te smeren …

Moeten we Herman Wirth bij de kwakzalvers van de Traditie onderbrengen ? Wij zijn overtuigd van niet, maar wél dienen we met omzichtigheid de resultaten van zijn onderzoekingen te beschouwen.

Zo heeft hij zich vér in de zogenaamde Ura Linda-kroniek gewaagd. Is ze een vervalsing, een louter literaire fantasie in de aard van de “Ossian-liederen” ? Is het een laattijdige kompilatie van een mondelinge traditie, ais de “Kalewala” ? De vraag blijft gesteld.

Vergeten we anderzijds ni et dat hij zolang hij persona grata was bij Ahnenerbe, ais groot geleerde op het vlak van de prehistorie werd beschouwd; en dat hij na zijn ongenade, zelfs het recht verbeurde les te geven en in het openbaar te spreken.

Jean Beelen schreef: “De onmetelijke verdienste van Prof. Wirth ligt erin, de oerperiode van het geschrift en de symboliek te hebben dóórgelicht en te hebben bewezen dat de mensen uit die tijd een kosmisch aanvoelen hadden dat aan de basis lag van een volkse godsdienst”. Dat is al héél wat en zo moeten we wei rekening houd en met al wat hij deed, en al wat hij schreef, zelfs al blijven we vrij te redetwisten over zijn – onbetwistbaar belangrijke – aanbreng inzake de voorgeschiedenis van de Westerse wereld.

Marc. EEMANS

(Vert. Roeland Raes)
(1) Het boek van Sebottendorf is niet te verwarren met dat van Dietrich Bronder dat eveneens de titel “Bevor Hitler kam” draagt (Hans Pfeiffer-Verlag, Hannover, 1964). Het essay van R.H. Phelps “Before Hitler came”. Thule Society and German Order” (in het Journal of Modern History, 1963) is géén vertaling maar een zelfstandige studie.
(2) Over Herman Wirth en het aktivisme, over Herman Wirth en het Vlaams-nationalisme, is het laatste woord nog niet gezegd. Willemsen en Elias vermelden hem even in de rand. Heel wat meer gegevens vindt men in een studie van Dr. Lammert Buning over Wirth, verschenen in Wetenschappelijke Tijdingen, 3/74.
(3) In feite medegesticht, samen met Hermann Reischle, Heinrich Himmler, Adolf Babel, Georg Ebrecht, Erwin Metzner en Richard Hintmann.
(4) Zie James Churchward: “Mu, le continent perdu.”

History and Biology

History & Biology

By Revilo Oliver

Ex: http://www.counter-currents.com/

American Opinion, December 1963 (part 4 of 4 of History and the Historians)

teinture-cheveux-grossesse.jpgHistory is the record of what men do. Scientific discoveries and technological applications of them are often events of historical importance, but do not affect our understanding of the historical process since they shed no light on the behavior of men in civilized societies.

For example, the recent use of atomic fission to produce a more powerful explosive has no significance for a philosophy of history. Like the many changes in the technology of war that have occurred throughout history, this one will call for changes in tactics and strategy, alters to some extent the balance of power in the world, and may well occasion the fall and extinction of a world power so fat-headed that it does not understand the importance of technological superiority in warfare. But all this is merely history repeating itself. It is true that the improved weapons set bands of addle-pated neurotics throughout the country shrieking as wildly as a tribe of banshees out on a week-end spree; but that is merely another instance of the rather puzzling phenomenon of mass hysteria. It is also true that Communist agents have been scurrying about the country to brandish the phrase “nuclear holocaust” as a kind of up-to-date Jack-o’-Lantern to scare children. But while it is the historian’s task to understand the International Conspiracy in the light of such partial precedents as are available, the new weapon will not help him in that. He will merely marvel that a large part of our population is not only ignorant of history in general, but evidently has not read even the Old Testament, from which it would have learned that atomic bombs, as instruments of extermination, are much less efficient that a tribe of Israelites armed with the simplest weapons (see Joshua vi. 20 et passim).

As an exception to the general rule, however, our century has brought one new area of knowledge in the natural sciences that must profoundly affect our understanding of history both past and present–that is as relevant to the rise and fall of the Mitanni and the Hittites as it is to our future. Distressingly enough, the new science of genetics raises for the historian many more questions than it answers, but it discloses the existence of a force that must be taken into account in any philosophy of history.

Multiplex Man

Civilized human beings have long been puzzled by the mysterious diversity of human beings. It is possible, indeed, that mystery was part of the process by which some people were able to rise from barbarism to civilization. The perception requires mental powers that are by no means universal. The aborigines of Australia, for example, who are probably the lowest from of human life still extant, have a consciousness so dim and rudimentary that they multiplied on that continent for fifty thousand years without ever suspecting that sexual intercourse had anything to do with reproduction. Most savages, to be sure, are somewhat above that level, but no tribe appears to have been aware of its own diversity, let alone capable of thinking about it.

Human beings capable of reflective thought, however, must have begun early to marvel, as we still do, at the great differences obvious among the offspring of one man by one woman. Of two brothers, one may be tall and the other short; one stolid and the other alert; one seemingly born with a talent for mathematics and the other with a love of music.

Many were the theories that men excogitated to explain so strange a phenomenon. One of the principal grounds for the once widespread and persistent belief in astrology was the possibility of explaining the differences between two brothers by noting that, although engendered by the same parents, they were conceived and born under different configurations of the planets. In the Seventeenth Century, indeed, Campanella, whose plan for a Welfare State is the source of many of our modern “Liberal” crotchets and crazes, devised a whole system of eugenics to be enforced by bureaucrats who would see to it that human beings were engendered only at moments fixed by expert astrologers.

Again, the doctrine of metempsychosis, once almost universally held over a wide belt of the earth from India to Scandinavia, seemed to be confirmed by the same observations; for the differences between brothers were understandable, if their bodies were animated by souls that had had far different experiences in earlier incarnations.

There were also some theoretical explanations, such as the one that you may remember having read in the stately verse of Lucretius, that were sound bases for scientific inquiry, but they were not followed up. Until the last third of the Nineteenth Century, men learned nothing of the basic laws of heredity. Darwin’s knowledge of the subject was no better than Aristotle’s, and Galton’s enthusiasm for eugenics was no more firmly founded than was Plato’s. It remained for a humble and too modest priest, Father Johann Gregor Mendel, to make one of the most important scientific discoveries ever made by man.

Father Mendel’s Versuche über Pflanzen hybriden was published in 1886, but the famous professors in the great universities could not take a mere priest seriously–certainly not a priest so impudent as to contradict Darwin–and so they went on for decades pawing over problems that father Mendel had made obsolete as the epicycles of Ptolemaic astronomy. He was simply ignored and forgotten until 1900, when three distinguished biologists discovered independently and almost simultaneously some of the laws that he had ascertained and formulated.

It required some time for systematic study of genetics to get under way, and research has been greatly impeded by two catastrophic World Wars and by the obscurantism of Communists and “Liberal intellectuals.”

In Russia and other territories controlled by the Conspiracy, Marx’s idiotic mumbo-jumbo is official doctrine and the study of genetics is therefore prohibited. There are, however, some indications that research may be going on secretly, and it is even possible that, so far as human genetics are concerned, the knowledge thus obtained may exceed our own; for the Soviet, though usually inept in scientific work, has facilities for experiments that civilized men cannot perform. In the mid-1930′s, for example, there were reports that experiment stations in Asiatic Russia had pens of human women whom the research workers were trying to breed with male apes in the hope of producing a species better adapted to life under Socialism than human beings. It was reported a few years ago that the Soviet is now trying to create subhuman mutations by exposing their human breeding stock to various forms of irradiation. One cannot exclude the possibility that the monsters who conduct such experiments may incidentally find some significant data.

In the United States, the situation differs somewhat from that in Russia. Geneticists are permitted to continue their studies in peace so long as they communicate only with one another and do not disclose to the public facts of which the American boobs must be kept ignorant. Since it requires rare courage to provoke a nest of “Liberal intellectuals” or rattlesnakes, the taboo thus imposed is generally observed.

Grim Genetics

Despite the restraints placed on scientific investigation, and despite the awesome complexity of genetic factors in so complicated a creature as man, it is now virtually certain that all of the physiological structure of human beings, including such details as color of eyes, acuity of vision, stature, susceptibility to specific diseases, and formation of the brain are genetically determined beyond possibility of modification or alteration except by physical injury or chemical damage. Some of the processes involved have been well ascertained; others remain unknown. No one knows, for example, why the introduction of minute quantities of fluorine into drinking water will prevent development of the brain in some children and so roughly double the number of mongolian idiots born in a given area.

It is far more difficult to investigate intellectual capacities, since these must involve a large number of distinct elements, no one of which can be physically observed; but all of the evidence thus far available indicates that intelligence is as completely and unalterable determined by genetic inheritance as physical traits.

Moral qualities are even more elusive than intellectual capacity. There is evidence which makes it seem extremely probable that criminal instincts, at least, are inherited, but beyond this we can only speculate by drawing an analogy between moral and intellectual potentialities.

Many persons find the conclusions thus suggested unpleasant, just as all of us, I am sure, would be much happier if the earth were the immobile center of the universe and the heavens revolved about it. But although vast areas in the new science of genetics remain unexplored, and although the complexity of many problems is such that we cannot hope to know in our lifetime many of the things that we most urgently need to know, the principles of heredity have been determined with a fairly high degree of scientific probability. They are, furthermore, in accord with what common sense has always told us and also with the rational perception of our place in the universe that underlies religion.

We can blind children, but we cannot give them sight. We can stunt their minds in “progressive” schools, but we cannot give them an intelligence they did not inherit at birth. It is likely that we can make criminals of them by putting them (like the somewhat improbable Oliver Twist) in Fagin’s gang or its equivalent, but we cannot induce a moral sense in one who was born without it. We have always known that it is easy for man to destroy what he can never create.

One Certainty

The Mendelian laws and hence the finding that human beings, physically and intellectually, at least, are absolutely limited to the potentialities they have inherited — which may be impaired by external action but cannot be increased — are the accepted basis of all serious biological study today. From the standpoint of scientific opinion, to deny heredity is about equivalent to insisting that the earth is flat or that tadpoles spring from the hair of horses.

The point is worth noting, for even if you choose to reject the findings of genetics, that science will enable you to demonstrate one very important truth.

Our “liberal intellectuals,” who have done all in their power to deride, defile, and destroy all religion, are now sidling about us with hypocritical whimpers that the facts of genetics ain’t “Christian.” This argument does work with those whose religion is based on the strange faith that God wouldn’t have dared to create a universe without consulting their wishes. But if you inquire of the “intellectual,” as though you did not know, concerning scientific evidence in these matters, the chances are that he will assure you, with a very straight face, that he is, as always, the Voice of Science. Thus you will know that he still is what he has always been: a sneak and a liar.

The Warp of Culture

Given the facts that all men are born unequal; that the inequality, apparent even among children of the same parents, increases with differences in genetic strains; that civilization, by the very fact of social organization and the variety of human activity thus made possible, accentuates such differences; and that the continuity of a culture depends on a more or less instinctive acceptance of the common values of that culture — given those facts, it becomes clear that historians who try to account for the rise and fall of civilizations by describing political, economic, philosophic, and religious changes without reference to genetic changes in the population are simply excluding what must have been a very important factor, however little we may be able to measure it in the past or the present.

Whatever should be true of statutory and often ephemeral enactments in human jurisprudence, it is undoubtedly true of all the laws of nature that ignorance of the law excuses no-one from the consequences of violating it. And it may be unjust, as it is certainly exasperating, that we must often act with only a partial and inaccurate knowledge of such laws. But that is a condition of life. Societies are like individuals in that they must make decisions as best they can on the basis of such information as is available to them. You may have stock in a corporation whose future you may find it very difficult to estimate, but you must decide either (a) to sell, or (b) to buy more, or (c) to hold what you have. What you cannot do is nothing.

The scope of genetic forces in the continuity of a civilization, and, more particularly, of Western civilization, and, especially, of that civilization in the United States was illustrated by one of the most brilliant of American writers, Dr. Lothrop Stoddard, in The Revolt Against Civilization (Scribner’s, New York, 1922). The book was out of print for many years, for our “liberal intellectuals” promptly decided that the subject was one that American boobs should not be permitted to think about, and accordingly shovelled their malodorous muck on both book and author, in the hope of burying both forever. Copies of it disappeared from many libraries, and the book became hard to find on the secondhand market (I obtained my copy from a dealer in Italy).

I commend The Revolt Against Civilization, not as a revelation of ultimate truth, but as a cogent and illuminating discussion of some very grim problems that we must face, if we intend to have a future. The book, you must remember, was written when problems in genetics seemed much simpler than they do now in the light of later research, and when Americans felt a confidence and an optimism that we of a later generation can scarcely reconstruct in imagination. Some parts of the book will seem quaint and old-fashioned. Dr. Stoddard assumes, for example, that the graduates of Harvard are a group intellectually and morally above the average: That probably was true when he was an undergraduate and when he took his doctorate; he did not foresee what loathesome and reptilian creatures would slither out of Harvard to infest the Dismal Swamp in Washington. And when he urged complete toleration of Communist talk (as distinct from violence), he was thinking of soap-box oratory in Bug-House Square and the shrill chatter of parlor-pinks over their teacups; he did not foresee penetration and capture of schools, churches, newspapers, and political organizations by criminals who disseminate Communist propaganda perfunctorily disguised as “progressive education,” “social gospel,” and “economic democracy.”

But the book remains timely. What were sins of omission in 1922, when we were, with feckless euphoria, repeating the blunders that destroyed past civilization, are now sins of commission, committed with deliberate and malicious calculation by the enemies whom we have given power over us. And we should especially perpend Dr. Stoddard’s distinction between the ignorant or overly-emotional persons who “blindly take Bolshevism’s false promises at their face value,” and the real Bolshevik, who “are mostly born and not made.” That dictum is as unimpeachable as the poeta nascitur, non fit, that it echoes.

The Optimistic Pessimist

Since Stoddard wrote, the horizons have darkened around us. A recent and stimulating book is Dr. Elmer Pendell’s The Next Civilization. The title may remind you of an article that Arthur Koestler published in the New York Times on November 7, 1943 — an article whose bleak pessimism startled all but the very few readers who were in a position to surmise, form the hints which Koestler was able to smuggle into the pages of the Times, that he, an ex-Communist, was able to estimate the extent to which the Communist Conspiracy had already taken control of the government of the United States. Koestler, stating flatly that we would soon be engulfed in a Dark Age of barbarism and indescribable horror, called for the establishment of monasteries that, like the monasteries of the early Middle Ages, would preserve some part of human culture as seed for a new Renaissance in some distant future. Dr. Pendell, although he does not entirely deny us hope for ourselves, is primarily concerned with preserving the better part of our genetic heritage as seed for a future civilization that may have the intelligence to avoid the follies by which we are decreeing our own doom.

Dr. Pendell very quickly reviews the historical theories of Brook Adams, Spengler, Toynbee, and others to show that they all disregard the fact that decline in a civilization is always accompanied by a change in the composition, and deterioration in the quality, of the population.

We know that such changes took place in every civilization of which we have record. The majority of Roman citizens in 100 A.D. were not related at all to the Roman citizens in 100 B.C. We know that the great Roman families died out from sheer failure to have enough children to reproduce themselves, and we have reason to believe that all classes of responsible Romans, regardless of social or economic position, followed the fashion of race suicide.

Since the Romans had the preposterous notion that any person of any race imported from any part of the world could be transformed into a Roman by some magic in the legal phrases by which he was made a Roman citizen, the children that the Romans did not have were replaced by a mass of very diverse origins. Some of the importations undoubtedly brought with them fresh vigor and talent; some were incapable of assimilating civilization at all and could only imitate its outer forms without understanding its meaning; and some, while by no mens inferior in intelligence and energy, had a temperament which, although eminently suited to some other civilization, was incompatible with the Roman. For some estimates of the deterioration of the population of the empire that the Romans founded, see the late Tenny Frank’s History of Rome (Holt, New York) and Martin P. Nilsson’s Imperial Rome (Schocken, New York).

When Dr. Stoddard wrote, we were merely behaving as thoughtlessly as the Romans: Carpe diem and let tomorrow take care of itself. But now, as Dr. Pendell hints and could have stated more emphatically, the power of government over us is being used, with a consistency and efficiency that must be intentional, to accelerate our deterioration and hasten our disappearance as a people by every means short of mass massacre that geneticists could suggest. To mention but one small example, many states now pick the pockets of their taxpayers to subsidize and promote the breeding of bastards, who, with only negligible exceptions, are the product of the lowest dregs of our population, the morally irresponsible and mentally feeble. An attorney informs me that in his state and others the rewards for such activity are so low that a female of this species has to produce about a dozen bastards before it can afford a Cadillac, and will have to go on producing to take care of the maintenance. Intensive breeding is therefore going on, and the legislation that was designed to stimulate it may therefore be said to be highly successful.

The United States is now engaged in an insane, but terribly effective, effort to destroy the American people and Western civilization by subsidizing, both at home and abroad, the breeding of the intellectually, physically, and morally unfit; while at the same time inhibiting, by taxation and in many other ways, the reproduction of the valuable parts of the population — those with the stamina and the will to bear the burden of high civilization. We, in our fatuity, but under the control of persons who must know that they are doing, are working to create a future in which our children, if we have any, will curse us for having given them birth.

When Dr. Pendell tells us what we must do, if we are to survive or even if we limit ourselves to the more modest hope that human civilization may survive on our planet, is to reverse the process — to encourage the reproduction of the superior stock and to check the multiplication of the inferior — he is unquestionably right. He may also be right when he urges that we must do more than desist from interfering with nature for the purpose of producing biological deterioration — that we must, instead, interfere with nature to ameliorate and improve our race. But here, I fear, Dr. Pendell, although he almost despairs of our civilization and looks to the next one, is yet too optimistic. There are two practical difficulties.

Our Coup d’Etat

Dr. Pendell proposes voluntary eugenic associations and “heredity corporations,” which, no doubt, would help a little, as he argues, but which, as he is aware, would not have much more effect than a few buckets of water thrown into the crater of Mauna Loa. At this late date, to accomplish much for ourselves or even for our putative successors, we must use at least the taxing power of government, if not its powers of physical coercion, to induce or compel the superior to have children and to prevent the inferior from proliferating. So here enters on the stage that most unlovely product of human evolution, the bureaucrat, whom we shall need to apply whatever rules we may devise. And –if you can stand a moment of sheer nightmare, dear reader — imagine, just for five seconds or so, what mankind would be like, if the power to decide who was or was not to have children fell into the hands of a Senator Fulbright, a Walt Rostow, and Adam Yarmolinsky, a Jack Kennedy, or a Jack The Ripper.

For that dilemma, of course, there is an obvious solution — but, so far as I can see, only one. You, my dear reader, Dr. Pendell, and I must form a triumvirate and seize absolute power over the United States. Unfortunately, I can’t at the moment think of a way of carrying out our coup d’etat, but let’s leave such details until later. Assume that we have that power, which we, certainly, are determined to use wisely and well. What shall we do with it?

Dr. Pendell is certainly right. We must breed for brain-power: We must see to it that the most intelligent men and women mate with one another and have many children. And we can identify the intelligent by testing their “I.Q.” and by their grades in honest college courses (as distinguished from the childish or fraudulent drivel that forms so large a part of the college curriculum today).

Let us not digress from the subject by questioning the relative validity of the various tests used to determine an “intelligence quotient.” And we shall ignore the exceptions which, as every teacher knows, sometimes make the most conscientious grading misleading. Father Mendel, to whom we owe the greatest discovery ever made in biology, failed to pass the examination for a teacher’s license in that field. A.E. Houseman, one of the greatest classical scholars in the world, failed to obtain even second-class honors at Oxford, and was given a mere “pass.” But such exceptions are rare. Let us assume that we can test intelligence infallibly. Is that enough?

It is always helpful to reduce generalizations to specific examples. Percy Bysshe Shelley was one of the great English poets; Albert Einstein, although fantastically over-advertised by yellow journalism, was a great mathematician. Both were brilliant men in more than one field of intellectual activity (Shelley is said to have exhibited a considerable talent for chemistry, among other things, and Einstein is said to have done well in courses on the Classics). Both, I am sure, would have placed themselves in the very highest bracket of any intelligence test, and (if so minded) could have been graduated summa cum laude from any college curriculum that you may advise. Both were, in their judgement of social and political problems, virtually morons. Merely a deficiency of practical common sense, you say? Yes, no doubt, but both acted on the basis of that deficiency and used their intellectual powers to exert a highly pernicious influence. One need not underestimate either the beauty of Shelley’s poems or the importance of the two theories of relativity to conclude that the world would be better off, had neither man existed.

But we must go farther than that. It is odd that most of the persons who urge us to foster “superior intellect” and “genius,” whether they recommend eugenics or educational subsidies or other means, simply ignore the phenomenon of the mattoid (see Lothrop Stoddard, op. cit., pp. 102-106, and the article by Max Nordau there cited).

A mattoid is a person possessed of a mentality that is, in the strict sense of the word, unbalanced. He is a Shelley or Einstein tilted just a few more degrees. He exhibits an extremely high talent, often amounting to genius, in one kind of mental activity, such as poetry or mathematics, while the other parts of his mind are depressed to the level of imbecility or insanity. Nordau, who was an acutely observant physician, noted that such unbalanced beings are usually, if not invariably, “full of organic feelings of dislike” and tend to generalize their subjective state of resentment against the civilized world into some cleverly devised pseudo-philosophic or pseudo-aesthetic system that will erode the very foundations of civilized society. Since civilized people necessarily set a high value on intellect, but are apt to venerate “genius” uncritically and without discrimination, the mattoid’s influence can be simply deadly. Nordau, indeed, saw in the activity of mattoids the principal reason why “people [as a whole] lose the power of moral indignation, and accustom themselves to despise it as something banal, unadvanced, and unintelligent.”

Nordau’s explanation may be satisfactory so far as it goes, but moral insanity is not by any means confined to minds that show an extraordinary disproportion among the faculties that can properly be called intellectual and can be measured by such things as intelligence tests, academic records, proficiency in a profession, and outstanding research. The two young degenerates, Loev and Leopold, whose crime shocked the nation some decades ago although the more revolting details could not be reported in the Press, were reputed to be not only among the most brilliant undergraduates ever enroled in the University of Chicago, but to be almost equally proficient in every branch of study. One could cite hundreds of comparable examples.

Most monsters that become notorious have to be highly intelligent to gain and retain power. Lenin and Trotsky must have had very active minds, and the latter, at least, according to persons who knew him, was able on occasion to pass as a cultivated man. Both probably had a very high “I.Q.” All reports from China indicate that Mao Tse-tung is not only extremely astute, but even learned in the Chinese culture that he is zealously extirpating. A few Communists or crypto-Communists who have been put in prominent positions may be mere stooges, but the directors of the Conspiracy and their responsible subordinates must be persons of phenomenally high intelligence.

It is clear that there is in the human species some biological strain of either atavism or degeneracy that manifests itself in a hatred of mankind and a list for evil for its own sake. It produced the Thugs in India and the Bolsheviks in Russia (cf. Louis Zoul, Thugs and Communists, Public Opinion, Long Island City). It appears in such distinguished persons as Giles de Rais, who was second only to the king of France, and in such vulgar specimens as Fritz Haarmann, a homosexual who attracted some attention in Germany in 1924, when it was discovered that for many years he had been disposing of his boy-friends, as soon as he became tired of them, by tearing their throats open with his teeth and then reducing them to sausage, which he sold in a delicatessen. And it animates the many crypto-Communist who hold positions of power or influence in the United States.

It is probable that this appalling viciousness is transmitted by the organic mechanisms of heredity, and although no geneticist would now even speculate about what genes or lack of genes produce such biped terrors, I think it quite likely that the science of genetics, if study and research are permitted to continue, may identify the factors involved eventually — say in two or three hundred years. I know that we most urgently and desperately need to know now. But it will do no good to kick geneticists: The most infinite complexity of human heredity makes it impossible to make such determinations more quickly by the normal techniques of research. (Of course, a brilliant discovery that would transcend those methods is always possible, but we can’t count on it.)

It is quite likely that at the present rate, as eugenicists predict, civilization is going to collapse from sheer lack of brains to carry it on. But it is now collapsing faster and harder from a super-abundance of brains of the wrong kind. Granting that we can test intelligence, we must remember that at or near the top of the list, by any test that we can devise, will be a flock of diabolically ingenious degenerates. And even if we could find a way to identify and eliminate the spawn of Satan, we should still have problems.

What causes genuine “liberal intellectuals”? Many are pure Pragmatists. They have no lust for evil for its own sake; they wouldn’t betray their country or their own parents for less than fifty dollars — and not for that, if they thought they could get more by bargaining. Others are superannuated children who want to go on playing with fairies and pixies, and are ready to kick and bite when disturbed at play; but they have the combination of lachrymose sentimentality and thoughtless cruelty that one so often finds in children before they become capable of the rational morality of adults. But all of our “liberal intellectuals” were graduated from a college of some sort, and many of them, I am sure, have a fairly high “intelligence quotient” by modern tests. I do not claim or suggest that they are the result of hereditary defects; I merely point out that we do not know and have no means of finding out. We can’t be sure of anything except that our society now has as many of those dubious luxuries as it can endure. And yet we are going to encourage them to raise the intellectual level.

Come to think of it, my friends, I guess we’d better postpone our coup d’etat for a couple of centuries.

The Shape of Things to Come

For a neat antithesis to Dr. Pendell’s book and, at the same time, a very significant application of genetics, I suggest Roderick Seidenberg’s Anatomy of the Future (University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill; 175 pages). Mr. Seidenberg — I call him that because I haven’t been able to find out whether or not it should be “Dr.” — told us what our future was going to be in an earlier book, Posthistoric Man (same publisher; 256 pages), which, according to the “liberal” reviewers, made him a gigantic “philosopher of history.” In the present volume, however, he has condescended to tell us again and in fewer pages — which may make this one the better bargain.

Mr. Seidenberg, according to Mr. Seidenberg, has surveyed with his eagle eye the whole course of human history and, what is more, the whole course of biological evolution since life first appeared on this planet. That is how he knows about the “ineluctable determinism” that is going to put us in our places.

The Prophet takes his departure from the now familiar phenomenon called the “population explosion” (see American Opinion, April 1960, pp. 33 f.). He says that an increase in the number of human beings automatically increases the “complexity” of society.

Of course, we have been hearing about this “complexity” for years. I am sure that you, poor harried reader, have reflected, every time that you leap into your automobile, how much simpler life would be, if you had to worry about the health of your horses, the condition of your stable, the quality of your oats and hay, the disposition and sobriety of your coachman, the efficiency of your ostlers, and the reliability of the scavengers whom you have hired to keep clean your mews. And I know that whenever you, in Chicago, pick up the telephone to call your aunt in Miami, you remark, with may a bitter oath, how much less complex everything would be, if all that you had to do was find and hire a reliable messenger who would ride express to her house and deliver your hand-written note in a month or so — if he was not waylaid on the road, and if his horse did not break a leg or cast a shoe, and if he did not decide to pause at some bowsing-ken en route for an invigorating touch of delirium tremens. Sure, life’s gettin’ awfully complicated these days; ain’t it a fact?

Well, as we all know, life’s getting complexer every minute ’cause there are more Chinese and Congolese and Sudanese than there were a minute ago; and that means, according to Mr. Seidenberg, that we have just got to become more and more organized by the minute. And the proof of this is that, if you want to resist the ever increasing organization and socialization of society, you have to join some organization, such — I interpolate, for I need not tell you that Mr. Seidenberg would never mention anything so horrid — such as The John Birch Society. The need to join organizations to resist the organization of society proves the point, for, as is obvious, if you in 1776 had wished to resist the rule of George III, you would not have needed to join the patriots of your colony. And if, in 490 B.C., you had wished to resist the Persian invasion of Europe, you would have had no need to join, or cooperate with, your fellow Athenians who marched to Marathon. In those days of greater individualism, you, as an individual, could have stood up alone on your hind legs and stuck out your tongue — and that, presumably, would have scared Darius and his armies right into the middle of the Hellespont. But alas, no more! So, you see, History proves that the day of the individual has passed forever, and the day of Organization has come.

You must not smile, for Mr. Seidenberg is in earnest, and even if he is a bit weak in knowledge of past and present, his projection of the future has seemed cogent not merely to “liberals,” but even to thoughtful readers.

Forward to Irkalla!

Mr. Seidenberg bases his argument on inferences that he draws with apparent logic from three indisputably correct statements about the contemporary world and from a widely accepted biological theory.

1) We have all observed that we are being more and more subjected to a Welfare State, which, with Fabian patience, takes away each year some part of our power to make decisions for ourselves regarding our own lives. It is perfectly obvious that if this process continues for a few more decades (as our masters’ power to take our money to bribe and bamboozle the masses may make inevitable), we shall have lost the right to decide anything at all, and shall have become mere human livestock managed by a ruthless and inhuman bureaucracy at the orders of an even more inhuman master.

2) Our Big Brains agree with Mr. Seidenberg in believing, or pretending to believe, that “the kernel of marxism…consists in elaborating…the social message of Christ.” They assure us, therefore, that it is simply unthinkable that Americans could ever be so wicked as to fight to survive. Thus we have got to be scared or beaten into One World of universal socialism in which, as Walt Rostow, Jack Kennedy, and others now gloatingly and openly tell us, not only our nation but our race must be liquidated and dissolved in a vast and mongrel mass of pullulating bipeds.

3) The number of human beings — anatomically human, at least — is undoubtedly increasing at an appalling rate. The United States is already overpopulated for optimum life, although no critical reduction in our standard of living would be necessary for the better part of a century, if our masters permitted us to remain an independent nation. But our increase is nothing compared to the terrible multiplication of the populations of Asia and Africa, caused, for the most part, by our export to those regions of our medical knowledge, medicines, food, and money. Although we Westerners might stave off a crisis for a few decades by working harder and ever harder to support our betters and to speed up the rate at which they are breeding, it is clear that we (unless we do something unthinkable) must soon be drowned in the flood that we, like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice, started but did not know how to stop. So, even if we did not have Master Jack and his accomplices or employers to arrange for our liquidation, the sheer multiplication of the human species would produce the same result anyway.

One has but to glance at a graph of the world’s population to see that it is rapidly approaching the point at which the vast human swarm can be kept alive, even on the level of barest animal subsistence, only by the most expert management of every square inch of earth’s arable surface plus expert harvest of the very oceans themselves. In that monstrous human swarm jammed together on our planet, like a swarm of bees hanging from a limb, there can be no privacy, no individuality, no slightest deviation from the routine that must be maintained just to keep alive the maximum number that can subsist at all.

Now the theory of biological evolution, as usually stated, provides that species must adapt themselves to the conditions of survival. Men, having bred themselves into a maximum swarm, become mere units of the species, and will obviously be most efficient when they perform every action of the routine by an automatic reflex. This means that thought and even consciousness will become not only unnecessary but intolerable impediments to the efficient functioning of the human animals. Obviously, the human minds must disappear in order to permit billions of human ants to make the globe an ant-hill in which they can all live in perfect socialism.

That is what “ineluctable determinism” makes ineluctable, but Mr. Seidenberg, who is as adroit in twisting words as any editor of the New York Times, shows you how nice that will be. The Revelations of Freud have shown that we are now just bundles of instincts. Mankind will necessarily evolve to the higher state of what Mr. Seidenberg calls “pure reason.” As he explains, “pure reason” is now found only among the forms of life that are biologically superior to us because better adapted to environment. The examples which he gives are “ants, bees, and termites,” whose “essentially unchanged survival during sixty million years testifies to the perfection of their adjustment…to the conditions of life.” We must strive to become like them — nay, the “ineluctable determinism” inherent in the “population explosion” and the need for a “more advanced society” will make us, willy nilly, just like ants and termites — intellectually and spiritually, that is, for Mr. Seidenberg does not seem to entertain a hope that human beings will ever be able to crawl about on six legs.

In this perfected socialist world there can be no change and hence no history: That is why the perfect man of the near future will be, in Seidenbergian terminology, “post-historic.” Everybody will be happy, because there will be no individuals — only organisms that are part of a species and have no separate consciousness. To see how attractive the inevitable future is, you have only to reflect, dear reader, how much happier you would be, if you were an ant or a cockroach in your basement. You could operate by what Mr. Seidenberg calls “pure reason.” You could not possibly be affected by religion, art, literature, philosophy, science, capitalism, racial discrimination, or any of the other horrid things that will have to be blotted out anyway in the interests of Equality and Social Justice. You could never have a thought to trouble you. You would have no consciousness; hence you would not know that you exist, and would have no organ that could feel pain when somebody steps on you. What more could you want?

If you are so reactionary as to prefer to be conscious, even at the cost of being unhappy from time to time, you may be amused by the similarity of Mr. Seidenberg’s vision of the future to the scene described in one of the oldest of the Babylonian tablets, on which the cuneiform characters represent an oddly sibilant and staccato language: a-na maat la tari kak-ka-rifi-ti-e ila istar marat ilu sin u-zu-un-sa is- kun, etc.

“To the land whence none return, the place of darkness, Ishtar, the daughter of Sin, her ear inclined.”Then inclined the daughter of Sin her ear to the house of darkness, the domain of Irkalla; to the prison from which he that enters comes not forth; to the road whose path does not return; …to the land where filth is their bread and their food is mud. The light they behold not; in unseeingness they dwell, and are clothed, like winged things, in a garment of scales…”

Of all of mankind’s nightmarish visions of a future existence, that Babylonian conception of the dead as crawling forever, like mindless insects, in a fetid and eternal night has always seemed to me the most gruesome.

Joy is not Around the Corner

Mr. Seidenberg’s ecstatic vision of the New Jerusalem has, I am sorry to say, imposed on a least two men of scientific eminence who should have known better. They permitted themselves to be confused by the theory of biological evolution. If man evolved, over a period of 500,000 years or more, from an ape (Australopithecus) that discovered that by picking up and wielding a long bone it could increase its efficiency in killing other apes, is it not possible that our species can go on evolving and become, in another 500,000 years or less, the perfectly adjusted biped termites that Mr. Seidenberg predicts? Heavens to Betsy, I’m not going to argue that point. Granted!

And isn’t the “population explosion” a fact? Sure it is, but don’t overlook one detail — the time factor. At the present rate, the globe, sometime between 2000 and 2005 A.D. — that is to say within forty years — will be infested by 5,000,000,000 anatomically human creatures, the maximum number for which food can be supplied by even the most intensive cultivation. And then, to keep the globe inhabitable at that bare subsistence level, it will be necessary to kill every year more people than now live in the whole United States — kill them with atomic bombs or clubs, as may be more convenient.

I shall not argue about what human beings could or could not become by biological evolution in half a million years: We all know, at least, that there is going to be no biological evolution in fifty years. And, if we stop a moment to think about it, we also know that the world is not going to have a population of five billion. Not ever.

The population of the world is going to be drastically reduced before the year 2000. [See Oliver's later revision of his prediction in his article "What Hath Man Wrought? [2]" -- Editor]

The reduction could come through natural causes. It is always possible — far more possible than you imagine, if you have not investigated the relevant areas of scientific knowledge — that next week or next year may bring the onset of a new pestilence that will have a proportional mortality as great as that of the epidemic in the time of the Antonines or the Black Plaque of the Middle Ages. Alternatively, the events described in John Christopher’s brilliant novel, No Blade of Grass, could become fact, instead of fiction, at any time. And there are at least three other ways, all scientifically possible, in which the world could be partly depopulated in short order by strictly natural forces beyond our control.

But if Nature does not act, men will. When things became a bit crowded in east Asia, for example, the Huns and, at a later time, the Mongols, swept a wide swath through the world as locusts sweep through a wheat field. And wherever they felt the inspiration, they were every bit as efficient as any quantity of hydrogen bombs you may care to imagine. In the natural course of human events, we shall see in the near future wars of extermination on scale and of an intensity that your mind will, at present, refuse to contemplate. The only question will be what peoples will be among the exterminated.

If the minority of the earth’s inhabitants that is capable of creating and continuing (as distinct from aping) a high civilization is exterminated (as it now seems resolved to be), or if for some reason wars of extermination fail to solve the problem, civilization will collapse from sheer lack of brains to keep it going, and the consequent reversion to global savagery will speedily take care of the excess in numbers. In a world of savages, not only would the intricate and hated technology of our civilization be abolished, but even the simplest arts might be forgotten. (Every anthropologist knows of tribes in Polynesia and Melanesia that forgot how to make canoes, although without them it became almost impossible to obtain the fish that they regard as the most delicious food, or how to make bows and arrows, although they needed them for more effective hunting and fighting.) A world of savages in 2100 probably would not have a population more numerous than the world had in 4000 B.C.

The ordinary course of nature and human events (separately or in combination) will, in one way or another, take care of the much-touted “population explosion,” and Mr. Seidenberg knows it. You have only to read him carefully to see that all his talk about history, biological evolution, and “ineluctable determinism” is strictly for the birds — or, at least, bird-brains.

Do-It-Yourself for Socialists

Like all internationalists, Mr. Seidenberg envisages a One World of universal socialism.

Every student of history and mankind (as distinct from the ignorant theorists who prefer to chirrup while hopping from cloud to cloud in Nephelococcygia) well knows what is needed for a successful and stable socialism. And our intelligent socialists know it, too. There are two essentials, viz.: (1) a mass of undifferentiated human livestock, sufficiently intelligent to be trained to perform routine and often complicated tasks, but too stupid to take thought for their own future; and (2) a small caste of highly intelligent planners, preferably of an entirely different race, who will direct the livestock and, with the aid of overseers who need be but little more intelligent than the overseen, make sure that the livestock work hard and breed properly and do not have unsocial thoughts. The owners must be so superior to the owned that the latter will not regard themselves as of the same species. The owners must be hedged about with a quasi-divinity, and their chief, therefore, must be represented as an incarnate god.

Mr. Seidenberg knows that and tells us so. Our blissful future, he says, is assured by the emergence of “administrators [whose] special talents place them above other men.” The most important of these special talents is enough intelligence to understand that “moral restraints and compassions [and] …the attitudes and values upon which they were based have become obsolete.” On the basis of such progressive thinking, “the relatively small elite of the organizers” will manipulate the “overwhelming social mass” and guide it toward its destiny, “the mute status of unconscious organisms.”

The Chosen Few will do this by promoting “the spiritual and psychological dehumanization of man” and “a vast organizational transmutation of life.” For this glorious purpose, various techniques are available; for example, as Mr. Seidenberg tells us, “there is, plainly, more than a nihilistic meaning in the challenging ambiguities of modern art.” And, in a masterfully managed society, “the gradually inculcated feeling of helplessness…will make the mass of humanity ever more malleable and dependent upon the complex functioning of society, with its ensuing regimentation under organized patterns of behavior.” But the Supermen will use, above all, “a scientific program of genetic control to assure the complete adjustment of the human mass to its destiny” and Reactionaries and other American swine, whose “anachronistic stance” and silly efforts to avoid “the mute status of unconscious organisms” show that they “belong essentially to the past.”

As for the Supermen, who form “the nucleus of an elite of administrative functionaries and organizers ruling over the vast mass of men,” you can bet your bottom dollar (so long as Master Jack permits you to have one) that that Master Race has no intention of becoming like the bipeds that it will supervise and selectively breed for more and better mindlessness until it has attained its “historic” goal, “the settling of the human race [as distinct from its owners] into an ecologic niche of permanent and static adjustment,” which, as Mr. Seidenberg says in a moment of candor, in simply “living death.” Obviously, when this goal has been achieved, human beings, deprived of mind and even consciousness, will differ from the Master Race as much as ants and bees now differ in intelligence from human beings. Glory be!

To any attentive reader of the book, it is clear that the author, under the guise of a transparently inconsistent prophecy about a distant future, is presenting a plan for a near future that is to be created, in spite of history, in spite of nature, and in spite of mankind, by the purposeful and concerted action of a small band of “elite” conspirators, comparable to, if not identical with, the directors of the International Communist Conspiracy.

To publish such a plan in a book sold to the general public seems a fantastic indiscretion, even when one allows for the breath-taking effrontery that our Internationalists are now showing in their confidence that Americans have already been so disarmed and entrapped in the “United Nations” that, for practical purposes, it’s all over except for the butchering. When I first read these books, therefore, I was inclined to believe that the author was trying to warn us.

The Veiled Prophet of Doylestown

My inquiries, necessarily hasty and perfunctory as I write this article to meet a deadline, have elicited almost no information about Mr. Seidenberg. I do not know what region on earth was blessed with his nativity, what academic institutions bestowed the benison of their degrees upon him, or even what may be his liaison with the University of North Carolina. He is said to be an architect, but he is not listed in the 1962 edition of the American Architects’ Directory. He is said to practice that art in Doylestown, Pennsylvania, but an informant in that town reports that he is not listed in the telephone directory as an architect, although there is listed under his name, without indication of profession or occupation, a telephone which did not answer, when called on successive days.

I do not have the facilities of the FBI, so all that I really know about Mr. Seidenberg, apart from his books, is that he surfaced momentarily on February 22, 1962, in the pages of the New York Times, to emit a yip for the abolition of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. (And if you wonder why anyone should now yip against a Committee that appears to have been virtually silenced by the concerted howling of our enemies after the release of Operation Abolition, I can only tell you that, according to persons who should know, the Committee has amassed in Executive Sessions testimony which, if published, would expose some of the most powerful anti-humans in Washington.)

Mrs. Sarah Watson Emery, in her excellent book, Blood on the Old Well (prospect House, Dallas, cf. American Opinion, October, 1963, pp. 67 ff.), reports that the elusive Seidenberg, in a conversation with her, “clearly implied that he wrote the books in order to bring about the ghastly future” that he “so confidently predicts.” If Mrs. Emery is right, Mr. Seidenberg’s books are inspirational literature for the Master Race of “administrators,” who are now taking over the whole world. They can own and operate the world forever in perfect Peace, if, by a scientific application of genetics, they reduce human beings to the status of mindless insects.

Is One World Feasible?

You, my patient reader, may be a member of the Radical Right and hence unenthusiastic about the happiness that is being planned for you. If so, I confess that I, whom a learned colleague recently described as a “filthy Fascist swine,” share your misgivings. But let us here consider the Seidenbergian ideal exclusively as a problem in genetics. Is it possible?

Probably not, by the hit-and-miss methods that the Conspiracy has thus far employed.

As Mr. Seidenberg carefully points out, “Russia [under Lenin, Stalin, and Khrushchev] and America [under Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and Kennedy] are basically akin by reason of the dominance of their organizational trends,” but — hélas! — even today “the collectivization of society is only in its incipient stages in Russia.” And the reason is obvious. Although Ulyanov (alias Lenin) and Bronstein (alias Trotsky) butchered millions of reactionary Russians who wanted to be individual human beings, and although Dzhugashvili (alias Stalin) butchered millions more, and although Saint Nick (formerly Khrushchev) shot, hacked to pieces, or starved seven million in the Ukraine alone when he as just a local manager for the Communist Conspiracy, the nasty Russians are still unregenerate. Although the world’s vermin have had absolute control of Russia for almost half a century and have certainly worked hard to exterminate every Russian who had in himself a spark of self-respect, human decency, or even the will to live, observers agree that the recent failure of crops would have precipitated a crisis and possibly even a revolt of blind desperation, if Master Jack had not ordered his American cattle to provide the wheat that Comrade Nick needed to keep his own restive cattle fairly quiet. And it is quite likely that if the Conspiracy were to lose control of the United States and so be forced to retreat somewhere in the world, the Russian people would revolt anyway. The most systematic butchery has not destroyed the genetic transmission of human instincts. And it is unlikely to do so for centuries, at least.

Americans are apt to be even more refractory, and I am sure that One Worlders, now that they think their final victory almost achieved, must be giving thought to the problem of what to do with them. (And I need not remind you that advanced minds are not troubled by “moral restraints” and the other “attitudes and values.”) The American kulaks were useful and even necessary to fight wars “to make the world safe for democracy” and to finance with “foreign aid” the Communist conquest of the world, but when that goal has been achieved, they are likely to be a real nuisance.

There are rumors, for example, that Master Jack is planning to send the U.S. Army — which, as purged by Yarmolinsky and his stooges, will presumably be a docile instrument for the abolition of the nation it was established to defend — to seal off one area of the country after another, drive the white swine from their homes, and search them to confiscate such firearms or other weapons as they may have in their possession. It may be necessary to beat a few hundred of the white pigs so that their squealing will teach the other livestock to obey their owner, but, according to the rumors, nothing more than that is contemplated. But even if the operation is successful, one can foresee endless trouble. Human instincts are more or less fixed by heredity.

It is no wonder, therefore, that Mr. Seidenberg foresees “long-range genetic manipulation designed not only to improve the human stock according to the social dictates of [the proprietors of] a collectivized humanity, but above all to eliminate, in one manner or another, any traces of anti-social deviation.”

Those are, doubtless, sound general principles, but what, specifically, is to be done with the Americans when the “United Nations” takes them over? One could, as Mr. Seidenberg delicately hints in one passage, just castrate all the males. (If this idea seems shocking to you, remember that that’s just your “anachronistic stance.”) Or one could adopt the policy which the Soviet, according to a report that was leaked “from U.N. official sources” and reported in the now defunct Northlander (September, 1958), uses in Lithuania, where all potentially troublesome males were rounded up and shipped to Siberia and then replaced in their own homes by public-spirited Mongolian males eager to improve the quality of the Lithuanian population. A Baluba or a Bakongo thus installed in every American home would not only effectively end “discrimination” and promote the “World Unity” desiderated by Internationalists, but would also — according to a “scientific” study made by a Professor Of Sociology in a tax-supported American university and reported both in his class-room lectures and in his broadcasts over a radio-station entirely owned by that university — fulfill the secret yearnings of all American womanhood.

This may seem a perfect solution (if you have a “One World” viewpoint), but it has, I fear, its drawbacks. Balubas and such are just fine for exterminating white men in Africa and creating chaos under direction from Washington and Moscow, but I suspect that anyone who tries to regiment them to do work is in for a powerful lot of trouble. After they have served their purpose, it will be necessary to exterminate them, too. And the Masters, after they have blotted out the civilization they hate, are going to need workers, not cannibals and other savages, if, in keeping with the Seidenbergian vision, they are to rule the world forever.

Now Americans and Europeans are excellent workers. What is needed, obviously, is not to destroy them but to convert them, as Mr. Seidenberg predicts, into true zombies, that is to say, creatures that have no will or personality of their own and therefore do whatever they are told. But that transformation, so far as I can learn from geneticists whom I have consulted, is genetically impossible by any process of selective breeding within any reasonable length of time — say a thousand years or less. This, I am sure, our author realizes, for after admitting that “the art of brainwashing and, even more so, the science of controlling society by pharmaceutical manipulation, are in their infancy,” he places his hope for the future in “the ever increasing techniques and the ever more refined arts of mental coercion.” Presumably, the human mind and will can be destroyed by drugs, or perhaps by an improved technique of lobotomy, to produce the kind of “mental health” requisite in the zombies who, like mindless insects, are to work to support the Master Race of the future. But this is not genetics, and the qualities thus induced in individuals cannot be transmitted genetically. The Masters, therefore, will be put to the trouble of operating on each generation of biped insects as it is produced — and, what is even worse, there is some reason to doubt that the zombies would or could reproduce themselves.

So, you see, the New Dispensation of which Internationalists dream is by no means assured, either historically or biologically. For that matter, it is even possible that enough Americans may object in time to frustrate the “determinism” that only their ignorance, apathy, or cowardice could make “ineluctable.” But I cannot speculate about that possibility here. I have sought only to show you, as dispassionately as possible, what kind of thoughts very advanced minds are thinking about you these days.

Source: http://www.revilo-oliver.com/news/1963/12/history-and-biology/ [3]


Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2011/07/history-biology/

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/schwabe-deathofthegravedigger.jpeg

[2] What Hath Man Wrought?: http://revilo-oliver.com/rpo/What_Hath_Man_Wrought.html

[3] http://www.revilo-oliver.com/news/1963/12/history-and-biology/: http://www.revilo-oliver.com/news/1963/12/history-and-biology/

mercredi, 08 juin 2011

L'Afrique n'est plus le (seul) berceau de l'Homme moderne

31c6709e-4401-11df-8797-954106b15a91.jpg

L’Afrique n’est plus le (seul) berceau de l’Homme moderne

 
Communiqué de Bernard Lugan
2 juin 2011
 
 
Déclarant à la revue Science et Avenir (n° 772, juin 2011) que « L’Afrique n’est pas le seul berceau de l’Homme moderne », Yves Coppens (photo) fait voler en éclats le postulat de l’exclusivité des origines africaines de l’humanité. Il évacue également d’une phrase plusieurs dizaines d’années d’un hallucinant « bourrage de crâne » scientifique construit autour du paradigme du « Out of Africa ». Pour mémoire, selon ce dernier, les Homo sapiens seraient sortis d’Afrique sous leur forme moderne entre moins 100 000 ans et moins 60 000 ans, et ils auraient partout remplacé les populations antérieures, ce qui fait que nous sommes tous des Africains...
 
C’est en prenant en compte les découvertes récentes qu’Yves Coppens a radicalement révisé ses anciennes certitudes. Désormais, pour lui, ni l’Homme moderne européen, ni l’Homme moderne asiatique ne descendent de l’Homme moderne africain puisqu’il écrit : « Je ne crois pas que les hommes modernes aient surgi d’Afrique il y a 100 000 à 60 000 ans (…) Je pense que les Homo sapiens d’Extrême-Orient sont les descendants des Homo erectus d’Extrême-Orient ».
Comment serait-il d’ailleurs possible de continuer à soutenir que les Asiatiques ont une origine africaine quand, dans une Chine peuplée en continu depuis 2 millions d’années, les découvertes s’accumulent qui mettent en évidence la transition entre les hommes dits archaïques et l’Homme moderne dont les Chinois actuels sont les très probables descendants (Dong, 2008 : 48)[1]. Il en est de même avec les Européens.
Les importantes découvertes archéologiques qui ont permis une totale révision des modèles anciens ne sont pas des nouveautés pour les lecteurs de l’Afrique Réelle. Dans un dossier publié dans le numéro 11 du mois de novembre 2010[2], il a ainsi été montré que l’Homme moderne, qu’il soit asiatique, européen ou africain est issu de souches locales d’hominisation ayant évolué in situ. Un peu partout dans le monde, nous voyons en effet et clairement des Homo erectus se « sapiensiser » et donner naissance à des lignées locales, peut-être les plus lointains marqueurs des « races » actuelles.
Ces « sapiensisations » observables à la fois en Asie, en Europe, dans le monde méditerranéen et en Afrique, réduisent à néant le postulat du diffusionnisme au profit de l’hypothèse multi régionaliste que je défends depuis de nombreuses années[3]. Les découvertes qui s’accumulent, de la Georgie[4] à l’Espagne[5], de la Chine au Maroc ou encore d’Israël à l’Australie et à la Mongolie vont ainsi toutes dans le sens d’hominisations indépendantes de (ou des) l’hominisation africaine.
Cette déferlante ayant fait céder les fragiles digues dressées par la pensée unique, ses derniers défenseurs en sont réduits à jongler avec les faits. Le célèbre généticien André Langaney n’a ainsi plus qu’un pauvre argument à opposer aux nombreuses et très sérieuses études faites en Chine puisqu'il ne craint pas d'écrire : « Des scientifiques orientaux au nationalisme mal placé veulent à toute force que l’homme de Pékin ou d’autres fossiles chinois soient leurs ancêtres » (Sciences et Avenir, page 63). Fin du débat !
Le dossier de Science et Avenir  constitue une étape essentielle dans la libération des esprits car il va toucher le plus grand nombre. En dépit d’inévitables scories idéologiques qui font surface ici ou là, et de concessions appuyées au politiquement correct, sa publication signifie qu’il n’est désormais plus possible de cacher au grand public une vérité que les spécialistes connaissaient mais qu’ils conservaient prudemment dans leurs tiroirs afin de ne pas désespérer le « Billancourt de la paléontologie »… La théorie de « l’Eve africaine » et celle d’ « Out of Africa » peuvent donc être désormais rangées dans le rayon des idéologies défuntes, quelque part entre la « lutte des classes » et le mythe de la « colonisation-pillage ».
Bernard Lugan
2 juin 2011
Pour vous abonner à la revue mensuelle par Internet l'Afrique Réelle :
Paiement par carte bleue / Paypal / chèque

[1]Dong, W., (2008) « Les premiers hommes vus de Chine ». Les Dossiers de la Recherche, n°32, août 2008, pp. 47-49.
[2] Pour les synthèses les plus récentes, voir l’Afrique Réelle n°11 (novembre 2010) et  Lugan, B., (2009) Histoire de l’Afrique des origines à nos jours. Ellipses, pp.15-19.
[3] Notamment dans un livre paru en 1989 et aujourd’hui dépassé sur plusieurs points qui a pour titre Afrique, l’Histoire à l’endroit.
[4]Lieberman, D.E., ( 2007) « Paleoanthropology : Homing in on early Homo ». Nature, n° 449, 20 septembre 2007, pp. 291-292.
[5]Carbonell, E et alii ., (2008) « The First European ? » Nature, n° 452, 27 mars 2008, pp. 465-469.
 

mardi, 24 mai 2011

Herder's Philosophy of the "Volksgeist"

Herder’s Theory of the Volksgeist

By Andrew Hamilton

Ex: http://counter-currents.com/

herder.jpgGerman philosopher and critic Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744–1803) developed the concept of romantic or organic nationalism, a form of ethnic nationalism in which the state derives its political legitimacy from historic cultural or hereditary groups. The underlying assumption is that every ethnicity should be politically distinct. Herder’s ideas on the subject were expressed in his theory of the Volksgeist.

A medical student at the University of Königsberg in East Prussia in the 1760s, Herder quickly abandoned medicine for theology and philosophy, which brought him into contact with philosopher Immanuel Kant, one of his professors. To encourage Herder, his favorite pupil, Kant waived the fees customarily paid for attendance at his lectures, allowed the student to read some of his unpublished manuscripts, and introduced him to the writings of Montesquieu, Hume, and Rousseau.

Ordained in 1765, Herder became assistant master (teacher) at the Lutheran cathedral school in Riga. His religious works include Christian Writings (Christliche Schriften), 5 vols. (1794–98), Luther’s Catechism, with a catechetical instruction for the use of schools (1798), and On the Spirit of Hebrew Poetry (Vom Geist der hebräischen Poesie) (1782–3). According to Steven Martinson, the Lutheran pietism in which he was raised exhibited “a sense of equality among the ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’ that carried over into Herder’s later understanding of community life.” Herder regretted that Martin Luther had not established a German national church. Christianity, he believed, had been (and should be) Germanized, just as other nations should adopt modifications of Christianity suitable to their own circumstances, ethnic consciousness, and experience.

Romantic Son of the Enlightenment

In Strasbourg he met Goethe, five years his junior, upon whom Herder’s ideas about poetry and its social role produced a powerful effect. Herder was a key figure, with Goethe and others, in the Sturm und Drang (Storm and Stress) movement in German literature c. 1770–84.

Though a leader of the Romantics, Herder was nevertheless, according to Royal J. Schmidt, “a true son of the Aufklärung and seventeenth-century rationalism who was strongly influenced by the ideas of Leibniz, Kant, Spinoza, Montesquieu and Shaftesbury.” (“Cultural Nationalism in Herder,” Journal of the History of Ideas [June 1956], 407.) Because all human structures are transitory, Herder believed, tradition,

though in itself . . . an excellent institution of Nature, indispensable to the human race: but when it fetters the thinking faculty both in politics and education, and prevents all progress of the intellect, and all the improvement, that new times and circumstances demand, it is the true narcotic of the mind, as well to nations and sects, as to individuals.

In 1776, through Goethe’s influence, Herder was named Generalsuperintendent of the Lutheran clergy at Weimar, a post he held for the rest of his life.

HerderBuch.jpgA prolific author in many different fields (poetry, art, comparative philology and linguistics, religion, mythology, philosophy of history, metaphysics, psychology or philosophy of mind, aesthetics, and political philosophy), his books most relevant to this discussion are This Too a Philosophy of History for the Formation of Humanity (1774); Ideas for the Philosophy of History of Humanity (Ideen zur Philosophie der Geschichte der Menschheit), 4 vols. (1784–91), his masterwork, in which he discussed all known peoples; and Letters for the Advancement of Humanity (Briefe zur Beförderung der Humanität), 10 vols. (1793–7), a work largely of political philosophy written in response to the French Revolution.

Stylistically, according to Michael Forster [2] of the University of Chicago, Herder is “hostile towards systematicity in philosophy. He is in particular hostile to the ambitious sort of systematicity aspired to in the tradition of Spinoza, Wolff, Kant, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel: the ideal of a comprehensive theory whose parts display some sort of strict overall pattern of derivation.” He was skeptical that such systematic designs could work, as opposed to creating the illusion that they do, and believed system-building closes off inquiry and disregards or distorts vital empirical evidence. Herder’s views “established an important countertradition in German philosophy (which subsequently included e.g. F. Schlegel, Nietzsche, and Wittgenstein).” He also harbored “a general commitment to empiricism and against apriorism in philosophy which leads him to avoid familiar sorts of apriorist arguments in philosophy.”

Herder and Biological Race

Herder was a key figure in the development of two well-known philosophical-anthropological concepts.

One is Zeitgeist (zeit time + geist spirit), “spirit of the time” or “spirit of the age,” signifying the general cultural, intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and political climate of an era. Herder reportedly coined the term in his 1769 critique of a work by German philologist Christian Adolph Klotz.

The second concept, the one relevant here, is Volksgeist, usually translated as “national spirit” or “national character.” In German, however, Nationalgeist is the term for national spirit, and Nationalcharakter for national character. Volksgeist means “spirit of the Volk.”

In a holistic sense, race consists of dimensions beyond physical anthropology or population genetics. Just as every distinct population shares common morphological and physiological traits, despite within-group variation they likewise express unique group psychology, intelligence, behavior, character, morals and, ultimately, culture and civilization. (Jared Taylor: “White Americans believed race was a fundamental aspect of individual and group identity. They believed people of different races differed in temperament, ability, and the kind of societies they built.”) In fact, such second-order phenomena are the aspects of race that preoccupy most “racists” most of the time.

Herder’s Volksgeist is highly compatible with this modern understanding of race. This is why he is frequently viewed as a “racist” by modern academics (e.g., Cedric Dover, “The Racial Philosophy of Johann Herder,” British Journal of Sociology [1952]: 124–33) or as a forerunner of Nazism. It is easy to see why this is the case.

German physical anthropologist Egon von Eickstedt maintained that Herder and Christoph Meiners (1747–1810) were the founders of the anthropological theory of history. Anthropologist Ilse Schwidetzky wrote that Herder “entertained the general conviction that the character of a people, and subsequently their history, is determined by their nature and heredity.”

However, Herder’s implicitly racial or ethnic understanding of Volk was not predicated upon a biological worldview, at least not an explicit one. Moreover, it reflected the biological confusion and limited scientific understanding of the time. As Oxford biologist John R. Baker noted, in Herder’s Ideas,

his arguments appear rather feeble and in places actually foolish. For instance, he says that all men are the same in internal anatomy, and even—almost unbelievably—that a few hundred years ago the inhabitants of Germany were Patagonians [natives of a region located at the southern tip of South America]. He mentions [Johann F.] Blumenbach [the German father of modern anthropology, who developed a 5-race model of mankind], but will not agree to the division of mankind into races. ‘Race [he uses this actual word] implies a difference of origin [i.e., not the Biblical creation],’ he claims; and this difference he denies. ‘Denn jedes Volk ist Volk,’ he insists; for him, the reality is not the race but the nation with its national speech.

Herder shows better sense than some of the philosophers of his time [Baker mentions Rousseau and several other eminent figures] in rejecting the idea that the anthropoid apes could be regarded as human. He tells us that nature has divided the apes and monkeys into many genera and species, but man is unitary. ‘Neither the Pongo [chimpanzee] nor the Longimanus [gibbon] is your brother; but truly the American [Amerindian] and the Negro are.

Herder’s religious convictions prevented him from classifying mankind with animals. He believed national groups belonged not to “systematic natural history,” but to “the physico-geographical history of man.” With Montesquieu, he viewed human populations as products of the lands they inhabited, the climates in which they developed, and the circumstances that shaped their respective histories:

The structure of the earth, in its natural variety and diversity . . . Seas, mountain ranges and rivers are the most natural boundaries not only of lands but also of peoples, customs, languages and empires, and they have been, even in the greatest revolutions in human affairs, the directing lines or limits of world history.

Yet, despite these caveats, Herder’s worldview was unmistakably racialist, as can be seen in his observations concerning the Chinese:

. . . show what kind of nation it is, and evince it’s genetic character: a character which equally meets the eye on contemplation of the whole, and inspection of its parts, even to dress, food, customs, domestic economy, arts, and amusements. This northeastern mungal [Mongol] nation could no more change its natural form by artificial regulations, even though enduring for thousands of years, than a man can change his nature, that is, the innate character of his race and complexion. It was planted on this spot of the Globe: and  . . . this race of men, in this region, could never become Greeks or Romans. Chinese they were, and will remain: a people endowed by nature with small eyes, a short nose, a flat forehead, little beard, large ears, and a protuberant belly: what their organization could produce, it has produced. . . . Nature seems to have refused them as well as many other nations in this corner of the World, great invention in Science: while on the other hand he has beautifully conferred on their little eyes a spirit of application, adroit diligence and nicety, a talent of imitating with art whatever their cupidity deems useful. Eternally moving, eternally occupied, they are forever going and coming, in quest of gain, or in fulfillment of their offices. . . .

Elsewhere he makes the reverse case: “Had Greece been peopled with Chinese, our Greece would never have existed.”

Jacques Godechot, a French Jewish historian, wrote that for Herder “the destiny of national groups is fixed by imperatives beyond popular [i.e., political] modification. These imperatives are race (Herder did not formulate a theory of race, but to a certain extent he can be considered as a forerunner of modern racism), language, tradition, and natural frontiers.”

It can be said that Herder inserted a full-blown, de facto racial-ethnic view of history and mankind at a level one step above that of biology (race). In Herder’s treatment, at least, the consequences are much the same as they would be for a more biologically-oriented approach.

Still, rejection of, or lack of clarity about, basic raciology is best avoided. It leads whites badly astray, as witness the consequences of the petty but internecine nationalisms of the 19th and 20th centuries.

The Volksgeist

The Volksgeist, the spirit of the folk, is a manifestation of the people; it animates the nation. “There is only one class in the state, the Volk (not the rabble), and the king belongs to this class as well as the peasant.” The Volksgeist is as old as the Volk, and evolves with the national group. There is a life of national groups, and withering and death marks the end of a Volk.

Every human group is, as an empirical matter, different from every other group, each nationality (or Volk) is characterized by its own unique spirit. Each people possesses its own cultural traits shaped by ancestral history and the experience of a particular physical environment, and mentally constructs its social life through language, literature, religion, the arts, customs, and folklore inherited from earlier generations. The Volk is the family writ large.

Law, too, must be adapted to the spirit of each nation, for rules applied to one nation are not valid for another. The only effective and legitimate governments are those that develop naturally from within particular nations and reflect, in their differences from other polities, the cultures of the people they govern.

It follows that two nations cannot have the same Volksgeist. Therefore, Herder rejected the French revolutionary (and contemporary) dogma that man is everywhere the same, whether he lives in Africa or England, or that every nation is fundamentally identical with every other nation, and thereby should be made homogeneous with them. Herder, Godechot writes, is staunchly opposed to all that is cosmopolite and universalist in character: “In contrast, he believes in particularism.”

Herder constantly likened the Volksgeist, “singular, marvelous, inexplicable, ineffable,” to a plant that grows, blooms, and withers. Just as the “botanist cannot obtain a complete knowledge of a plant, unless he follow it from the seed, through its germination, blossoming, and decay,” so too must the historian seek to understand the uniqueness of the present by reference to its roots in the past.

In other words, the Volksgeist can best be understood through the phenomena of history. Therefore, the study of history must play a central role in education. The objective of historical instruction, which should be nationalistic in character, is to teach how the Fatherland evolved over time.

herder-id5361179.jpgRather than giving priority to the study of ancient and modern history, as was common in the 18th century, Herder redeemed the history of the Middle Ages, feeling that it had been given short shrift. He also refused to restrict history to the study of politics, wars, and dynasties. For Herder, history was primarily the history of the Volk: its language, culture, customs, religion, literature, law, and folklore. (A writer and collector of poetry, folk songs, and legends, and an early student of comparative literature, Herder published a collection of folk songs in 1773 entitled Voices of the People in Their Songs [Stimmen der Völker in ihren Liedern].)

Herder’s views of both the German and the Slavic Volksgeist did not match existing territorial borders, but were pan-national in character.

Despite being Prussian, Herder rejected Prussian nationalism as too narrow. An intense German nationalist, he was imbued with the spirit of the entire German Volk: “He is deserving of glory and gratitude who seeks to promote the unity of the territories of Germany through writings, manufacture, and institutions.” Herder believed that Austria, too, should be part of Germany.

Likewise, he conceived of Slavs as a Volk, rather than extolling specific polities. Thus, he wrote of the Slavic, as opposed to the Russian, Polish, or some other politically-defined Volksgeist. Herder predicted the Slavic nations would one day be the real power in Europe, as western Europeans would reject Christianity and rot away, while the eastern European nations would adhere to their religion and to their idealism. Through his concept of Volksgeist, which directly influenced Slavic intellectuals, and his high praise for the Slavic people and culture, Herder became an intellectual godfather of Pan-Slavism [4].

Herder rejected the mixture of Völker, each of which he believed was adapted to a particular ecological niche. Ideally, “if every one of these nations had remained in its place, the Earth might have been considered as a garden, where in one spot one human national plant, in another, another, bloomed in its proper figure and nature.” But just “as men are not firmly rooted plants, the calamities of famine, earthquakes, war and the like, must in time remove them from their place to some other more or less different.” Almost every people on Earth “has migrated at least once, sooner or later, to a greater distance, or less.”

On Language

For Herder, language became a key cultural differentiator and identifier:

Has a people anything dearer than the speech of its fathers? In its speech resides its whole thought-domain, its tradition, history, religion, and basis of life, all its heart and soul. To deprive a people of its speech is to deprive it of its one eternal good. . . . As God tolerates all the different languages in the world, so also should a ruler not only tolerate but honor the various languages of his peoples. . . . The best culture of a people cannot be expressed through a foreign language; it thrives on the soil of a nation most beautifully, and, I may say, it thrives only by means of the nation’s inherited and inheritable dialect. With language is created the heart of a people; and is it not a high concern, amongst so many peoples—Hungarians, Slavs, Rumanians, etc.—to plant seeds of well-being for the far future and in the way that is dearest and most appropriate to them?

Herder’s stress on the centrality of language, including dangerously divisive multilingual diversity within the white race, or even a single white state, impacted the development of European nationalism during the succeeding two centuries. (Linguistic diversity within multiracial states like the US is desirable because, genetically speaking, language barriers tend to hinder hybridization. You do not want anything like “English Only” in a multiracial milieu.) After Herder, European national languages assumed a heavily romanticized, mystical aura in nationalist thought. Worse, language was used as a poor stand-in for race in whites’ construction of their concepts of “people” and “nation” in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard, and others realized that race and language are not interchangeable, that language is not an adequate surrogate for race. Nor should language balkanize and divide whites, as it has to date. It is imperative that we transcend the currently impermeable linguistic barriers that seal whites into airtight national compartments, rendering us “foreign” and mutually unintelligible to one another. Rather, we must talk and move ceaselessly across the old territorial, linguistic, and intellectual borders as a prelude to full-fledged transnational white cooperation.

The Jews

In terms of religion, for Herder there was no continuity between (for him, legitimate) Old Testament Judaism and the Pharisaic Judaism of Jesus’ time, which he regarded as degenerate in form.

As far as ethnicity goes, Herder did not think of Jews primarily as individuals, but as a Volk. The Jews, he wrote, “in the land of their fathers, and in the midst of other nations . . . remain as they were; and even when mixed with other people they may be distinguished for some generations downward.” His view of Völker compelled him to regard Jews as alien to Germany and Europe:

For thousands of years, since their emergence on the stage of history, the Jews were a parasitic growth on the stem of other nations, a race of cunning brokers all over the earth. They have caused great evil to many ill-organized states, by retarding the free and natural economic development of their indigenous population.

In another passage reflective of Herder’s racial-ethnic worldview, he says:

The Jewish people is and remains in Europe an Asiatic people alien to our part of the world, bound to that old law which it received in a distant climate, and which, according to its confession, it cannot do away with . . . [Emphasis added.]

How many of this alien people can be tolerated without injury to the true citizens?

A ministry in which a Jew is supreme, a household in which a Jew has the key of the wardrobe and the management of the finances, a department or commissariat in which Jews do the principal business, are Pontine marshes which cannot be drained.

However, in the opinion of some Jews, Herder’s greatest sin was his formulation of the theory of the Volksgeist itself. David Isadore Lieberman, an anti-white publicist, writes:

Herder’s most important contribution to the intellectual history of antisemitism was entirely unintended: his novel argument for the organic development of national cultures, which incorporated elements of geography, language, kinship, and historical continuity. Although Herder maintained (with occasional lapses) that no culture enjoyed a privileged position with respect to any other, his model of the organic natural culture left Jews living in the Diaspora exposed, susceptible to charges that their culture was “inorganic” and therefore inauthentic.

This last sentence is dishonest or possibly ignorant. To Herder, Jews definitely constituted an organic, “authentic” Volk. (See Frederick M. Barnard, “The Hebrews and Herder’s Political Creed,” Modern Language Review [Oct. 1959], 533.) It would be correct to say that Herder’s model leaves Jews exposed to the charge of subverting and destroying—and today, committing genocide against—other authentic cultures and peoples.

Finally, Herder’s contention that “No nationality has been solely designated by God as the chosen people of the earth” must also be classified as anti-Semitic, flatly contradicting as it does the central dogma of Judaism, Jews, organized Jewry, and all governments today.

Editor’s Bibliographical Note

A number of Herder’s works are available in English translation:

Another Philosophy of History and Selected Political Writings [5], ed. and trans. Ioannis D. Evrigenis and Daniel Pellerin (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2004)

God, Some Conversations [6], trans. Frederick T. Burckhardt (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1940)

On the Origin of Language: Two Essays [7] (by Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Johann Gottfried von Herder), trans. John H. Moran and Alexander Gode (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986)

On World History: An Anthology [8], ed. Hans Adler and Ernest A. Menze, trans. Ernest A. Menze and Michael Palmer (M. E. Sharpe, 1996)

Philosophical Writings [9], ed. Michael N. Forster (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)

Reflections on the Philosophy of the History of Mankind [10] (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968)

Sculpture: Some Observations on Shape and Form from Pygmalion’s Creative Dream [11], trans. Jason Gaiger (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002)

Selected Early Works, 1764-1767: Addresses, Essays, and Drafts; Fragments on Recent German Literature [12], ed. Ernest A. Menze and Karl Menges, trans. Ernest A. Menze and Michael Palma (University Park, Penn.: Penn State Press, 1992)

Selected Writings on Aesthetics [13], ed. and trans. Gregory Moore (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006)

Shakespeare [14], trans. Gregory Moore (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008)

The Spirit of Hebrew Poetry [15](Toronto: University of Toronto Libraries, 2011).


Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2011/05/herders-theory-of-the-volksgeist/

vendredi, 13 mai 2011

Anatolia: Una indoeuropeizacion frustrada

por Olegario de las Eras
 

La herencia indoeuropea, concretada en una jerarquía de valores y principios y en un tipo humano determinado que desde la Prehistoria han dado forma a ciclos de civilización análogos, conforma el nervio de la comunidad constituida por los pueblos europeos, comunidad sentida y vivida más allá de las contingentes «fronteras nacionales». En efecto, es un hecho que las sucesivas oleadas de pueblos septentrionales, migrando en grupos masivos y compactos, de celtas a eslavos de helenos a germanos, fueron los materiales sobre los que en el transcurso de milenios cristalizaron la práctica totalidad de pueblos de nuestro continente. Siendo esto así, resulta aparentemente contradictorio que un territorio como el de la península de Anatolia en el que se documenta una presencia indoeuropea desde fines del III milenio a. n. e. y que ha visto sobre su suelo a hititas, luvitas, helenos, tracios, frigios, persas, gálatas o latinos entre otros, se perciba por parte de los europeos como algo ajeno. Pero la realidad es que los indoeuropeos no pudieron permanecer en todas partes donde llegaron: «Los indoeuropeos no siempre han vencido»: no tenemos más remedio que dar la razón, aunque sea por una vez, a J. P. Mallory.

     La llegada a las costas del Mediterráneo de grupos indoeuropeos produjo siempre necesariamente enfrentamientos con las poblaciones autóctonas: de la derrota y sometimiento de éstas dependió la posibilidad de supervivencia de aquellos. En realidad, la historia de las civilizaciones indoeuropeas del Mediterráneo (Hélade, Roma, la Céltica...) es la historia de una incesante lucha contra el elemento humano y espiritual aborigen1. Éste fue el caso también de los pueblos que hablaban las lenguas indoeuropeas del grupo anatolio, pueblos que conservaban firmemente su tradición religiosa y jurídico-política indoeuropea en el momento de asentarse en sus sedes históricas2. A su llegada la península se encontraba densamente poblada por gentes pertenecientes al complejo racial mediterráneo, su cultura calcolítica, cuyas raíces se encuentran en el creciente fértil,  se estructuraba en esos momentos alrededor de centros urbanos que dominaban amplios espacios y su religión, omnipresente en el registro, estaba determinada por los cultos ctónios y de fecundidad. Con toda probabilidad la lengua hablada fue la que posteriormente será conocida como hático. Si bien los resultados de su inmigración fueron devastadores3, el impacto demográfico no alteró el predominio del substrato neolítico como han demostrado los trabajos de M. Senyürek: el impacto numérico del elemento indoeuropeo, étnicamente nórdico4, fue demasiado pequeño como para perdurar física y espiritualmente por demasiado tiempo. Con el transcurso de los siglos, la dünne Herrenschicht, el delgado estrato señorial hitita, resultó fatalmente «hurritizado», «mesopotamizado» y «haticizado» y la destrucción del Imperio a fines del II milenio por obra de grupos frigios procedentes de más allá del Helesponto signará la desaparición de la propia lengua hitita. Los llamados reinos neohititas surgidos tras el desastre en el borde meridional del antiguo Imperio utilizarán el luvita en sus textos. Esta lengua, hablada en las zonas occidental y meridional de la península por comunidades en las que el elemento indoeuropeo parece haber presentado una mayor densidad,  resistió el embate, sobreviviendo en el licio5.

    A ojos del observador contemporáneo podría parecer que la presencia de los helenos en  áreas de la franja costera occidental, de los grupos licios y lidios y los aportes indoeuropeos de las invasiones del 1200 acabaría por vincular el Asia Menor a Europa. Sin embargo, tanto los propios testimonios lingüísticos, que nos hablan de la profunda acción del sustrato no indoeuropeo en las lenguas del grupo anatolio, tanto antiguas como recientes, como las influencias no helénicas que podemos descubrir cada vez con mayor peso en toda la Jonia nos demuestran que el destino de los hititas volvía a repetirse en el occidente y el sur peninsular: en ambos ámbitos los cultos de naturaleza telúrica, enraizados en el neolítico anatolio, van recobrando fuerza mostrando la abrumadora presencia de una población «no receptiva» a las concepciones espirituales indoeuropeas6.

     Tras el periodo de dominio persa, las conquistas de Alejandro y de Roma son los últimos empujes en la historia de Anatolia de raíz occidental7. Empujes políticos que tienen como efecto la integración de este territorio en la ecúmene helenística y en el Imperio pero una escasa relevancia en términos étnicos8. Y es en época romana cuando se constata un fenómeno ciertamente revelador: la muy temprana y fácil cristianización del ámbito anatolio que contrasta con el carácter de secta y muy minoritario de los seguidores del Galileo en la parte occidental del Imperio y la misma Grecia9, fenómeno paralelo al resto de áreas no europeas del Imperio.

     El fracaso de la renovatio imperii de Justiniano y las posteriores concepciones teocráticas de lejanas raíces próximo-orientales preludian el destino «no europeo» de Anatolia: Bizancio se percibe por los occidentales romano-germánicos como algo profundamente ajeno: la matanza de latinos de 1182 y las conquistas cruzadas jalonan este desencuentro. Pero este destino quedará sellado a partir de 1071 cuando los selyúcidas ocupen la mitad oriental de Anatolia. Tres siglos después toda Anatolia pertenece a los otomanos. Los procesos de «turquización» étnica y lingüística y de islamización comenzados en el siglo XI, que culminan con las masivas deportaciones contemporáneas de griegos y armenios, borrarán todo resto lingüístico (excepción hecha del pueblo kurdo, cuya lengua pertenece al grupo iranio, que está padeciendo un etnocidio por parte del estado turco del cual no es este lugar para hablar) e ideológico indoeuropeo de la península. Sólo los rasgos nórdicos que muy de tarde en tarde se pueden observar en algún campesino de Capadocia, probablemente de sangre gálata, dan testimonio de aquellos antiguos ciclos de civilización hoy completamente agotados.    

 



1 Véase J. Evola, Rebelión contra el mundo moderno, Buenos Aires 1994, especialmente la Parte II capítulos V-X y la recopilación de textos del mismo autor sobre esta cuestión publicada por Ed. di Ar bajo el título La Tradizione Romana.

2 Véase, por ejemplo, E. Masson, Le combat pour L’inmortalité. Héritage indo-europeen dans la mytologie anatolienne, París 1991 y O. J. Gurney, Los hititas, Barcelona 1995, especialmente pp. 72 y ss.

3 P. Garelli, El Próximo oriente asiático, Barcelona 1982, pp. 27 y A. Romualdi, Los indoeuropeos. Orígenes y migraciones, Barcelona 2002, p. 173 n. 50.

4 V. Christian, «Die frühesten Spuren der Indogermanen in Vorderasien», en Rasse 1935 2ª año, nº 4, p. 121 y ss. y H.F.K. Günther, Rassenkunde des Jüdischen Volkes, Munich 1930, pp. 50-54. La extensión del rito de incineración ha dificultado enormemente el diagnóstico tipológico de los grupos conquistadores indoeuropeos: Gurney (op. cit., pp. 160 y ss.) llama la atención sobre las semejanzas entre los ritos de incineración descritos en las tablillas hititas y los homéricos. Entre las nuevas poblaciones que no incineran a sus muertos también se documentan tipos alpinos, inexistentes en Anatolia con anterioridad. Por otro lado, el proceso de «hurritización» del Imperio hitita se ve acompañado por una difusión desde el este del tipo armenoide o pre-asiático, actualmente muy bien representado entre la población turca (H.F.K. Günther op. cit., pp. 20-40).

5 Para una breve visión de conjunto de la problemática de las lenguas indoeuropeas del grupo anatolio véase F. Villar, Los indoeuropeos y los orígenes de Europa, Madrid 1996, pp.289 y ss. 

6 Baste recordar el culto de Ártemis Efesia como diosa de la fertilidad, el de Attys o el de la «frigia» Cibeles. 

7 Es preciso mencionar la aventura gálata que se inicia con los movimientos de diferentes grupos célticos en el siglo IV a. n. e. Algunos de estos grupos, apenas unos 20.000 individuos en su conjunto, de los cuales unos 10.000 guerreros, tras numerosas vicisitudes fueron asentados por Antíoco Soter en las llanuras frigias y sobre el Halys, tierras que desde entonces recibirán el nombre de Galacia. Derrotados por Atalo I, a cuyo sepulcro pertenecen las impresionantes estatuas helenísticas del guerrero gálata moribundo y de su caudillo quitándose la vida, fueron concentrados en su territorio donde dominarán a una población anatolia mucho más densa. Se helenizarán progresivamente pero conservarán su lengua hasta la cristianización. Sobre los gálatas véase H. Hubert, Los celtas y la civilización céltica, Madrid 1988, pp. 297-307.

8 Una aproximación muy interesante a los estados helenísticos en el que se aplican las categorías interpretativas de G. Dumézil puede verse en C. Preaux, El mundo helenístico, Barcelona 1984, 2 volúmenes.

9 Véase, por ejemplo, M. Simon y A. Benoit, El judaísmo y le cristianismo antiguo, Barcelona 1972, pp. 54.

mardi, 10 mai 2011

El misterio de los chinos rubios

El misterio de los chinos rubios

Ex: http://www.idpress.org/

newsgraphics2007443345a.jpg

Si nos pusiésemos a pensar cuáles son los rasgos físicos y/o característicos de los chinos, coincidiríamos en decir que suelen ser más bajos, ojos rasgados y oscuros, pelo moreno y nariz pequeña. Ahora, imaginaos a un grupo de chinos cuyos rasgos son todo lo contrario: altos, rubios, ojos azules y nariz grande.

Liqian, una población al noroeste de China y a 300 kilómetros del Desierto del Gobi, cuenta entre sus habitantes con un nutrido grupo de personas que responden a estas últimas características.

Pruebas realizadas han demostrado que poseen un 56% de ADN caucásico, y aunque no se descarta ni asegura ninguna hipótesis, las conclusiones apuntan a que estas personas podrían ser herederos genéticos de un grupo de legionarios romanos que, muy posiblemente, llegaros hasta China dos mil años antes…

En el año 53 AC, siete legiones de soldados romanos, comandados por el general Marco Licinio Craso, fueron masacrados en la Batalla de Carrhae, la que debía de ser la gran conquista hacia la Ruta de la Seda del Imperio Romano.

Todo parece indicar que un centenar de legionarios pudieron escapar y huir en dirección a Oriente.

Tras miles de kilómetros y 17 años de peregrinación, llegaron al noroeste de China y allí se asentaron, prestando servicios como mercenarios y ayudando al ejército local en la Batalla de Zhizhi entre chinos y hunos.

Llamó especialmente la atención la forma de luchar de los recién llegados mercenarios. Su perfecta formación y disciplina hicieron que fuesen bien recibidos allí. Tras la batalla, los supervivientes de ese grupo se instalaron en la población de Liqian.

Hoy en día, dos mil años después, se tiene cierto convencimiento de que aquellos legionarios romanos son los antepasados de este grupo de chinos con aspecto europeo.

Esta teoría fue presentada por primera vez en la década de 1950 por Homer Dubs, profesor de Historia China en la Universidad de Oxford.

En el año 2007, se llevaron a cabo una serie de pruebas las cuales detectaron dos tercios de ADN caucásico entre ese grupo de habitantes.

Nadie se atreve a asegurar la ascendencia de esos chinos con rasgos occidentales, y lo atribuyen al continuo paso de diferentes etnias por la ruta de la seda.

Hay que recordar que un porcentaje alto de hunos eran caucásicos, lo cual también podría ser el origen de esta incógnita.

De momento, las diferentes excavaciones llevadas a cabo en la zona no han aportado ningún elemento proveniente de soldados romanos, como monedas, armas o cascos, por ejemplo. Si este hecho se produjese, podría ser esclarecedor para revelar si realmente aquel grupo de legionarios romanos que pudieron huir de la Batalla de Carrhae, llegaron a establecerse en China.


http://es.noticias.yahoo.com/blogs/ciencia_cultura/los-chinos-rubios-descendientes-de-los-romanos-p14121.html

 

dimanche, 08 mai 2011

Indoeuropeos y no indoeuropeos en la Hispania preromana

Las poblaciones y las lenguas prerromanas de Andalucía, Cataluña y Aragón según la información que nos proporciona la toponimia. Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca. Salamanca 2000

El proceso de indoeuropeización de la Península Ibérica es uno de los problemas más complejos a los que, desde hace ya muchos años, se enfrentan tanto la Prehistoria como la Lingüística. Es tal la cantidad de elementos en juego y de cuestiones a resolver que no resulta difícil augurar que serán muchas las generaciones de arqueólogos, filólogos, historiadores de la religión y antropólogos que investigarán y debatirán sobre este campo.  El camino por recorrer es largo y, como es sabido, son pocos los puntos que han  sido firmemente establecidos y, en consecuencia,  aceptados por todos. No es este lugar para hacer balance de la cuestión: un muy breve resumen se podrá encontrar en un artículo que publicamos en un número anterior de Terra Nostra o una exposición mucho más detallada en la Parte V de otra obra del autor del que nos ocupamos aquí, Francisco Villar, Los Indoeuropeos y los orígenes de Europa, 2ª ed., Madrid 1996. Brevemente, recordaremos que parece clara la existencia de tres estratos lingüísticos indoeuropeos prerromanos: por un lado, el  correspondiente al Alteuropäisch, por otro, el de la lengua de las inscripciones lusitanas y, por último, el celtibérico, existiendo posiciones encontradas sobre la naturaleza de cada una y el tipo de relaciones que pudieran haber existido entre ellas.

Este ya de por sí complejo panorama se ha visto más complicado, si cabe, por la hipótesis que presenta F. Villar en esta obra. En efecto, a lo largo de sus casi 500 páginas el autor intenta demostrar, a través del análisis de una ingente cantidad de material lingüístico, la presencia en la Península Ibérica de un estrato lingüístico indoeuropeo diferente a cualquiera de los otros tres detectados hasta el momento, un estrato de rasgos muy arcaicos que de confirmarse atestiguaría que el proceso de indoeuropeización de la Península fue mucho más complejo y profundo de lo que  se había supuesto.

La obra comienza haciendo repaso de una serie cuestiones relativas a la Lingüística Comparada, en especial un alegato de la validez de su método y una descripción de sus características, para continuar con un amplio comentario de la historia de la investigación paleolingüística en España, desde los dislates del padre Astarloa hasta los autores contemporáneos como Gorrochategui o de Hoz, haciendo especial hincapié en la progresiva complejidad de las concepciones del substrato, desde el vasco-iberismo originario, tesis que no se cansa durante toda la obra de denostar, y con razón, hasta la identificación de los diferentes niveles actualmente admitidos: los ya mencionados indoeuropeos junto al vasco, tartesio, ibérico, etc.

Tras estos dos capítulos a guisa de introducción, se adentra en el examen del material recogido: topónimos, hidrónimos, antropónimos y etnónimos, material organizado en series en función de un componente principal que es estudiado en todos los aspectos filológicos posibles, tanto fonéticos como morfológicos, y del que ofrece su correspondiente distribución geográfica, tanto en la Península como en Europa, norte de África u Oriente Próximo. Así, uno a uno, van siendo analizados todos los elementos susceptibles de formar parte de este estrato, proponiendo el carácter indoeuropeo, entre otros, de los siguientes: uba-, relacionado con las raíces indoeuropeas para agua *ap, *ab, *up; ur, relacionado con el ide *(a)wer- / (a)ûr, agua, río, corriente; urc- con el ide *war- / *ur- más el sufijo ko; uc-, en el que se habrían reunido tres componentes diferentes: uko (diminutivo), uko (sufijo hidronímico que aparece en lituano) y un apelativo relacionado con ûkis (lugar de habitación) también presente en lituano, bai-, relacionado con el ide *gwhêi, brillar, etc. Al estudio de los elementos susceptibles de ser agrupados en series que califica de mayores sigue el de las series menores (tur-, turc- y murc-) y de aquellos, muy numerosos, que por su escasa aparición en las fuentes no pueden ser seriados, pero que responden a unas mismas características lingüísticas, así como el análisis de la antroponimia susceptible de ser relacionada con este estrato.

Una vez analizado el material, Villar se adentra en la caracterización de la lengua o lenguas responsables de esta hidronimia,  toponimia y antroponimia, llegando a la conclusión de que no corresponde a ninguna de las lenguas indoeuropeas conocidas, siendo imposible su identificación con ninguno de los tres estratos indoeuropeos conocidos en la Península por diferentes razones (aquí no podemos dejar de mencionar que en su obra mencionada anteriormente relaciona el elemento tur-, presente en nuestro Turia, con el Alteuropäisch pp. 507-509), y sosteniendo que este estrato presenta fuertes relaciones con las lenguas itálicas y con las bálticas, generalmente, aunque no siempre, en las innovaciones con las primeras y en los arcaísmos con las segundas.

Durante toda la obra, y mediante el estudio de la distribución geográfica de los testimonios de este estrato se va evidenciando una concentración de estos elementos en dos áreas principales: la meridional y la ibérico-pirenaica, como el autor las denomina, que se corresponden con el área que hasta ahora se consideraba no indoeuropea (baste recordar la famosa frontera de los briga-). Resulta evidente que las consecuencias de las propuestas de Villar pueden resultar revolucionarias para nuestra protohistoria. El autor es consciente de ello y en un último capítulo analiza algunos de los etnóminos del área ibérica (ilérgetes, indicetes, volciani, etc.) atribuyéndoles etimologías indoeuropeas relacionadas con el estrato objeto del libro (seguras para dieciséis entre veintitrés, aunque posiblemente sean más todavía), lo que implica un masivo substrato indoeuropeo en todo esta área (Aragón, Cataluña y norte de Valencia), pero, sin embargo, renuncia explícitamente a intentar explicar el mecanismo de entrada de estas lenguas, emplazando a arqueólogos y prehistoriadores a abordar esta cuestión. Lo que sí sostiene es la imposibilidad de relacionar los Campos de Urnas con esta toponimia debido a motivos distribucionales (son prácticamente inexistentes en Andalucía) y cronológicos (relaciona el topónimo Alube de la Ilíada con el Guadalquivir y con los hallazgos micénicos allí efectuados, lo que dataría este estrato con anterioridad a las penetraciones de esta cultura. Por otro lado, considera que la densidad de este estrato casa mal con unos «recién llegados» como los Urnenfelder). No obstante, no parecen argumentos excesivamente fuertes: Infiltración y transformación de la cultura material son fenómenos que a menudo van parejos y aunque en la actualidad se tiende a ver en las transformaciones del bronce final tartésico influencias mediterráneas, algunos de los nuevos elementos no dejan de estar relacionados con el ambiente de las urnas, aunque tampoco podemos dejar de señalar que se ha hecho responsable a influencias del Mediterráneo los elementos indoeuropeos presentes en el tartesio. Por otra parte, la relación del Alube homérico con la Península no deja de ser una conjetura toponímica, apoyada sobre conjeturas cronológicas y arqueológicas, y en cuanto a la excesiva densidad que pueda presentar un substrato depende más bien de la profundidad de la «limpieza étnica» que de la antigüedad del proceso. Todo esto, no obstante, no deja de ser un mero comentario ante la superposición de esta toponimia y los Campos de Urnas en el área nordoriental peninsular, que resulta bastante sugerente y ante la propia naturaleza lingüística del substrato (sobre todo la presencia de elementos compartidos con diferentes grupos del «indoeuropeo nordoccidental») que no deja de evocar constantemente las ideas de H. Krahe sobre el «estado líquido» (flüssige Zustand) del complejo de las urnas desde el punto de vista lingüístico. No obstante, evidentemente es todavía muy pronto para intentar elaborar hipótesis arqueológicas sobre esta cuestión.

Un punto que quizá llame la atención a quienes han seguido la labor de Villar es el escaso espacio dedicado al paleoeuropeo y a sus presuntas relaciones con este estrato recién descubierto. Ya que ambas son lenguas ciertamente arcaicas y siguen un modelo distribucional diferente, aunque muy determinado en ambas por los cursos de agua, cabría esperar un análisis comparativo de ambas lenguas que nadie mejor que Villar está en condiciones de realizar. Estamos convencidos de que no tardará en abordar este problema.

En definitiva se trata de una obra destinada a tener un gran eco entre los especialistas no sólo en paleohispanística sino también en indoeuropeística y que abre nuevos caminos para el conocimiento del pasado de nuestros pueblos.                                                                                                                          

 

Olegario de las Eras.        

jeudi, 05 mai 2011

The Fall of Man: Richard Lynn's "Dysgenics"

Richard HOSTE

Ex: http://www.counter-currents.com/

Review: Richard Lynn (photo)
Dysgenics: Genetic Deterioration in Modern Populations
Westport, Conn.: Praeger Publishers, 1996

rlynn-2s-300x282.jpgWhen it comes to population, quality matters more than quantity. While educated Westerners never tire of sprinkling their conversations with the word “overpopulation,” voicing concern about population worth is taboo. Put it this way: you have to spend the rest of your life in a city filled with Nigerians or Japanese. You can either pick the ethnic makeup or the amount of people in the city. Which would you choose? As it’s settled that genes influence character and intelligence, could these traits be declining in some or all populations? Has it to some extent? Anecdotes exist about single educated women and fertile welfare queens, but hard data is needed.

While support for eugenics has been around since the time of Plato, the first person to worry about genetic deterioration was French physician Benedict August Morel. He’s an obscure figure today and much better known is the more important Sir Francis Galton, who coined the term eugenics in 1883. He thought that more genes for lower intelligence and poor character were concentrated in the lower classes, whose higher fertility would lead to a decline in genetic quality. Galton spent his life working to reverse the trend. He eventually convinced Darwin himself of the danger. Biologist Alfred Russell Wallace wrote:

In one of my last conversations with Darwin he expressed himself very gloomily on the future of humanity, on the ground that in our modern civilisation natural selection had no play and the fittest did not survive.

It wasn’t until 1974 that Nobel prize winning physicist William Shockley called the process dysgenics. Darwin went on to despair over the excessive breeding of “the scum.” Data has always been needed on whether his fears had been justified. Richard Lynn brings together studies and data from the last 200 years dealing with the connection between fertility and intelligence/socioeconomic status from all over the world. How afraid should we be?

Selection throughout Time

The conditions that hunter-gatherers lived in insured an upkeep of genetic quality. Usually there was a chief who had to have a certain amount of intelligence to acquire and maintain his position. He had the most access to females, there would be relatively high ranking men who had one wife and many of the unfit never bred. Mutations that popped up which adversely affected health would be weeded out. Early nation-states continued with polygamy.

With Western man’s transition to civilization selection was weakened but not eliminated. The higher social classes enjoyed better nutrition so had better health and children more likely to survive into adulthood. Christianity struck a blow against the Western gene pool by enforcing celibacy among the priesthood but probably more than made up for it by prohibitions against adultery. Most who have children out of wed-lock then and now have/had lower intelligence and less self-control. Overall, the years 1500-1800 were good for Europe’s gene pool. In England from 1620-1624 the middle classes reported 4.4 children per woman compared to 2.1 for the working class. Part of the reason why is life expectancy. In Berlin from 1710-1799 the average life expectancy for the upper class was 29.8 years compared to 20.3 for the lower class. The numbers for Geneva, Rouen and Neuruppin in the 18th century are similarly tilted towards the former. This didn’t mean that everybody died when they were 20-30 years old but that more of the lower classes were dying in childhood before they could mate.

Lynn understands that for these numbers to mean anything it would have to be shown that there was social mobility. If everybody was stuck in their own class with no opportunity to rise or fall then we would expect different social classes to be similar and not worry about differences in fertility. Pitrim Sorokin looked at a wide range of societies and found that there has never been one with no social mobility at all. The closest thing has been the caste system in India, but even these classes weren’t absolutely closed. Economist historian S.J. Payling concluded that there was significant social mobility in Europe from at least the 14th century on.

Natural Selection Breaks Down: Health and Intelligence

Mutations occasionally pop up in any population. Since the vast majority are adverse, stable fertility for an entire population still means deterioration. The maintenance of the quality of the population requires not just a stable population at all levels but the active weeding out of the unfit. The results of the slacking of selection in our modern world is apparent in disease. Today, almost 1% of children born have a mutation for a common genetic disorder. Due to carriers of bad genes surviving and new mutations, it’s estimated that the rates of hemophilia, cystic fibrosis and phenylketonuria are increasing every generation by 26%, 120%, and 300% respectively. Humanity requires that we save children that can be saved but breeding for those with diseased genes needs to be restricted. Lynn hints that better genetic screening and selective abortion can offset some of the consequences of modern medicine.

American psychologist Theodore Lentz was the first to devise a method for finding the relationship between intelligence and fertility. He tested the IQs of children and found out how many siblings they had. Assuming that children have the same IQ as their parents, if those with lower IQs had more brothers and sisters than children with high IQs then it could be determined that dysgenics is happening. In 1927 Lentz calculated an IQ drop of 4 points per generation. Calculations in Britain found a drop of about 2 points per generation. These surveys didn’t include the childless but since they are disproportionately those with higher IQs the studies actually underestimate the extent of dysgenic fertility. Reviewing various studies and using findings from twin and adoption cases showing that IQ is 82% heritable, Lynn calculates a genotypic IQ decline of 5 points in Britain from 1890-1980. In the US he calculates a drop of 2.5 IQ points for whites and 6.2 for blacks over three generations. Interestingly, women are shown to universally have more dysgenic fertility than men. This is partly because low IQ men probably have a harder time finding mates than low IQ women.

The Fall of Greece

Greece is a particularly interesting example. Papavassiliou (1954) looked at IQ, socioeconomic status and fertitlity for men and came up with the following results.

Intelligence and Fertility in Greece, 1950s

Socioeconomic StatusNumber SurveyedMean IQNumber of Children
Professionals 41 117.2 1.78
Skilled Workers 80 100.9 2.66
Semi-skilled Workers 27 91 4
Unskilled Workers 67 82.2 5.56

My calculations give an IQ of 96.9 for the parent generation and an IQ drop of 4.9. Using a heritability of .82 for IQ puts the IQ of the children’s generation at 92.9 (IQ of parent generation – .82 x 4.9). Lynn has found elsewhere that the IQ of Greece is 95. This low (for Europe) figure is surprising considering the country’s historical accomplishments. Papavassiliou’s data may solve the puzzle.

Does the Flynn Effect Disprove Eugenics?

While science has shown that traits for IQ and socioeconomic status are heritable and those with poor genes are outbreeding those with good genes, actual performance on IQ tests in the industrialized world has risen over the last century. How can this be? This seeming paradox is called the Flynn effect, after the scientist who estimated IQ gains of about 3-4 points per decade over the 20th century.

We can rule out the effect of increased familiarity with written tests or better education because these gains are present in children as young as two years old. It is doubtful that it is due to increased stimulation because adoption studies show that the effect of shared environment is negligible; two biologically unrelated people raised in the same house are no more alike than any two random strangers. Lynn’s explanation is that the Flynn effect is due to better nutrition. This seems like the best explanation, as over the same time period height and brain size have increased by one standard deviation: the same as the increase in IQ.

So while genotypic intelligence, which can be seen as underlying genetic quality, has decreased, actual performance, phenotypic intelligence, has seen an increase. This increase can’t last forever and the evidence shows that in the developed world, with even the poorest suffering from obesity, the Flynn effect has hit its ceiling. We can now expect a decrease in observed intelligence in the developed even discounting low IQ third world immigration.

The Case of Character

Francis Galton and the early eugenicists weren’t only concerned with the decline in intelligence and health but what they called character: a moral sense, ability to delay gratification and work towards long term goals and sense of duty. Modern psychologists call this conscientiousness and Lynn gives a working estimate for it being 66% heritable. The news here is even worse than the data on intelligence.

Looking at criminals and psychopaths and their number of siblings yields a decline in consciousness that is twice the rate of the decline in intelligence. This has had real life consequences

The straightforward prediction is that the high fertility of criminals has led to an increase in the number of genes in the population responsible for crime and this will show up in increasing crime rates. These increasing crime rates have certainly occurred in most of the economically developed nations during the second half of the twentieth century. In the United States, crime rates approximately tripled between 1960 and 1990; in Britain they quadrupled, and similar increases have occurred in many other countries.

Rates of out-of-wedlock births tell a similar story. Western populations are morally worse than ever and we can expect the modern welfare state to continue to accelerate the decline. Unfortunately, most social scientists and policy makers are too steeped in the environmentalist dogma to deal with these problems.

Does the Universality of the Problem Mean It’s Hopeless?

While there are no direct studies for IQ and fertility in the third world we can check to see how socioeconomic status and education, both correlated with IQ, relate to number of children. Lynn calls the birth rate of the lowest class over the birth rate of the highest class the dysgenic ratio. For example, if those in the lowest class have 3 children per woman and the higher class have 2, the dysgenic ratio is 3/2 = 1.5. Anything over 1 indicates dysgenic fertility and anything under 1 indicates eugenic fertility. While a number over 2 is high for modern Western nations, ratios have been calculated at 3.1 for Columbia, 2.6 for Guatemala, 2.7 for Mexico and 3.1 for Brazil. Muslim and African countries have lower ratios, but only because even the highest classes have large numbers of children. In a worldwide survey the only exceptions are Bangladesh, Fiji and Indonesia who have ratios of 1.01, 0.93, and 0.86 respectively. The developing world can be expected to remain “developing” indefinitely.

So dysgenic fertility is found everywhere: among rich and poor and every race. Does that mean it’s hopeless? We won’t know until we at least acknowledge and try to deal with the problem. Communism once controlled half the planet and today its equivalent is globalization and the supposed triumph of liberal democracy. While communists can say that true communism “has never been tried” and continue to be liberals, the legacy of Nazism poisons the eugenics movement. Of course, blaming the ideas behind eugenics for the crimes of the Nazis is as silly as blaming the ideology of the welfare state for Soviet labor camps. So there is no rational reason why eugenics can’t capture the hearts and minds of policy makers the way it did 100 years ago. While the facts of differential fertility may discomfort our feminized elites we must never stop repeating that the cost of doing nothing is the end of civilization. There’s no virtue in ignoring that.

Source: HBD Books

vendredi, 29 avril 2011

Croatian Genetics - New Origins

Croatian Origines - New Genetics

jeudi, 24 mars 2011

Urheimat: alle origini del Popolo Europeo

Urheimat_ipotesi.png

Urheimat: alle origini del Popolo Europeo

Molteplici le teorie sulle origini etniche, addirittura c’è chi sostiene che gli Ittiti provengano dal popolo dei Chatti, stanziati in Europa tra Reno e Weser

Gianluca Padovan

Ex: http://rinascita.eu/ 

L’improbabile origine asiatica
La questione più dibattuta tra archeologi e linguisti è la sede originaria (dal tedesco Urheimat) dei cosiddetti “Indoeuropei”, popolo che tra il IV millennio a. e il I millennio a. sembra comparire, oltre che in Europa, anche in Asia e in Africa. Ma, inizialmente, si pensa che tale popolazione provenga dall’India e approdi in Europa foriera di cultura e tradizione: cosa mai avvenuta. Così pure si desidera vedere la provenienza di genti, che fanno fiorire culture sul suolo europeo, dalle steppe e dalle tundre dell’est e dai deserti di sudest, basandosi più che altro sui testi biblici e sulla propria religione. A mio avviso il concetto espresso nella frase “ex Oriente lux” è da riconsiderare e soprattutto da evitarne la pedissequa e acritica applicazione.
Alcuni ritengono che la patria originaria sia da ricercarsi nell’Asia Centrale, in un territorio compreso tra il Turkestan e il Pamir, altri nella cosiddetta Russia Europea, ovvero ad ovest degli Urali. Ma vi è chi ritiene che l’ “Urheimat” sia l’Europa del Nord. Oggi i più tendono a considerare che essa sia da collocarsi tra la Germania del Nord e l’Elba e la Vistola, fino alle steppe che vanno dal Danubio agli Urali, quasi in una sorta di compromesso. In buona sostanza la provenienza della luce culturale e sociale è ancora da definirsi e, sostanzialmente, le idee al proposito rimangono varie anche e soprattutto in campo accademico.
Ad esempio, uno dei luoghi comuni dell’Antropologia è l’origine asiatica degli “Indoeuropei”. E a sostegno della tesi della provenienza asiatica vi è la questione del cavallo. Si afferma che esso è addomesticato e allevato nelle grandi pianure dell’est e del sudest asiatico e da qui introdotto in Europa. In realtà il cavallo è già noto almeno fino dal paleolitico superiore, con attestazioni, ad esempio, in Scania (Svezia meridionale). Ma sulla questione si potrebbero leggere fiumi di parole sia pro che contro.
Calvert Watkins scrive: “Molti studiosi ritengono che la zona della steppa siberiana a nord e a est del Mar Nero sia stata, se non la ‘culla’ originaria degli Indoeuropei, almeno un’importante area di sosta negli spostamenti verso ovest nei Balcani e oltre, verso l’Anatolia e verso il sud e poi verso l’est nell’Iran e in India, a cominciare dalla metà del quinto millennio a.C. Questa è quella che viene chiamata dagli archeologi cultura Kurgan, dalla parola russa per i suoi caratteristici monumenti o tumuli sepolcrali” (Watkins C., Il proto-indoeuropeo, in Campanile E., Comrie B., Watkins C., Introduzione alla lingua e alla cultura degli Indoeuropei, Il Mulino, Bologna 2005, p. 49). Tali teorie sono basate anche sugli scritti dell’archeologa americana di origini lituane Marija Gimbutas.
Innanzitutto è probabilmente da ricercare in Europa il fenomeno del megalitismo, che ha lasciato sul territorio monumenti a tumulo che si perpetuano nel tempo e anche all’esterno dei confini continentali. L’argomento è più che noto ed è superfluo riprenderlo, ma un passo è doveroso riportarlo: “L’architettura territoriale neolitica realizza i suoi capolavori nelle regioni europee che costeggiano l’Atlantico e il Mare del Nord - la facciata atlantica europea - dal Portogallo alla Svezia. Gordon Childe ha avuto l’intuizione di rilevare che in Europa i grandi centri dell’architettura megalitica corrispondono alle regioni in cui le sopravvivenze paleolitiche sono più numerose e meglio attestate. Perciò c’è forse un rapporto, sconosciuto e mediato dal tempo, di educazione, atteggiamento e cultura tra i pittori delle caverne paleolitiche e i costruttori di monumenti megalitici. È significativo ricordare il profondo cambiamento di opinione, nella comunità archeologica, sulle origini delle culture megalitiche europee. In passato si pensava che derivassero dalle grandi civiltà urbane del Vicino Oriente. Attraverso i sistemi moderni di datazione al radiocarbonio Colin Renfrew ha potuto dimostrare che i manufatti europei risalgono a prima del 4000 a.C. e sono “creazioni autonome, uniche nel loro genere: i più antichi monumenti di pietra eretti al mondo”. Molte costruzioni furono cominciate nel V millennio a.C. e modificate fino al I millennio a.C.” (Benevolo L., Albrecht B., Le origini dell’architettura, Editori Laterza, Bari 2002, p. 97).
 
La forza culturale Europea
Così ricorda Romualdi: “L’espansione della cultura nordica nella Russia centrale e meridionale si lascia seguire attraverso la cultura megalitica di Volinia, quella del medio Dnepr e quella di Fatyanovo: tutte queste culture sono caratterizzate da ceramica globulare o cordata e da asce da battaglia. Esse invadono il territorio dei cacciatori ugro-finnici della ceramica a pettine, e premono su quello degli agricoltori della ceramica dipinta di Tripolje. Queste invasioni sono state appassionatamente negate dalla scuola archeologica sovietica di Marr e compagni, pei quali l’esistenza di una Urheimat indoeuropea era “un pregiudizio borghese, esattamente come la fede nell’esistenza di Dio” e per i quali le invasioni indoeuropee facevan parte della mitologia capitalistica” (Romualdi A., Gli Indoeuropei, Edizioni di Ar, Padova 1978, p. 29).
E ancora Romualdi sottolinea l’improbabilità di forti migrazioni da est verso ovest, apportatrici di caratteri culturali: “Ci si trova sempre di fronte alla vaga suggestione delle ‘orde indoeuropee irrompenti nelle steppe euroasiatiche’, contro la quale già Hermann Hirt aveva obiettato che a nessun popolo delle steppe è mai riuscito di diffondere lingue in Europa” (Ivi).
Herman Hirt, nel suo Die Indogermanen, afferma: “L’agricoltura può nutrire su uno stesso territorio assai più uomini dei nomadi delle steppe. È in grado di produrre forze sempre nuove che rafforzano e vivificano la prima corrente. L’assalto dei popoli delle steppe può abbattersi straordinariamente violento, può distruggere come una fiumana di lava ma, poiché non ha nulla dietro di sé, si riassorbe ben presto nella sabbia” (Hirt H., Die Indogermanen I, S. 190; in Romualdi A., op. cit., p. 70). Se qualcuno nutre dei dubbi, guardi che cos’hanno lasciato, ad esempio, gli Unni in Europa: solo un ricordo e per giunta negativo.
Fin dagli albori della storia in Asia e nell’Africa del Nord si incontrano Europei in quanto minoranze che riescono a imprimere una propria impronta alla storia locale. La lingua che diffondono è quella di una aristocrazia conquistatrice, probabilmente poco rispecchiante i multiformi aspetti della vita quotidiana, ma in grado di perdurare nel tempo.
 
Ittiti, Hittiti, Hatti o Chatti
Rimanendo cauti su traduzioni, trascrizioni, vocalizzazioni più o meno azzeccate, e interpretazioni, parrebbe che la terra di Hatti o di Chatti sia quella occupata dagli Ittiti, che verrebbero così scritti: Hittites, Héthéens, Hetiter, etc. Il territorio, o patria di origine o di semplice sviluppo, è stato localizzato nella penisola anatolica, ad est dell’attuale città di Ankara, antica Angora, capitale della Turchia, ed è la regione detta Hatti. La città principale è Hattusa, o Chattusa, vecchia Boğhazköy (“villaggio nella gola”), odierna Boğazkale. Ma la domanda canonica rimane comunque la seguente: da dove provengono gli Ittiti? Anche qui le ipotesi, ognuna con i suoi bravi dati a sostegno, sono varie. All’occhio di un profano come me sono tutte ugualmente interessanti e valide. Ma una mi ha colpito per la sua originalità e, senza che la si prenda troppo sul serio, la riporto semplicemente perché mi piace, invitando le persone competenti a rifletterci sopra. C’è chi sostiene che gli Ittiti provengano dal popolo dei Chatti, stanziati in Europa tra Reno e Weser. Alcuni linguisti sostengono che varie parole ittite derivino da una forma di linguaggio “antico-alto-tedesco” (Lehman J., Gli Ittiti, Garzanti, Milano 1997, p. 61). Fermo restando che la lingua ittita appartiene alla “famiglia indoeuropea” (meglio identificabile come Famiglia Europea), non basta l’assonanza dei nomi a fornire dati probanti: “Tuttavia non ci basiamo solo su questo. Theodor Bossert, una delle autorità dell’ittitologia, ha pubblicato nel suo Alt-Anatolien (Anatolia antica) una mappa in cui sono registrate tutte le località archeologiche dove sono state rinvenute divinità raffigurate su un toro o nell’atto di cavalcarlo. È una traccia lineare che dalla Siria, oltrepassando Boğhazköy, corre lungo il Danubio fino al Reno, piegando per una sua parte anche verso l’Italia. Un bellissimo esemplare di epoca romana, raffigurante questa divinità ittita con tutti i suoi attributi (fascio di saette e doppia ascia) a cavallo del toro, è stato trovato all’inizio del secolo a Heddernheim, che oggi è un quartiere di Francoforte sul Meno. Werner Speiser forse esagera, quando nel suo Vorderasiatische Kunst (Arte dell’Asia Anteriore) del 1952 sostiene che gli ittiti, con le loro teste e i lunghi nasi vigorosi, avevano un aspetto addirittura “falico” (cioè vestfalico); ma se si accetta la tesi di fondo c’è da riflettere. In definitiva anche i Galati dell’Asia Minore, cui scriveva l’apostolo Paolo, sono parenti dei celti nordeuropei” (Ibidem, pp. 74-75).
 
Caratteri distintivi
Leggendo nei vari testi e osservando le testimonianze della loro cultura possiamo vedere che gli Ittiti hanno la fronte alta e arrotondata, il naso dritto è senza l’angolo di attaccatura e i capelli sono tendenzialmente sciolti, lunghi e diritti. Possiamo ravvisarvi dei connotati “greci” come per esempio il naso? Attenzione: riferendosi agli Ittiti le iscrizioni egizie li descrivono aventi capelli chiari o probabilmente castano-chiari; inoltre c’è chi ha la barba, tagliata in varie fogge, verosimilmente a seconda della moda del momento. Per curiosità andiamo a vedere che cosa ci dice Tacito a proposito dei germanici Chatti, i quali sono stanziati a nordest del fiume Reno: “abitano il territorio che comincia dalla selva Ercinia, in luoghi non così pianeggianti e palustri come le altre regioni nelle quali si estende la Germania; infatti vi continuano i colli, che a poco a poco si fanno più rari, e la selva Ercinia continua insieme ai suoi Chatti e alla fine li mette al sicuro. La conformazione fisica è più resistente, solide le membra, truce l’aspetto, maggiore la forza d’animo. Possiedono - per essere dei Germani - molto raziocinio e abilità: mettono a capo delle truppe condottieri scelti, ubbidiscono ai comandanti, mantengono il loro posto nelle file dell’esercito; sanno riconoscere l’opportunità favorevole, ritardare gli attacchi, distribuire opportunamente le occupazioni della giornata e fortificarsi di notte; ascrivono la fortuna alle cose dubbie, e invece il valore alle cose sicure, e, cosa ben rara e concessa soltanto alla disciplina romana, ripongono maggior fiducia nel comandante che nell’esercito. La loro forza militare risiede interamente nella fanteria, che oltre alle armi caricano anche di arnesi da lavoro e vettovaglie: gli altri li vedi andare in battaglia, i Chatti in campagna militare. Rare presso di loro le scorrerie e scaramucce. Ottenere rapidamente la vittoria e altrettanto rapidamente ritirarsi è tipico del combattimento a cavallo: la velocità è connessa al timore, la ponderatezza invece alla costanza” (Tacito C., Germania, Risari E. (a cura di), Mondadori Editore, Milano 1991, 30, 1-3).
Tacito sottolinea quindi la capacità dei Chatti di possedere due cose non comuni tra Germani e Celti, che sono la ponderatezza, la costanza, la disciplina e la logistica. Inoltre spiega che dalla tribù dei Chatti, nel 38 a., si staccano i Batavi per andarsi a stabilire alla sinistra orografica del fiume Reno, quindi nel territorio occupato dai Romani, ma da questi “non subiscono l’umiliazione di pagare tributi, né sono oppressi dagli esattori; sono esenti da oneri di imposte e da contribuzioni straordinarie e tenuti in serbo soltanto per il combattimento; li si destina alla guerra come fossero armi da offesa e da difesa” (Ibidem, 29, 1).
 
Arii o Ariani.
Con il nome di Arii o di Ariani si designano comunemente le genti di lingua “indoeuropea” che dilagarono nelle attuali regioni dell’Iran e dell’India del nord. Taluni hanno sostenuto che si tratta di genti provenienti da nord o da est del Mar Nero, altri da settori ad ovest che oggi portano il nome di Romania e Ucraina. Nel corso del XIX sec. altri studiosi indicano invece come ariani i popoli di lingua europea, di razza bianca e in particolare quelli provenienti dalle regioni del Nord Europa.
Ad ogni buon conto non si è stabilita, o non si è voluta stabilire, con esattezza la loro terra d’origine, andando a negare l’esistenza di una cosiddetta “razza ariana”. Dagli Anni Trenta in avanti, e soprattutto a conclusione della Seconda guerra mondiale, si tende ad assimilare il termine di ariano con le teorizzazioni sulla razza e le formulazioni e le applicazioni delle cosiddette “leggi razziali”. Pertanto l’argomento viene accantonato come scomodo e inopportuno.
Ecco un’altra curiosità che ci viene dal passato tramite Tacito e ancora sui Germani: “Io, personalmente, condivido l’opinione di chi ritiene che le popolazioni della Germania non si siano mescolate con altre genti tramite matrimoni, e che quindi siano una stirpe a sé stante e pura, con una conformazione fisica propria. Da ciò deriva un aspetto simile in tutti, nonostante il gran numero di individui: occhi azzurri e torvi, capelli biondo-rossastri, corpi saldi e robusti, in grado però di costituire una massa d’urto: la loro capacità di sopportare prestazioni faticose è di gran lunga inferiore, e non sono avvezzi a tollerare la sete e il caldo; il clima e la configurazione del territorio li abituano infatti ad adattarsi al freddo e alla fame” (Ibidem, 4, 3).
In particolare, Tacito parla della numerosa tribù dei Suebi, costituita da più tribù: “Attraversa e divide il paese dei Suebi una catena continua di montagne, al di là della quale abitano numerose genti; tra di esse è ampiamente diffuso il nome di Lugi, applicato a molte tribù. Basterà qui ricordare le più forti: Harii, Helveconi, Manimi, Helisi, Nahanarvali” (Ibidem, 43, 2). Stando ad alcuni studiosi la catena montuosa è stata individuata nei Carpazi occidentali e i territori nelle odierne Slesia e Polonia, dalla Vistola all’Oder; inoltre si esprime perplessità sul fatto che fossero della tribù dei Suebi, propendendo per quella degli Slavi.
Vediamo ora cosa ci dice Tacito di una tribù in particolare, quella degli Harii: “Per tornare agli Harii, alla forza per la quale superano le popolazioni sopra elencate aggiungono un’aria truce, e accrescono l’innata ferocia con artifici e con la scelta del momento opportuno: neri gli scudi, tinti di scuro i corpi, scelgono per l’attacco le notti più buie: un esercito di spettri che incute terrore col suo aspetto tenebroso. Non c’è nemico in grado di fronteggiare quella vista tremenda e quasi infernale. Infatti in qualsiasi combattimento i primi a essere sconfitti sono gli occhi” (Ibidem, 43, 4).
Gli studi delle nostre origini e quindi delle popolazioni che abitarono il continente europeo servono allo sviluppo delle conoscenze, nel senso più ampio del termine. Questo porrà probabilmente dei limiti a quello che fu propugnato fin dall’Ottocento come “pangermanesimo”, a cui Stalin oppose, nella prima metà del secolo successivo, il suo ideale di “panslavismo”, dimenticando come gli Slavi siano gente di stirpe europea e non già asiatica. È auspicabile che tutto ciò ponga fine all’equivoco ottocentesco e novecentesco di credere che da altrove sia pervenuta la nostra cultura, definendola “indoeuropea”. Sarebbe un po’ come dire (mi si conceda il paragone) a persone che vivono onestamente del proprio lavoro che gli asini volano ed è bello vederli volare: a furia di ripeterlo, decennio dopo decennio, qualcuno per creduloneria, qualcuno per problemi psichici, altri per piaggeria, affermeranno di vedere gli asini volare.
Noi siamo Europei e la nostra cultura è a tutti gli effetti europea. Non ci credete? La storia si ripete sempre e non sono certo io a dirlo: basti pensare, ad esempio, al filosofo napoletano Giambattista Vico e alla sua teoria riguardo corsi e ricorsi storici. Quindi è necessario e bastante vedere cos’hanno fatto, nel bene e nel male, le genti europee in questi ultimi duemilacinquecento anni e da dove sono partite, dove sono giunte, cos’hanno fondato, cos’hanno costruito, quale sia il contributo sociale, nazionale e culturale che hanno ovunque lasciato. Reimpariamo a pensare con la nostra testa... da veri Europei.
 


11 Marzo 2011 12:00:00 - http://rinascita.eu/index.php?action=news&id=7010

jeudi, 10 mars 2011

Man's Devolution Across Cycles: Radical Traditionalism on Anthropogenesis

Man’s Devolution Across Cycles:
Radical Traditionalism on Anthropogenesis

Michael Bell

Ex: http://www.counter-currents.com/

Sonnenrad.jpgConcerning the genesis of modern humanity, there are two primary theories that receive credence in anthropological circles. One is the “Out of Africa” hypothesis, which argues that today’s humans are the evolved descendants of a primitive race of hominids that, 70,000 years ago, departed its homeland in Africa and spread across the globe. Upon entering Asia and Europe, these archaic humans displaced the indigenous Neanderthals through violent conflict and higher birthrates. They then adapted to their environments and gradually morphed into today’s human races through a process called localized evolution.

The other theory is “Divergent Evolution,” which posits that the various races of mankind were spawned out of continuous admixtures between the different proto-humans (Homo-erectus, Cro-Magnon, Neanderthal, etc.) many millennia ago. The countless hybrid amalgams then underwent localized evolution like the single ancestor of the “Out of Africa” process.

While these hypotheses are considered to be at loggerheads, they are united by one key concept: the idea of progress. While each gives a different origin to mankind, both proceed from the assumption that as time goes on, mankind has become better. Although evolutionary theory does not imply that superior adaptations are also superior in terms of intelligence or beauty, this notion is particularly hard to shake with regard to human evolution.

Radical Traditionalism rejects the modernist assumption of progressive human evolution, regarding it as the exact opposite of how the universe functions. For Traditionalism, all things begin at their zenith and gradually degenerate, through a series of stages, into mere shadows of their former glory, a pattern no less true of human beings. The purpose of this essay is to explain how this rule has applied to mankind, who has not risen to mastery of the world from the lowly origins of some apelike ancestor, but rather has fallen from godhood into his current, all-too-human condition.

To do so, it will first be necessary to describe the Radical Traditionalist understanding of history. Like all tenets of Traditionalism, this conception of history is held to be a revealed truth passed down through a chain of initiation. What recommends the Traditionalist outlook to the non-initiate is its coherence and explanatory power. In the following essay, I show that Traditionalism explains archaeological and historical records and harmonizes with ancient myths as well. The modern empiricist will likely disregard such myths as the fancies of primitive imaginations, but that begs the question, for it is just another version of the progress thesis that Traditionalism rejects.

Cyclical History

Radical Traditionalism shares the same view of human history as our ancient forerunners from nearly every corner of the globe. As opposed to the linear model of history—whether ruled by an overriding purpose of by mere chance—the ancients accepted a cyclical model. This is evident in the texts of virtually every civilized race. The Hindus traced man’s descent across four ages or yugas, from the age of Truth (Satya Yuga) to the Dark Age (Kali Yuga), with the series comprising a single Great Age (Mahayuga). The Hellenic Hesiod, in his Works and Days, described the procession from a Golden Age to Silver, Bronze, and Iron Ages, which corresponds to the Persian rendition of the cycles. The Old Testament reveals that the Semitic peoples also shared this cyclical understanding. In a dream experienced by the Chaldean king Nebuchadnezzar, there stood a statue with a head made of gold, a chest and arms of silver, thighs of bronze, and legs and feet made of iron and clay, all of which eventually crumbled upon being struck by a stone.[1] The list can go on, with discussions of peoples from the Aztecs to the Japanese, but the examples provided are sufficient to reveal the universality of this cyclical concept.

The ancients also agreed that with each successive age, man becomes more and more distant from a primordial state of perfection. In the Golden Age, man lived in harmony with divine beings and according to absolute, transcendent principles that brought happiness, wholeness, and near immortality to individuals while it brought order and prosperity to collective life. With the ushering in of the Silver Age came a fall from this state of grace and the establishment of an imperfect existence, where those old principles were abandoned, the gods lost much of their divine nature, and man took a step away from cosmic harmony toward chaos. For the purposes of this essay, we shall elaborate on the Golden and Silver Ages, for it was in these prehistoric periods that humanity underwent processes that bestowed our multitude of contemporary mental and physical forms upon us.

The Atlantean Silver Age

The Golden Age was a period of perfection on all levels. Human life was directly guided by the gods themselves and therefore orderly, plentiful, and enjoyable. Though the Golden Age was long ago and its location long since lost, its memory is kept alive by the mythical traditions of nearly every people on the planet. Hesiod, writing in the eighth century B.C., describes this “Age of Gold” thusly:

Men spent a Life like Gods in Saturn’s Reign,
Nor felt their Mind a Care, nor Body Pain;

The fields, as yet untill’d, their Fruits afford,
And fill a sumptuous, and enevy’d, Board.
From Labour free they all Delights enjoy,
Nor could the Ills of Time and Peace destroy;
They dy, or rather seem to dy, they seem
From hence transporting in a pleasing Dream.
Thus, crown’d with Happyness their ev’ry Day,
Serer, and joyful, pass’d their Lives away.[2]

Hesiod is one of few writers to directly mention the Golden Age and describe its qualities. Using his work as a reference point, however, the scholar can detect allusions to the same period in other ancient texts. For example, in Book 6 of the Mahabharata, the author discusses Mount Meru, “made of gold,” where the “measure of human life is 10,000 years” and “men are all of a golden complexion . . . [and] without sickness, without sorrow, and always cheerful.”[3] Outside the Aryan tradition, the Book of Lieh-Tzu (fourth century B.C.) describes what appear to be the inhabitants of the Golden Age:

All were equally untouched by the emotions of love and sympathy, of jealousy and fear. Water had no power to drown them, nor fire to burn; cuts and blows caused them neither injury nor pain, scratching or tickling could not make them itch. They bestrode the air as though treading on solid earth; they were cradled in space as though resting in a bed. Clouds and mist obstructed not their vision, thunder-peals could not stun their ears, physical beauty disturbed not their hearts, mountains and valleys hindered not their steps. They moved about like gods.[4]

Finally, we have in the Semitic memory the Garden of Eden, where man was first established on Earth at God’s decree. According to the Book of Genesis, those who dwelled there lived for nearly 1000 years in a blissful paradise.[5] The allusions to this pristine setting are numerous, from the Avestic recollection of a distant period in the Airyana Vaego, where man was under the aegis of the creator god Ahura Mazda himself, to the Buddhist remembrance of Shambhala, roughly translated “land of peace” or “tranquility.”

In tracing anthropogenesis, it is crucial to establish the physical location of this primordial paradise. Unfortunately, no material archaeological evidence lends any insight into this question. We are thus forced to rely solely on the mythological memories of our ancestors. Among the Greeks, this land “beyond the pole” where neither “pestilence nor wasting eld approach” the inhabitants was referred to as Hyperborea, meaning “beyond the north wind.”[6]

In his book Arctic Home in the Vedas, the Hindu nationalist and scholar Bal Gangadhar Tilak, writing in the early twentieth century, presents a vast array of clues from Vedic and Avestic literature to argue that the primordial paradise was located in the Arctic. Tilak explains that if one were stationed at the North Pole, the sky above would appear to be rotating around one “from left to right, somewhat like the motion of a hat or umbrella turned over one’s head.”[7] He also explains that one would see the sun continuously in the sky for roughly six months, followed by a period of dusk, night, and dawn of two months each. Thus for the Arctic inhabitant, a full year would appear to unfold as a single day.

With these astral phenomena in mind, Tilak proceeds to pinpoint allusions to them in the Aryan texts. For example, in the Mahabharata, Mount Meru is discussed in one passage as a place where the “sun and the moon go round from left to right every day and so do all the stars” and “The day and the night are together equal to a year to the residents of the place.”[8] He supports this with a selection from the post-Vedic Laws of Manu, which says “A year (human) is a day and a night of the Gods; thus are the two divided, the northern passage of the sun is the day and the southern the night.”[9] Tilak corroborates this evidence with clues from Persian tradition. From the Avesta we have reference to an “enclosure” in the Airyana Vaejo in which “the stars, the moon, and the sun are only once (a year) seen to rise and set, and a year seems only as a day.”[10]

The present conditions in the Arctic make it uninhabitable. According to Tilak, however, modern scientists have conceded that at one time in distant prehistory, perhaps in pre-Glacial times, the region was hospitable, fertile, and filled with life. Among these scientists is the geologist James Geikie, who in 1893 argued that “during the Inter-Glacial period the climate was characterized by clement winters and cool summers so that the tropical plants and animals, like elephants, rhinoceroses, and hippopotamuses, ranged over the whole of the Arctic region, and in spite of numerous fierce carnivora, the Paleolithic man had no unpleasant habitation there.”[11] Joscelyn Godwin confirms that such conditions were indeed possible when, as “numerous authorities” claim, “the earth was not tilted, but spun perfectly upright with . . . its axis perpendicular to the plane of its orbit around the sun,” which was the case in “primordial times.”[12]

Since the Arctic Golden Age took place many eons before recorded history, assessing its actual place in time is troublesome. Using Hindu calculations, Traditionalist René Guénon concluded that this Golden Age took place nearly 65,000 years ago.[13] We must prefer this number over Tilak’s hypothesized 12,000 years, as the latter would place the subsequent Silver Age far too near recorded history to be possible, especially considering that the fourth, Dark Age, “is said” to have begun only 6000 years ago.[14] In addition, it would be implausible to place man’s origins only 12,000 years ago, as the devolutionary processes that reduced him to his modern form could not have fully unfolded within that short span.

Eventually, the Arctic seat and its Golden Age met a catastrophic end for a number of reasons, both physical and metaphysical. In his magnum opus, Revolt Against the Modern World, Julius Evola argues that the Earth’s axis shifted positions slightly, ushering in a cataclysmic climate change.[15] As a result, the Polar Regions became inhospitable to most life forms. In ancient texts one finds numerous references to this tilting of the axis. The Taoist tradition recalls when the “pillar which connects Heaven and earth” was “snapped” (the axis is essentially an invisible pillar that unites the sky with Earth), explaining “why Heaven dips downwards to the north-west, so that sun, moon and stars travel towards that quarter.”[16] The Hebrew story of the crumbling of the Tower of Babel, which connected Heaven to Earth, is another example. The Avesta explains the onset of the climate change in a dialog between the creator god and his disciple, king Yima: “And Ahura Mazda spake unto Yima, saying: ‘O fair Yima, son of Vîvanghat! Upon the material world the fatal winters are going to fall, that shall bring the fierce, foul frost; upon the material world the fatal winters are going to fall, that shall make snow-flakes fall thick.”[17] As this event would have occurred tens of thousands of years ago, it likely coincides with the beginning of one of the various Ice Ages.

One more event, metaphysical in nature, is explained to us by the Old Testament. It tells of how the “sons of God” mated with the “daughters of man” and spawned a race of mighty giants, whose evil behavior, driven by the appetites of the flesh, made God unleash elemental forces against them.[18] These sons are likely parallels to the “celestial gods” who dwelled in Airyana Vaego, as well as the other gods and demigods that the ancient texts say lived in this primordial paradise. From the clues above, we can paint the following picture regarding the end of the Golden Age. Human beings lived harmoniously with divine beings in the Arctic paradise until the two entered sexual unions that produced powerful, semi-divine half-breeds. This action caused such a rupture in the cosmic balance of the universe that the Earth’s axis shifted, bringing on the Ice Age that turned the paradise into a cold wasteland.

Following the destruction of Airyana Vaego/Mount Meru/Eden/ Hyperborea, the semi-divine survivors were forced to migrate southwards. In their exodus they retained the memory of their Polar homeland, evinced by polar symbols such as the swastika (a bent cross revolving about a fixed point) and the axial World Tree, which traditionally links Midgard (Earth) with the realms above. Some settled in areas of North America and Northern Europe, but the majority regrouped in an Atlantic location to reconstitute their civilization.

If we are to make any conjectures about the race of our Hyperboreans, we must look to those people who carried with them the memory of the primordial home. By Hyperboreans, I mean the Arctic race of “men” who lived among the gods. Discerning the features of the latter is impossible, as they are not bound by the limitations of material existence; they could have been anthropomorphic, ethereal, or capable of alternating between the two. Our only clue is that they were “Golden,” which may be an allusion to vibrant blondness.[19]

In all of the civilizations discussed above, as well as in others, our concern would be with the upper castes, namely the priests and the military aristocracy, who preserved the memories of Hyperborea. Among the Aryan peoples of Europe, this task is simpler due to the abundance of physical evidence available, namely statues, frescoes, engravings, and physical remains. The ancestors of classical Greece and Rome, Germania, and Celtia, who brought with them the worship of Zeus, Saturn, Tuisto, and Dana, were evidently of a tall, robust, fair-haired, and fair-skinned Nordic stock. The fourth century A.D. physician, Adamantios, gives us a picture of the early Hellenes, claiming that “Wherever the Hellenic and Ionic race has been kept pure, we see proper tall men of fairly broad and straight build, neatly made, of fairly light skin and blond; the flesh is rather firm, the limbs straight, the extremities well made.”[20]

As we push further east, the evidence becomes less plentiful but nonetheless revealing. The Brahmins who carried to India the oldest extant accounts of the Golden Age in Mount Meru were of that same Nordic race. If one juxtaposes a modern Brahmin or Kshatriya with a member of the lower castes, it often appears that the former has something quite different “in his woodpile.” He would tend to be taller and fairer in complexion and occasionally possess blue or green eyes and, more rarely still, fair hair. Lower caste individuals generally tend to be shorter and darker, and although many have fine Caucasoid features, others display an Australoid phenotype. Kaiyata, writing in the second century B.C., affirms that White Brahmins once “flourished in a previous cycle of existence” but that their “descendants are rarely met with even now.”[21] The sixth century B.C. Kshatriya noble, Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha), is described in the Pali Canon as having abhi nila netto, or “very blue eyes,” a typical Nordic trait.

In the Far East, we have a non-Aryan milieu entirely. However, there is ample genetic evidence that tall, fair Whites roamed both Western[22] and Eastern[23] China long before the present-day Mongoloids. Taken with the racial description of the Buddha, we have enough to surmise a heavy influence upon China’s culture by Nordics or a stalwart white race akin to them. Since Buddhism influenced the development of Japanese religious culture, the same rule applies to Japan.

The list can go on, but we have already given sufficient proof that the bearers of the oldest and clearest recollections of Hyperborea were tall, fair, blue-eyed, and red or blonde-haired whites. It would thus be fair to conclude that the Hyperboreans, from whom they claim descent, were likely of a proto-Nordic race.

 

The Atlantean Silver Age

Hesiod’s poem continues with a discussion of a second age, “which the Celestials call the Silver years.”[24] In this period, man became subject to sickness and mortality. He no longer lived according to the absolute principles provided by his divine tutors during the Golden Age, and paid the gods themselves “no honors.”[25]

It is with the dawning of this era that the Arctic inhabitants, now a race mixed with divine and human elements, traveled as refugees from their destroyed Urheimat to a southern location somewhere in the Atlantic. There they founded the famed city of Atlantis in mimicry of their original homeland. After establishing themselves, they embarked on a colonizing campaign across the world, passing the “Pillars of Hercules” (the Straits of Gibraltar) and reaching deep into the Mediterranean Sea. There they established their hegemony, holding “sway . . . over the country within the Pillars as far as Egypt and Tyrrhenia.”[26] It is reasonable to assume that they also sent voyagers to the Americas, as Atlantis would have lain between them and Europe.

As this new civilization was built before recorded history, it is difficult to ascertain its precise chronology. Plato asserts that Atlantis crumbled 9000 years before his own time, while Guénon, relying once again on Vedic mathematics, says this occurred several thousand years earlier. This would, therefore, place its origins even further back. Regardless, our concern is the racial state of those dwelling within Atlantis.

The Boreal race inhabiting the Arctic was probably quite Nordic in appearance. When they mixed with the gods, however, they spawned “men of monstrous size” according to Hesiod, paralleling the Nephilim of the book of Genesis. Given that modern Nordics are some of the tallest humans, and that they themselves are merely degenerated descendants of something greater, the mythological testimony seems plausible. Thus, the Atlanteans sired from the union of gods and men were likely much taller than today’s tallest people and probably more muscular; they would have been frightfully imposing giants. Further credence is given to this idea by the fact that in Numbers, the Hebrews refer to the Anakim as “Nephilim” due to their immense stature, which made the Hebrews feel like “grasshoppers.”

These giants were not the norm, however. Plato speaks of them becoming “diluted too often and too much with the mortal admixture,” suggesting that unmixed Boreal humans also lived within Atlantean borders. This was also the cause of Atlantis’s inevitable downfall, much like that of Hyperborea. After several generations of unchecked miscegenation with their human subjects, the Atlantean giants forfeited their angelic constitution and “grew visibly debased, for they were losing the fairest of their precious gifts.”[27] When this happened, the cosmic balance was once again disrupted. Evidence from the myths, sometimes suggestive and other times affirmative, leads us to believe that a massive earthquake occurred, causing Atlantis, the seat of the Silver Age, to sink beneath the Atlantic. The Mesopotamian story of the deluge that submerged the first cult-centers, linked to the Biblical flood that Noah overcame, is an example.[28]

With the Atlantean admixture with humans came a race almost entirely sapped of divinity. They were the direct ancestors of modern Northern Europeans (proto-Nordics), retaining the fair complexion and keen intellect but losing their titanic build and strength. Forced to flee their sinking kingdom, these people migrated in an East-West trajectory, bringing significant numbers into the Americas and Europe.

There is some physical and genetic evidence to substantiate this claim.

Firstly, there is the link between the 18,000 year old Solutrean weapon culture of France and the 13,500 year old American weapon culture of Clovis, New Mexico. Archaeologists Bruce Bradley and Dennis Stanford concluded in 2004 that there was a striking similarity between the manufacturing methods of each culture, particularly because they both used a very difficult and rare technique called overshot flaking.[29] They also noted that a weapon culture discovered in Virginia, dating to 16,000 years ago, appeared to be a “technological midpoint between the French Solutrean style and the Clovis points.”[30]

Our second piece of evidence is genetic. Scientists have found that among the genes of Native American populations, the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of haplogroups A through D, which are common in Asia, predominates. However, it has been found that a significant number of Native Americans in the Eastern United States possess mtDNA from haplogroup X, which is only also found in Western European populations and in some parts of Mongolia. One might argue that the presence of this mtDNA in Mongolia debunks the argument that Whites settled North America first, but this simply is not so when combined with all the other evidence provided here. Significantly, the mtDNA of pre-Columbian Native American skeletons has been studied, revealing that X was present in that race’s genes before the conquistadores arrived.[31]

Thirdly, we have the controversial Kennewick Man corpse. This 9300 year old skeleton, unearthed in Washington State in 1996, was discovered by anthropologist James Chatters to be of Caucasoid origin. In a clay reconstruction the face even ended up resembling that of British actor, Patrick Stewart.[32]

These bits of evidence indicate that a race of people predating the Mongoloid Native Americans split up and branched out into Europe and America from the Atlantic. They carried with them the same genes and tool-making methods, which they adapted to the available resources. An alternative possibility would be that this Upper Paleolithic race migrated first into Europe, with a group then splitting off and migrating eastward to America.

The Children from the Earth

As our Hyperborean ancestors ventured across the globe, first to the Atlantic and then in an East-West trajectory, they encountered preexisting societies in the lands they traversed. As the Golden and Silver Ages took place tens of thousands of years ago, these indigenous peoples were likely from the countless breeds of hominids, including Neanderthalensis and Soloensis. Whatever stock of proto-human they were, our ancestors characterized them as either chthonic, Earth-spawned beings or creatures originating from the chaotic waters. In most cases, their interaction resulted in conflict, but in others the two coexisted and even intermixed. These events have been vividly preserved in the various myths of Hyperborean origin: the epic struggle between the Tuatha da Danaan and the Fomors (people “from the water”); the battles between the Olympians and the various monsters spawned by Gaia (Earth); the vitriolic relationship between the Aesir (the Nordic sky gods) and the Vanir (trolls, giants, and other monsters); even the Anglo-Saxon epic Beowulf recaptures this theme in the fight between the hero and Grendel, a humanoid demon that lives beneath a lake.

Wherever the newcomers settled down and mixed with the natives, new races were spawned representing further bastardizations of the semi-divine Arctic prototype. Thus our giant, proto-Nordic race ramified into various hybrid breeds, each differing in appearance and attributes depending upon the areas they settled in, the stocks with which they mixed, and just how far they allowed this miscegenation to continue. From these mixed unions sprung the various Mongoloid, Semitic, Australoid, and Negroid races, with the latter two probably representing the farthest debasement from the original Hyperborean phenotype. In instances where mixing was less pronounced, or where adaptation to the environment and other factors had their effect, the various white races were generated (i.e. Nordics, Mediterraneans, Alpines, etc.).

Conclusions

In summary, anthropogenesis was a process of devolution, not evolution. Sixty-five thousand years ago, a race of gods described as “Golden” lived harmoniously with a race of advanced early humans, characterized by fair skin, fair hair, and light eyes, in a joyous, orderly Golden Age somewhere in the Arctic. At some point, the two races intermixed and bred giant demigods. As the Arctic seat froze over in one of the Ice Ages, these demigods led the remaining human survivors south into the Atlantic, with some remaining in different lands along the way. Those who did so, encountered autochthonous races with whom they ultimately mixed, debasing their divine nature and giving rise to a new, Silver Age that corresponded to the Atlantean civilization vividly described by Plato and remembered by many traditions as a “Western” land. It sent explorers out across the world from the Americas to the Far East. Thousands of years later this second super-civilization floundered due to continued mixing between the demigods and their human companions, generating the Upper Paleolithic proto-Nordic race.

With the sinking of Atlantis, these beings, now human in nature but still retaining a divine spark, migrated in an East-West trajectory. On this second great exodus, corresponding to a Bronze Age, some intermarried with indigenous peoples and further debased their line while others maintained their purity. The latter would later erect the most revered civilizations and empires of recorded history, such as Sumeria, Vedic India, Egypt, Hellas, Rome, China, and much later, the feudal regimes of Western Europe. The mixed peoples would be remembered as the Pelasgians, Minoans, Etruscans, Hebrews, Arameans, Iberians, and all other chthonic ethnicities that were subdued and restricted to a plebeian caste. Unfortunately, the vast empires noted above served as little more than dim reflections of the original Hyperborean civilization, precluded from fulfilling their true potential by the prevailing metaphysical conditions of the age in which they flourished.

We have now entered into the terminal phase of the Dark Age, and the type of humanity that is to inherit the succeeding Mahayuga remains to be seen; however, if the races of the world continue down the path of profligate inter-mixing, that divine spark, which drove the white peoples of the world to erect history’s grandest civilizations, and is now harbored by so few, will be completely extinguished. Humanity will then be forced to pass the torch of greatness to a succeeding species.

Notes

1. Dan. 2:35.

2. Hesiod, Works and Days, 1.154–63.

3. Mahabharata, 6.1.6.

4. Lieh-Tzu, The Book of Lieh-Tzu, trans. Lionel Giles (1912), 36.

5. Gen. 5:5.

6. Pindar, Pythian Odes, 10.29, 10.41.

7. Lokamanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Arctic Home in the Vedas (Poona City, India: 1903), 43.

8. Mahabharata, 3.7.163. Quoted in Tilak, 64.

9. The Laws of Manu, 1.67. Quoted in Tilak, 63.

10. Vendidad, 2.40. Quoted in Tilak, 350.

11. James Geikie, Fragments of Earth Lore: Sketches and Addresses, Geological and Geographical (1893), 266. Quoted in Tilak, 22–23.

12. Joscelyn Godwin, Arktos: The Polar Myth in Science, Symbolism, and Nazi Survival (Kempton: Adventures Unlimited Press, 1996), 13.

13. René Guénon, Traditional Forms and Cosmic Cycles (Paris: Gallimard, 1970), 24.

14. René Guénon, The Crisis of the Modern World, trans. Marco Pallis (Hillsdale: Sophia Perennis, 2001), 7.

15. Julius Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World (Rochester, Vt.: Inner Traditions International, 1995), 189.

16. Lieh-Tzu, 79.

17. Vendidad, 2.22.

18. Gen. 6: 2–7.

19. Julius Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World, 185. In his chapter “The Golden Age,” Evola contends that gold symbolizes the gods’ divine nature, which is “incorruptible, solar, luminous, and bright.” I see no reason, however, to reject the possibility that it could be a reference to something phenotypical.

20. Hans F. K. Gunther, The Racial Elements of European History, trans. G. C. Wheeler (London: Methuen, 1927), 157.

21. R. P. Chanda, The Indo-Aryan Races: A Study of the Origin of Indo-Aryan People and Institutions, Part I (Rajshahi: Varendra Research Society, 1916), 24.

22. “Genetic Testing Reveals Awkward Truth About Xinjians’s Famous Mummies,” Khaleej Times Online, April 19, 2005.

23. Li Wang et al, “Genetic Structure of a 2500-Year-Old Human Population in China and Its Spatiotemporal Changes,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, 17 (2000): 1396–1400.

24. Hesiod, Works and Days, 1.175.

25. Hesiod, Works and Days, 1.189.

26. Plato, Timaeus, 25.

27. Plato, Critias, 120.

28. “A Sumerian Myth: The Deluge,” trans. S. N. Kramer, The Ancient Near East, ed. James Pritchard, vol. 1 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1953), 29.

29. Bruce Bradley and Dennis Stanford, “The North Atlantic ice-edge corridor: a possible Paleolithic route to the New World,” World Archaeology 36 (2004): 465.

30. “Stone Age Columbus-programme summary,” BBC, 21 Nov. 2002. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2002/columbus.shtml>. 1 Sept. 2008.

31. Maggie Villiger, “Tracing the Genes,” PBS, July 20, 2004, http://www.pbs.org/saf/1406/features/dna.htm.

32. Timothy Egan, “Old Skull Gets White Looks, Stirring Dispute,” The New York Times, April 2, 1998.

TOQ, vol. 10, no. 1 (Spring 2010)

 

lundi, 07 février 2011

Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Ist der abendländische Mensch vom Aussterben bedroht?

IrEE.jpg

Schon vor 15 Jahren wurde von Eibl-Eibesfeldt eigentlich bereits alles gesagt zur gegenwärtigen Misere. (Ich stimme ihm dabei zu 100 Prozent zu) Aber es hat nichts verändert. Das zeigt doch wohl, daß die bestehende gesellschaftliche Struktur wahrscheinlich nicht mehr aus sich heraus reformfähig ist....

Lesenswertes Interview mit Irenaeus Eibl-Eibesfeldt aus dem Jahr 1996

Sagen Sie mal, Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt ...
IST DER ABENDLÄNDISCHE MENSCH VOM AUSSTERBEN BEDROHT?
Von Michael Klonovsky
http://www.focus.de/politik/deutschland/deutschland-sagen...
IST DER ABENDLÄNDISCHE MENSCH VOM AUSSTERBEN BEDROHT?
Eibl-Eibesfeldt: So gefährlich ist die Situation nicht. Der abendländische Mensch ist sehr dynamisch, findig, einfallsreich und neugierig, und er wird seine Probleme sicher meistern.

FOCUS: Sie warnen seit Jahren vor den Folgen der Immigration; zugleich schauen Sie so gelassen auf die Zukunft des Abendländers?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Es geht mir zunächst einmal um die Erhaltung des inneren Friedens. Entscheidend ist deshalb auch, wer einwandert. Die europäische Binnenwanderung hat es immer gegeben, mitunter auch massive Immigrationswellen und kriegerische Überschichtungen. Aber die Bevölkerung im breiten Gürtel von Paris bis Moskau hat etwa die gleiche Mischung, sie ist anthropologisch nah verwandt. Die europäischen Nationalstaaten haben das Glück, relativ homogen zu sein.

FOCUS: Der Begriff des Ausländers müßte also durch den des Kulturfremden ersetzt werden?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Ich würde sagen: Kultur-fernen. Die integrieren und identifizieren sich nicht so leicht. Bei den innereuropäischen Wanderungen wurden die Leute integriert.

FOCUS: Und das ist Bedingung?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Es gibt diese schöne Idee, daß Immigranten ihre Kultur behalten und sich als deutsche Türken oder deutsche Nigerianer fühlen sollen, weil das unsere Kultur bereichert. Das ist sehr naiv. In Krisenzeiten hat man dann Solidargemeinschaften, die ihre Eigeninteressen vertreten und um begrenzte Ressourcen wie Sozialleistungen, Wohnungen oder Arbeitsplätze konkurrieren. Das stört natürlich den inneren Frieden. Die Algerier in Frankreich etwa bekennen sich nicht, Franzosen zu sein, die sagen: Wir sind Moslems. Vielfalt kann in einem Staate nebeneinander existieren, wenn die Kulturen verwandt sind, jede ihr eigenes Territorium besitzt und keine die Dominanz der anderen zu fürchten braucht – wie etwa in der Schweiz.

FOCUS: Also müssen die Türken in Deutschland die Deutschen fürchten?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Gegenseitig. Wenn man über Immigration Minoritäten aufbaut, die sich abgrenzen und ein anderes Fortpflanzungsverhalten zeigen, wird das Gleichgewicht gestört. Immigrationsbefürworter sagen: Die werden sich angleichen. Nur: Warum sollten sie eigentlich? Deren Interesse kann doch nur sein, so stark zu werden, daß sie bei Wahlen eine Pressure-Gruppe darstellen, die ihre Eigen-interessen durchsetzen kann.

FOCUS: In Amerika werden die Weißen in hundert Jahren vermutlich Minderheit sein . . .

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Das hat in erstaunlicher Offenheit das „Time-Magazine“ ausgesprochen. Die Amerikaner haben gerade kulturferne Immigranten gefördert in dem Glauben, man dürfe nicht diskriminieren. Aber Diskriminierung – auf freundliche Weise – betreibt ja jeder! Die eigenen Kinder stehen uns näher als die der anderen, die Erbgesetze nehmen darauf Rücksicht, und es ist ja auch schon diskriminierend, daß kein Fremder in meinen Garten darf. Auch ein Land darf seine Grenzen verteidigen. Wenn jemand den Grenzpfahl in Europa nur um zehn Meter verschieben würde, gäbe es furchtbaren Krach, aber die stille Landnahme über Immigration soll man dulden?

FOCUS: Das gebietet der Philanthropismus, sofern der nicht ein evolutionärer Irrläufer ist.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Es wird nicht in Rechnung gestellt, daß wir, wie alle Organismen, in einer langen Stammesgeschichte daraufhin selektiert wurden, in eigenen Nachkommen zu überleben. Europäer überleben nun mal nicht in einem Bantu, was gar keine Bewertung ist, denn für den Biologen gibt es zunächst einmal kein höheres Interesse, das sich im Deutschen oder im Europäer verwirklicht – nicht mal in der Menschheit.

FOCUS: Solche Ansichten haben ihnen den Vorwurf des Biologismus eingetragen, wobei Sie sich im Lasterkatalog der Wohlmeinenden noch zum Rassisten oder Faschisten hocharbeiten können.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Die Leute, die so de-monstrativ ihren Heiligenschein polieren, tun das ja nicht aus Nächstenliebe, sondern weil sie dadurch hohes Ansehen, hohe Rangpositionen, also auch Macht, gewinnen können – früher als Held, heute als Tugendheld. Der Mensch kann alles pervertieren, auch Freundlichkeit oder Gastlichkeit, und wenn die Folgen sich als katastrophal erweisen, schleichen sich die Wohlmeinenden meist davon und sagen: Das haben wir nicht gewollt.

FOCUS: Aber dieses Verhalten ist doch evolutionär schwachsinnig.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Sicher. Es sterben ja immer wieder Arten aus. Fehlverhalten im Politischen kann eine Gruppe immer wieder gefährden, wie man zuletzt am Marxismus gesehen hat.

FOCUS: Was sollten wir also tun?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Wir müssen von dem fatalen Kurzzeitdenken wegkommen. Wie alle Organismen sind wir auf den Wettlauf im Jetzt programmiert. Wir sind aber zugleich das erste Geschöpf, das sich Ziele setzen kann, das seinen Verstand und seine Fähigkeit, sozial zu empfinden, fürsorglich zu sein, auch mit einbringen kann.

FOCUS: Was bedeutet das praktisch?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Ein generationsübergreifendes Überlebensethos. Ich würde vorschlagen, daß sich Europa unter Einbeziehung Osteuropas großräumig abschottet und die Armutsländer der Dritten Welt durch Hilfen allmählich im Niveau hebt. Wenn wir im Jahr 1,5 Millionen Menschen aus der Dritten Welt aufnähmen, würde das dort überhaupt nichts ändern – das gleicht der Bevölkerungsüberschuß, wie Hubert Markl unlängst betonte, in einer Woche wieder aus, solange es keine Geburtenkontrolle gibt. Man kann gegen eine Bevölkerungsexplosion in diesem Ausmaß sonst nichts tun, bestenfalls das Problem importieren, wenn man dumm ist.

FOCUS: Das ist dann, wie Sie schreiben, „Überredung zum Ethnosuizid“?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Die heute für die Multikultur eintreten, sind eben Kurzzeitdenker. Sie sind sich gar nicht bewußt, was sie ihren eigenen Enkeln antun und welche möglichen Folgen ihr leichtfertiges Handeln haben kann.

FOCUS: Ist der moderne Westeuropäer überhaupt noch vitalistisch erklärbar? Leistet er sich aus evolutionärer Warte nicht zuviel Luxus wie Immigration, Feminismus, Randgruppendiskurse, den Wohlfahrtsstaat?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Das wird sich wieder moderieren, wie man in Wien sagt . . .

FOCUS: Über Katastrophen?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Nicht nur. Ich glaube, daß die Leute Vernunftgründen doch zugänglich sind. Konrad Lorenz hat gesagt, es sei doch sehr unwahrscheinlich, daß von einer Generation auf die andere alles kulturelle Wissen auf einmal hinfällig und überholt ist. Die Tradition mitsamt der Offenheit für Experimente in gewissen Bereichen und die Bereitschaft zur Fehlerkorrektur, das zusammen eröffnet uns große Chancen. Aber alles umzubrechen und Großversuche wie das Migrationsexperiment anzustellen, das ja nicht mehr rückgängig zu machen ist, halte ich für gewissenlos. Man experimentiert nicht auf diese Weise mit Menschen.

FOCUS: Sie sagen, daß Xenophobie – Fremdenscheu, nicht Fremdenhaß – stammes-geschichtlich veranlagt ist.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Das ist in der Evolution selektiert worden, um die Vermischung zu verhindern. Die Fremdenscheu des Kleinkindes sichert die Bindung an die Mutter. Später hat der Mensch das familiale Ethos zum Kleingruppenethos gemacht. Mit der Entwicklung von Großgruppen erfolgte eine weitere Abgrenzung. Die ist unter anderem an Symbole gebunden, die Gemeinsamkeit ausdrücken sollen. Beim Absingen von Hymnen überläuft viele ein Schauer der Ergriffenheit, was auf die Kontraktion der Haaraufrichter zurückzuführen ist. Es sprechen da kollektive Verteidigungsreaktionen an; wir sträuben einen Pelz, den wir nicht mehr haben.

FOCUS: Das ist alles etwas Gewordenes. Kann sich nicht eines Tages den türkischen Deutschen und den deutschen Deutschen beim Abspielen der gemeinsamen Nationalhymne gemeinsam der Pelz sträuben?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Wenn das über Integration erfolgte, ja. Eine langsame Durchmischung kann durchaus friedlich verlaufen, und es kann etwas Interessantes herauskommen. Wir sprechen aber davon, ob in einem dichtbevölkerten Land über Immigration das Gesundschrumpfen der Bevölkerungszahl aufgehalten werden soll. Das fördert sicherlich nicht den inneren Frieden, sondern könnte selbst zu Bürgerkriegen führen – wir haben ja bereits das Kurdenproblem. Das ist nicht böse gemeint, es zeigt eben, daß diese Gruppen ihre Eigeninteressen ohne Rücksicht vertreten. Ich verstehe da übrigens auch die Grünen nicht, die sich gegen jede Autobahn sträuben und klagen, daß das Land zersiedelt wird. Dann kann man nicht zugleich alle reinlassen wollen.

FOCUS: Würden Sie bitte zu den folgenden Personen einen Satz sagen: Edmund Stoiber.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Ein sehr klarer, engagierter Geist; ein Lokalpatriot, der aber auch gut nach Bonn passen würde.

FOCUS: Alice Schwarzer.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Das Anliegen der Gleichberechtigung ist berechtigt, man sollte aber nicht die Rolle der Frau als Mutter abwerten.

FOCUS: Jörg Haider.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Ein stürmischer, sicherlich national betonter Mann, ein Hitzkopf, aber natürlich kein Rechtsradikaler – es wählen nicht 23 Prozent der Österreicher rechtsradikal.

FOCUS: Madonna.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Was soll man dazu sagen? Lustig, daß es so etwas gibt.

FOCUS: Nietzsches „Zarathustra“ hat die Ära des „verächtlichsten Menschen“ beschworen, des „letzten Menschen“, der alles klein macht und meint, er habe das Glück erfunden . . .

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Das ist sicherlich kein wünschenswerter Typus, denn der will ein passives Wohlleben ohne Dynamik.

FOCUS: Interessanterweise hat dieser letzte Mensch, wenn auch mit russischer Hilfe, den Zweiten Weltkrieg gegen die blonde Bestie gewonnen.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: War das der letzte Mensch? Das waren doch ganz tüchtige, mutige Leute. Ich würde sagen, wir haben den Krieg verloren, weil wir den Satz Immanuel Kants vergessen haben, man müsse sich auch im Krieg so verhalten, daß ein späterer Friede möglich ist. Man kann daraus übrigens lernen, daß Inhumanität kein positiver Selektionsfaktor ist.

FOCUS: Wie auch immer, der letzte Mensch steuert scheinbar unaufhaltsam der Weltzivilisation entgegen. Halten Sie einen globalen Einheitsmenschen für vorstellbar?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Ich kann mir vorstellen, daß es große Blöcke geben wird, in denen der Bevölkerungsaustausch eine ziemlich einheit-liche Population hervorbringt. Aber der Verlust an Differenzierung wäre schade. Das würde eine Weltsprache bedeuten oder eine Sprache des eurasischen Blockes. Niemand würde mehr spanische oder italienische Autoren lesen . . .

FOCUS: Aber Sie als Ethologe müßten solche Verluste doch in den Skat drücken können. Die verschiedenen Sprachen sind doch bloß Neandertaler.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Dann bin ich eben ein Neandertaler. Ich liebe die kulturelle Buntheit. Die Neigung, sich abzugrenzen und eigene Wege zu gehen, ist schon im Tier- und Pflanzenreich ausgeprägt. Artenfülle ist die Speerspitze der Evolution, da wird dauernd Neues probiert. Der Mensch macht das kulturell, und wenn er seine kulturelle Differenzierung verliert, verliert er sehr viel von dem, was ihn zum heutigen Menschen gemacht hat. Wir wissen, daß es andere Möglichkeiten gibt; der Ameisenstaat ist perfekt. Die Frage ist nur, ob wir uns das als Individuen wünschen können.

FOCUS: Jetzt sind Sie so anthropozentrisch.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Ich gehöre der Gattung Homo sapiens an. Ob sich die Humanität bewährt, für die ich ja plädiere, wissen wir nicht, aber ich sehe durch die ganze Geschichte, daß sie sich bewähren könnte.

FOCUS: Das Glück des letzten Menschen scheint unverträglich mit der Idee zu sein, als Glied einer Generationenkette zu existieren.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Das ist ein schrecklicher Irrglaube. Wer keine Kinder in die Welt setzt, steigt aus dem Abenteuer der weiteren Entwicklung aus.

FOCUS: Das ist denen ja egal.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Ja, aber die Natur sorgt schon dafür, daß dann deren Gene nicht weiterleben. Ich glaube, daß diese Leute um einen Teil ihres Lebensglücks betrogen wurden. Zum Individuum gehört das Bewußtsein, daß man eben nicht nur Individuum ist, sondern eingebettet in eine größere Gemeinschaft und in einen Ablauf von Generationen und daß wir den Generationen vor uns unendlich viel verdanken.

FOCUS: Es handelt sich also um das freiwilliges Ansteuern einer evolutionären Sackgasse?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Ich kann im Hirn des Menschen über Indoktrination und dauernde Belehrung Strukturen aufbauen, die diese Menschen gegen ihre Eigeninteressen und gegen die Interessen ihrer Gemeinschaft handeln lassen. Ein Kollektiv kann ja von religiösem Wahn befallen werden und sich umbringen.

FOCUS: Da haben wir den Bogen zurück zur Eingangsfrage: Schafft sich der westliche hedonistische Individualmensch kraft nach-lassender Vitalität allmählich selbst ab?

Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Zu allen Zeiten haben Gruppen andere verdrängt, und es gibt sicherlich kein Interesse der Natur an uns. Aber es gibt ein Eigeninteresse. Man muß nicht notwendigerweise seine eigene Verdrängung begrüßen.

„Wenn man über Immigration Minoritäten aufbaut, die sich abgrenzen, wird das Gleichgewicht gestört“

„Das Kurdenproblem zeigt, daß fremde Gruppen ihre Eigeninteressen ohne Rücksicht vertreten“

„Inhumanität ist kein positiver Selektionsfaktor“

„Wer keine Kinder in die Welt setzt, steigt aus dem Abenteuer der weiteren Evolution aus“

SKEPTISCH-HUMANISTISCHER VERHALTENSFORSCHER

HERKUNFT: 1928 in Wien geboren

BILDUNGSWEG: Studium Naturgeschichte und Physik, 1949 Promotion (Zoologie) in Wien

KARRIERE: 1949-69 Schüler und Mitarbeiter von Konrad Lorenz. 1963 Habilitation (Uni München). Seit 1975 Leiter der Forschungsstelle f. Humanethologie der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (in Andechs). Seit 1992 Direktor des Instituts f. Stadtethologie Wien

jeudi, 27 janvier 2011

George Montandon et Louis-Ferdinand Céline

George Montandon et Louis-Ferdinand Céline

par Alain CAMPIOTTI

Ex.: http://lepetitcelinien.blogspot.com/

De l’admiration de la révolution bolchevique à l’adhésion totale à l’antisémitisme nazi: la dérive mortelle du Dr Montandon, Neuchâtelois, médecin à Renens, ami de Céline et ennemi juré de la «Gazette de Lausanne».

Vatslav Vorovsky est un bolchevique vétéran, vieil ami de Lénine. Il était souvent à Genève avec lui au début du XXe siècle pour fabriquer les journaux du parti. Quand il revient en Suisse, en 1923, c’est en tant que diplomate soviétique, pour participer à la conférence de Lausanne sur la question turque. Il est descendu avec sa délégation à l’Hôtel Cecil. Le soir du 9 mai, un homme s’avance vers sa table, au restaurant, sort un pistolet et l’abat. L’assassin, Maurice Conradi, dont la famille avait été spoliée en Russie où elle s’était établie, revendique haut et fort son crime. En automne pourtant, il est acquitté, sous les applaudissements du public. Son procès, tenu sans rire au Casino, s’est transformé en réquisitoire contre l’URSS.

Les bolcheviques n’ont plus beaucoup d’amis au bord du Léman. Sauf le Dr George Montandon, de Renens. Cité par la partie civile, le médecin, qui durant deux ans a parcouru la Russie ravagée de Vladivostok aux pays baltes, est venu dire que la «terreur blanche» était bien pire que la «terreur rouge». Il est rentré de Moscou avec de la sympathie pour le nouveau régime. La police de sûreté vaudoise pense même qu’il est au parti. Il écrit dans Clarté, la revue philocommuniste de Romain Rolland. Mais en même temps, le Dr Montandon collabore de longue date à la Gazette de Lausanne, dont il est par ailleurs actionnaire. La Gazette n’aime guère les rouges. S’ensuivent des tensions qui deviennent, l’année suivante, explosives. Le docteur veut la tête de Charles Burnier, le directeur du journal, et il ne lésine pas sur les moyens, publiant des pamphlets de plus en plus violents et insultants. Le dernier est intitulé «Burnier fumier», avec une illustration d’une belle grossièreté. Le directeur dépose plainte, le Tribunal fédéral s’en mêle, et George Montandon écope de dix jours de prison. Mais il triomphe: entre-temps, Charles Burnier a été viré. «Ma condamnation est un honneur, écrit-il. Je paie mon attitude de sympathie à la Révolution russe.» Pour échapper à l’arrestation, le docteur prend le bateau vers Thonon, puis émigre avec sa famille à Paris.

A-t-il de l’humour, cet homme à tête de croque-mort? Il est né en 1879 à Cortaillod, fils d’un industriel riche et influent, député au Grand Conseil neuchâtelois. Après sa médecine faite à Genève, Lausanne et Zurich, il se prend de passion pour l’ethnologie, va l’étudier à Londres et à Hambourg. En 1910, il est en Abyssinie, soigne le vieux roi Ménélik II avec qui Arthur Rimbaud trafiquait ses armes, parcourt le pays en tous sens au point qu’une montagne prend son nom, Toulou Montandon. La Gazette publie au retour les longs reportages du docteur aventurier.

Quand éclate la Grande Guerre, Montandon ferme son cabinet de Renens et s’engage pour deux ans dans un hôpital militaire français. Après la révolution d’Octobre, il récidive et convainc le CICR de lui confier une mission compliquée: organiser en pleine guerre civile, par Vladivostok, le rapatriement des prisonniers austro-hongrois dispersés en Sibérie centrale. De toute évidence, l’expédition lui plaît. Il a son train, qui va et vient dans la plaine infinie. A ses moments perdus, il fait un peu de recherche ethnographique, ramasse des arcs et des lances, mesure des crânes. Il côtoie les soudards blancs qui dans la neige se réchauffent à la vodka. Il s’arrête à Omsk chez un fromager suisse émigré qui voudrait «sortir de cette maison de fous». Il connaît des chefs bolcheviques, en particulier Boris Choumiatski, qui tente de contrôler pour Moscou les immensités sibériennes et dont Staline fera son tsar du cinéma, persécutant Eisenstein, avant de l’envoyer recevoir sa balle dans une cave. Il fréquente les hordes du baron Roman von Ungern-Sternberg, ce général balte qui tente de se tailler un empire militaro-mystique au cœur des ténèbres mongoles. Il est arrêté trois fois par la Tcheka, la dernière fois à Moscou, accusé d’espionnage et enfermé à la Loubianka où il entend les pires rumeurs, et les hurlements d’une femme.

Sorti de cette aventure, George Montandon en tire un livre, Deux ans chez Koltchak et chez les Bolcheviques. Drôle de bouquin, récit picaresque plein de détails ferroviaires et militaires, de rodomontades naïves dans une langue un peu surannée, mais dans lequel on découvre des fulgurances. Louis-Ferdinand Destouches, autre docteur, n’a encore rien écrit, mais on dirait parfois du Céline. Montandon parle de l’égalité obtenue «par libre consentement ou par contrainte» qu’il observe chez les Russes, et il s’exclame: «Le costume bourgeois: néant! L’allure digne et repue du bourgeois: renéant! L’orgueil bourgeois, la morgue bourgeoise – voici, voici l’essentiel – l’orgueil bourgeois, la morgue bourgeoise: néant de néant! Les jeux sont faits, rien ne va plus! En comparaison de notre moisissure, la démocratie américaine nous avait déjà montré quelque chose de remarquable, mais voici qui est beaucoup plus fort. Ici, si l’un a plus que l’autre […] il semble en avoir honte comme d’un vice. […] Aujourd’hui, en Russie prise dans son ensemble, l’orgueil de classe est évanoui, le monocle est tombé.»

La Gazette de Lausanne n’accepte pas de parler de Deux ans chez Kol­tchak. Mais George Montandon n’est plus là, il s’est vengé à sa manière, et maintenant, à Paris, il met le même entêtement qu’en Afrique ou en URSS à conquérir, cette fois, les sommets universitaires qu’on vient de lui refuser à Neuchâtel. Il côtoie la crème de l’ethnologie française, Marcel Mauss, Paul Rivet, Lucien Lévy-Bruhl, s’en fait des amis, puis surtout des ennemis. Il obtient un poste, pas celui qu’il visait, en tire de la hargne. Il écrit, utilisant les observations accumulées dans ses voyages, alignant des types humains, les organisant en familles, les classant: «La race, les races». Il commence à parler un peu des juifs, qui sont avant tout «une raison sociale, et non une race uniforme». Dans le climat intellectuel de l’époque, ses écrits ne choquent pas. Il traite ensuite de «l’ethnie française», et ses écrits se durcissent. L’ancien admirateur de Lénine est désormais lu avec intérêt par les idéologues racistes allemands. Cette dérive intellectuelle l’amène finalement à rencontrer celui qui l’attendait, l’autre docteur: Céline. C’est en 1938. L’auteur du Voyage au bout de la nuit est tout occupé par ses pamphlets antisémites. Il s’inspire de Montandon dans Bagatelle pour un massacre, le cite dans L’Ecole des cadavres. Ils sont amis, jusqu’à la fin.

Quand l’armée allemande occupe la France, la haine antisémite du Neuchâtelois n’a plus de frein. Dans La France au travail, le nouveau nom donné à L’Humanité confisquée aux communistes, dont le rédacteur en chef est, sous le pseudonyme de Charles Dieudonné, le fasciste genevois Géo Oltramare, Montandon traite les juifs d’«ethnie putain» qui, «s’imposant aux Français: a) faisait bêler la paix, b) sabotait l’armement, c) et surtout dégoûtait la femme de la maternité grâce à sa presse avec ses rubriques quasi pornographiques, dirigées par des putains juives». Ailleurs, il promet aux belles actrices juives de les défigurer en leur coupant le nez.

Céline reconnaît chez le Suisse sa propre haine. Il envoie un mot de recommandation pour que son ami trouve un emploi dans l’administration des «questions juives»: «Parfait honnête homme, un peu suisse (comme J.J.), docteur en médecine (et autrefois un peu communiste), et par-dessus tout un grand savant.» Montandon obtient son emploi. Désormais, c’est lui qui établira pour le Commissariat général les certificats de non-appartenance à la race juive, qui offrent une protection à ceux qui peuvent se les payer, car les factures du docteur sont salées. Ce commerce macabre finit par indisposer Céline lui-même.

Le 3 août 1944, une camionnette s’arrête devant la villa au numéro 22 de la rue Louis-Guespin, à Clamart. Deux ou trois hommes en descendent. Ils sont armés. Marie Montandon, qui ouvre la porte, est criblée de balles. Les assaillants montent à l’étage, trouvent le docteur dans son lit, malade, et ouvrent le feu. Puis ils prennent la fuite. George Montandon n’est que blessé. Il appelle une ambulance qui le conduit à l’Hôpital Lariboisière, géré par l’armée allemande. Quelques jours plus tard, le conseiller du Commissariat général aux questions juives est emmené en Allemagne. Il meurt le 30 août, à Fulda.

Céline, qui soignait George Montandon, n’avait pas vu son ami depuis trois mois. En 1952, dans Féerie pour une autre fois, il a parlé de lui une dernière fois: «Il savait pas rire Montandon, il était gris de figure, de col, d’imperméable, de chaussures, tout… mais quel bel esprit! tout gris certes! pas une parole plus haut que l’autre! mais quelles précisions admirables! […] Bébert qu’est pourtant le malgracieux! le griffeur, le bouffeur fait chat!… il comprenait le «charme Montandon»…»

Alain CAMPIOTTI
Le Temps, 6/1/2011

 

dimanche, 05 décembre 2010

Jean Haudry sur Radio Courtoisie

lesindo-europeens.jpg

Mercredi 15 décembre 2010 :

Jean Haudry sur Radio Courtoisie…

Le professeur Jean Haudry présentera son livre Les INDO-EUROPÉENS, le mercredi 15 décembre de 19 h 30 à 21 h 00, à Radio Courtoisie.

Il sera présent pour la signature de son livre à la Librairie Facta, le samedi 18 décembre de 15 à 18 h 00 (Librairie FACTA : 4 rue de Clichy, 75009 Paris. Tel : 01 48 74 59 14).

mardi, 26 octobre 2010

La psico-antropologia de L. F. Clauss

LA PSICO-ANTROPOLOGÍA DE L.F. CLAUSS:

UNA ALTERNATIVA FRUSTRADA
Sebastian J. Lorenz
 
Frente al concepto materialista de la antropología nórdica, que consideraba la raza como un conjunto de factores físicos y psíquicos, se fue haciendo paso una antropologíade tipo espiritual, que tendrá su máximo exponente en el fundador de la “psico-raciología” (Rassenseelenkunde) Ludwig Ferdinand Clauss. Frente a la preeminencia de los rasgos fisiológicos, a los que se ligaba unas características intelectuales, Clauss inaugurará la “ley del estilo” . Para él, la adscripción a una etnia es, fundamentalmente, un estilo que se manifiesta en una multiplicidad de caracteres, ya sean de tipo físico, psíquico o anímico que, conjuntamente, expresan un determinado estilo dinámico: «por el movimiento del cuerpo, su expresión, su respuesta a los estímulos exteriores de toda clase, el proceso anímico que ha conducido a este movimiento se convierte en una expresión del espacio, el cuerpo se convierte en campo de expresión del alma» (Rasse und Seele).
Robert Steuckers ha escrito que «la originalidad de su método de investigación raciológica consistió en la renuncia a los zoologismos de las teorías raciales convencionales, nacidas de la herencia del darwinismo, en las que al hombre se le considera un simple animal más evolucionado que el resto». Desde esta perspectiva, Clauss consideraba en un nivel superior las dimensiones psíquica y espiritual frente a las características somáticas o biológicas.
Así, la raciología natural y materialista se fijaba exclusivamente en los caracteres externos –forma del cráneo, pigmentación de la piel, color de ojos y cabello, etc-, sin reparar que lo que da forma a dichos rasgos es el estilo del individuo. «Una raza no es un montón de propiedades o rasgos, sino un estilo de vida que abarca la totalidad de una forma viviente», por lo que Clauss define la raza «como un conjunto de propiedades internas, estilo típico y genio, que configuran a cada individuo y que se manifiestan en cada uno y en todos los que forman la población étnica». Para él, la forma del cuerpo y los rasgos físicos no son sino la expresión material de una realidad interna: tanto el espíritu (Geist) como el sentido psíquico (Seele) son los factores esenciales que modelan las formas corpóreas exteriores. Así, en lo relativo a la raza nórdica, no es que al tipo alto, fuerte, dolicocéfalo, rubio y de ojos azules, le correspondan una serie de caracteres morales e intelectuales, sino que es a un determinado estilo, el del “hombre de acción”, el hombre creativo (Leistungsmensch), al que se deben aquellos rasgos físicos, conjunto que parece predestinar a un grupo determinado de hombres. La etnia aparece concebida, de esta forma, como una unidad físico-anímica hereditaria, en la que el cuerpo es la “expresión del alma”. Klages dirá que «el alma es el sentido del cuerpo y el cuerpo es la manifestación del alma».
La escuela “espiritualista” fundada por Clauss tuvo, ciertamente, una buena acogida por parte de sus lectores, que se vieron liberados de las descripciones antropológicas del tipo ideal de hombre nórdico, las cuales no concurrían en buena parte de la población alemana, reconduciendo, de esta forma, el estilo de la raza a criterios idealistas menos discriminatorios. Pero lo que, en el fondo, estaba proponiendo Clauss, no era una huida del racismo materialista sino, precisamente, un reforzamiento de éste a través de su paralelismo anímico, según la fórmula “a una raza noble, le corresponde un espíritu noble”. Distintos caminos para llegar al mismo sitio. Así, podrá decir que «las razas no se diferencian tanto por los rasgos o facultades que poseen, sino por el estilo con que éstas se presentan», esto es, que no se distinguen por sus cualidades, sino por el estilo innato a las mismas. Entonces, basta conceder un “estilo arquitectónico” a la mujer nórdica, a la que atribuye un orden metódico tanto corporal como espiritual, frente a la mujer africana que carece de los mismos, para llegar a las mismas conclusiones que los teóricos del racismo bio-antropológico.
Por todo ello, las ideas de Clauss no dejan de encuadrarse en el “nordicismo” más radical de la época. El hombre nórdico es un tipo cuya actuación siempre está dirigida por el esfuerzo y por el rendimiento, por el deseo y por la consecución de una obra. «En todas las manifestaciones de actividad del hombre nórdico hay un objetivo: está dirigido desde el interior hacia el exterior, escogiendo algún motivo y emprendiéndolo, porque es muy activo. La vida le ordena luchar en primera línea y a cualquier precio, aun el de perecer. Las manifestaciones de esta clase son, pues una forma de heroísmo, aunque distinto del “heroísmo bélico”». De ahí a afirmar que los pueblos de sangre nórdica se han distinguido siempre de los demás por su audacia, sus conquistas y descubrimientos, por una fuerza de empuje que les impide acomodarse, y que han marcado a toda la humanidad con el estilo de su raza, sólo había un paso que Clauss estaba dispuesto a dar.
El estilo de las otras razas, sin embargo, no sale tan bien parado. Del hombre fálico destaca su interioridad y la fidelidad por las raíces que definen al campesinado alemán (deutsche treue), puesto que la raza fálica se encuentra profundamente imbricada dentro de la nórdica. Respecto a la cultura y raza latina (Westisch) dirá que no es patrimonio exclusivo del hombre mediterráneo, sino producto de la combinación entre la viveza, la sensualidad gestual y la agilidad mental de éste con la creatividad del tipo nórdico, derivada de la productiva fertilización que los pueblos de origen indogermánico introdujeron en el sur de Europa (Rasse und Charakter).
De los tipos alpino (dunkel-ostisch) y báltico-oriental (hell-ostisch), braquimorfos y braquicéfalos, dirá que son el extremo opuesto del nórdico, tanto en sus formas corporales como en las espirituales, porque son capaces de soportar el sufrimiento y la muerte de forma indiferente, sin ningún tipo de heroísmo, pero su falta de imaginación los hace inútiles para las grandes ideas y pensamientos, en definitiva, el hombre evasivo y servicial. Curiosamente, el estudio que hace de la raza semítico-oriental –judía y árabe-, con las que se hallaba bastante involucrado personalmente, no resulta tan peyorativo, si bien coincidía con Hans F.K. Günther en que existe entre los hebreos un conflicto entre el espíritu y la carne que acaba con la victoria de esta última, con la “redención por la carne”, mientras que de los árabes destaca su fatalismo y la inspiración divina que les hace creer –como iluminados- que son los escogidos o los enviados de Dios.
Por lo demás, Clauss admitió que los diferentes estilos, al igual que sucede con los tipos étnicos, se entrecruzan y están presentes simultáneamente en cada individuo. Según Evola, «para él, dada la actual mezcla de tipos, también en materia de “razas del alma”, en lo relativo a un pueblo moderno, la raza es objeto menos de una constatación que de una “decisión”: hay que decidirse, en el sentido de seleccionar y elegir a aquel que, entre los diferentes influjos físico-espirituales presentes simultáneamente en uno mismo, a aquel que más se ha manifestado creativo en la tradición de aquel pueblo; y hacer en modo tal que, entonces una tal influencia o “raza del alma” tome la primacía sobre cualquier otra.»
No obstante lo anterior, el nordicismo ideal y espiritual de Clauss fracasó estrepitosamente porque nunca pudo superar la popularidad que tuvo el tipo ideal de hombre nórdico que Hans F.K. Günther proponía recuperar a través de los representantes más puros de la cepa germánica, si bien no como realidad, sino como una aspiración ideal, de tal forma que, finalmente, Clauss se vio apartado de todas las organizaciones del tejido nacionalsocialista a las que, desde un principio, había pertenecido.

vendredi, 15 octobre 2010

Noi, Celti e Longobardi

Michele Fabbri:

Noi, Celti e Longobardi

http://www.centrostudilaruna.it/

Nel 1997 Gualtiero Ciola pubblicava un’opera, poi ristampata, che costituiva un originale punto di riferimento per un’adeguata considerazione delle origini etniche dei popoli italiani. Nel suo corposo studio Noi, Celti e Longobardi, Ciola analizza le testimonianze archeologiche e linguistiche che hanno segnato il territorio della penisola italica, fornendo utili indicazioni per seguire nuovi percorsi di ricerca.

Il libro di Ciola è un’opera dal carattere decisamente militante che vuole mostrare le tracce lasciate, soprattutto nei territori settentrionali della penisola, da popolazioni di origine celtica e germanica. Si tratta quindi di un testo particolarmente importante per favorire la ricostituzione di una coscienza identitaria dei popoli padani. Infatti la classe dirigente italiana, soprattutto nell’ultimo mezzo secolo, ha utilizzato massicci flussi migratori di meridionali e di extracomunitari con l’intento di sottoporre la Padania a un processo di denordizzazione che rischia di cancellarne per sempre l’identità etnica.

In una vera e propria controstoria dell’Italia etnica, Ciola col suo libro indica la via della liberazione dai tabù e dai pregiudizi che vengono inculcati dalla cultura di regime, particolarmente insistente nel contesto del mondialismo.

A partire dal secondo millennio a.C. si verifica l’irruzione nella penisola italica di genti ariane che segneranno in modo indelebile le culture del territorio, sebbene a macchia di leopardo, come Ciola mostra nel suo libro. La differenza più evidente fra i nuovi venuti e le popolazioni preesistenti è nel fatto che gli Indoeuropei si caratterizzavano per i culti solari e patriarcali, mentre gli autoctoni celebravano culti matriarcali riferiti alla Madre Terra. Gli Etruschi sono probabilmente gli eredi dei culti matriarcali, anche se la civiltà etrusca fu di gran lunga la più avanzata fra quelle italiche delle origini, e assorbì elementi culturali di civiltà indoeuropee, soprattutto di quella greca.

L’espansione etrusca nella pianura padana venne subito fermata dai Celti che si affermarono in tutta la zona lasciando un vasto patrimonio di toponimi nonché di parole che sono arrivate fino all’italiano moderno. Ciola elenca in tavole apposite una lunga serie di lemmi di origine celtica, di cui i dialetti padani sono letteralmente infarciti. Proprio per cancellare queste tracce di cultura nordica la classe dirigente italiana ha sempre cercato di oscurare le culture dialettali, soprattutto settentrionali, sia col regime liberale, sia con quello fascista, soprattutto con quello democristiano, e ancora di più con l’attuale sistema mondialista. Assai più ampia tolleranza, invece, è stata mostrata verso i dialetti meridionali…

La parte nord-orientale della penisola era abitata dai Veneti, popolazione di origine indoeuropea che l’autore ritiene ascrivibile anch’essa all’ethnos celtico. Si tratta di una questione storiografica ancora dibattuta, sulla quale Ciola propone numerosi spunti di approfondimento.

Molte feste popolari sono chiaramente ispirate alle feste solstiziali celebrate dai Celti, e talune sono state cristianizzate, come la festa della Candelora, che originariamente era la festa della dea celtica Brigit.

Purtroppo in Italia è sempre esistito un malanimo anticeltico che risale ai tempi dei Romani e che si è perpetuato nel Risorgimento e nel fascismo, che hanno cercato di inculcare l’idea di un’Italia “schiava di Roma”: un dogma che ancora oggi viene propagandato dai governi italiani, con l’aggravante del mondialismo, di cui la classe politica è totalmente succube.

Un altro momento importante per la formazione delle identità etniche italiane è l’arrivo dei Germani col crollo dell’Impero Romano. L’invasione dei “Barbari” rappresenta un significativo apporto di sangue nordico nella penisola: i Germani si caratterizzavano per un solido senso della stirpe e per una più accentuata divisione in caste della società. Tuttavia nessuna tribù germanica riuscì a dare un assetto stabile al territorio, aprendo la strada alla riconquista bizantina e alla formazione del territorio pontificio.

L’invasione longobarda fu l’ultima occasione di instaurare un regno “nordico” in Italia. La questione, com’è noto, fu ampiamente dibattuta al tempo del Risorgimento, suscitando l’interesse anche di personalità importanti come Alessandro Manzoni. Sta di fatto che la strenua resistenza bizantina, la diplomazia papale e l’intromissione dei Franchi resero impossibile ai Longobardi la conquista dell’Italia.

Tuttavia l’apporto culturale longobardo ha lasciato tracce significative in numerosi vocaboli, nei toponimi, nonché nelle caratteristiche razziali soprattutto nel Nord Italia e in Toscana.

La diffusione dei Longobardi in Toscana ha dato origine anche a particolari teorie sul Rinascimento. Lo studioso tedesco Ludwig Woltmann sosteneva che il Rinascimento, che ebbe in Toscana la sua sede privilegiata, era un fenomeno essenzialmente nordico: un’aspirazione alla libertà e alla curiosità intellettuale che è molto meno sentita nelle culture mediterranee. In effetti l’arte toscana di quell’epoca presenta caratteri assai poco meridionali: simbolo del Rinascimento fiorentino sono le Grazie e la Venere del Botticelli, che hanno un aspetto decisamente ariano!

L’ultima parte del libro passa in rassegna tutte le regioni italiane delineandone la composizione etnica che è chiaramente celtico-germanica al Nord, con un consistente apporto celtico nelle Marche e con influenze umbre che, secondo Ciola, sono da far risalire a elementi proto-celtici. L’elemento etrusco è diffuso al Centro, ma in Toscana è frammisto a una consistente presenza longobarda. Nel Sud, invece, nonostante alcuni insediamenti longobardi e normanni, durarono a lungo le occupazioni musulmane, e ancor oggi prevalgono elementi di origine meridionale e levantina che determinano le tipiche caratteristiche psicorazziali della popolazione locale.

Il saggio di Ciola è opera di notevole erudizione, ricca di indicazioni che possono essere utili anche in ambito accademico, ma soprattutto è un invito a non dimenticare i valori delle culture nordiche che hanno segnato per tanti secoli la nostra civiltà: la sete di libertà, l’aspirazione alla giustizia, la fedeltà alla parola data, il coraggio, il senso dell’onore…

Si tratta di espressioni che rischiano di scomparire dal vocabolario, in un contesto come quello del mondialismo, dove dominano la menzogna, l’inganno, la truffa, il doppio gioco: gli ingredienti della società multicriminale.

Noi, Celti e Longobardi è un libro che ha il sapore di una boccata di aria fresca nell’ambiente asfittico della cultura ufficiale, e ha potenzialità dirompenti per la mentalità dominante, bigotta e conformista al di là di ogni ragionevole immaginazione.

* * *

Gualtiero Ciola, Noi, Celti e Longobardi, Edizioni Helvetia, Spinea (VE) 2008, pp.416, € 27,00.

jeudi, 14 octobre 2010

Ludwig Woltmann: la obsesion por la hegemonia germanica

 
Sebastian J. Lorenz
Ex: http://imperium-revolucion-conservadora.blogspot.com/

ludwig-woltmann.jpgComenzamos por señalar la corriente darwinista que reinterpretó la lucha de clases como una lucha de razas, en la que destaca la obra de Ludwig Gumplowicz (Der Rassenkampf), judío de origen polaco que, casualmente, sería considerado como maestro sociológico por el germanista radical Ludwig Woltmann. Precisamente, increpado Gumplowicz por su discípulo Woltmann al haber abandonado el concepto de raza, el sociólogo nostálgico respondió en los siguientes términos: «Me sorprendía … ya en mi patria de origen el hecho de que las diferentes clases sociales representasen razas totalmente heterogéneas; veía allí a la nobleza polaca, que se consideraba con razón como procedente de un tronco completamente distinto del de los campesinos; veía la clase media alemana y, junto a ella, a los judíos; tantas clases como razas … pero, en los países del occidente de Europa sobre todo, las distintas clases de la sociedad hace ya mucho tiempo que no representan otras tantas razas antropológicas y, sin embargo, se enfrentan las unas a las otras como razas distintas …».
Woltmann, sin embargo, representa ya un modelo racista más avanzado en el tránsito hacia el racismo biológico, apropiándose, al mismo tiempo, de ciertas elucubraciones de Gobineau y De Lapouge. Ludwig Woltmann, un ex-marxista que abandonó la lucha de clases y se convirtió a la lucha de razas, representa, en definitiva, un racismo que aparece ahora revestido como una ciencia de la antropología que se dirige a establecer los caracteres de los pueblos superiores y dominadores, capaces de asegurar la primacía y la potencia de las civilizaciones. Curiosamente, en su famoso “manual”, Armin Mohler incluye a Woltmann entre los autores völkischen (rama del “campesinado”) de la Revolución Conservadora alemana.
Para ello, Woltmann define un tipo biológico, puramente antropológico y morfológico en sus descripciones, y después, lo asocia a una serie de cualidades espirituales: «el hombre de alta estatura, de cráneo desarrollado, con dolicocefalia frontal y de pigmentación clara –la raza nord-europea- representa el tipo más perfecto del género humano y el producto más alto de la evolución orgánica». Otto Hauser, su discípulo, definía a los pueblos indoeuropeos como «pueblos rubios, bien definidos, que llegaron por sí mismos a una cultura cuyo nivel será admirado siempre, mientras circule en un pueblo, en un individuo, sangre nórdica afín».
Insiste Woltmann en que, mientras a las razas nórdicas les corresponde mayores cualidades intelectuales y facultades creativas, a las razas inferiores les resulta imposible acoger elementos de las civilizaciones que, como la nórdico-mediterránea tan próxima a sus áreas geográficas, pudieron adoptar para su propio beneficio, pero no lo hicieron, sumiéndose finalmente en la barbarie. Sin embargo, las razas germánicas se adueñaron rápidamente de las culturas griega y romana, mientras que, ni griegos ni romanos asimilaron la hebraica. «La transmisión de una civilización superior a razas inferiores no es posible sin una mezcla de sangre, a través de la cual los elementos de la raza más dotada se fundan con los de las razas menos dotadas». Pero el cruce de razas no es un factor de progreso duradero, sino cuando se trata de dos razas afines y del mismo valor biológico y espiritual: «es así como los germanos y los romanos se sintieron recíprocamente como de igual valor».
A pesar de reiterar la tradicional advertencia sobre los peligros de la mezcla de razas, Woltmann se aparta del pesimismo gobiniano para abrazar el difuso concepto de la “desmezcla de razas” que luego reinterpretarían Rosenberg y Darré para el nacionalsocialismo. Según esta teoría, debía atribuirse una importancia capital al fomento artificial de la raza a través de cruzamientos endogámicos (esto es, entre individuos supuestamente pertenecientes a la misma raza), con «la modesta esperanza de poder conservar y salvaguardar la sana y noble existencia de la raza actual por medio de medidas higiénicas y políticas encaminadas a protegerla».
291208_152955_PEEL_QZBZNe.jpgLas tesis iniciales de Woltmann, no obstante lo anterior, irían cobrando un intenso matiz germanista, hasta el extremo de no tolerar la unión de los alemanes con otras ramas de la familia nord-europea. Es más, una posible asimilación de los otros pueblos germánicos –daneses, holandeses, etc- la condicionaba a su dominio por parte de una gran Alemania. La extravagancia de Woltmann, que partía de la idea según la cual el valor de una civilización depende de la cantidad de raza rubia germana que contenga, le hizo asegurar que los grandes hombres (nobles, políticos, artistas, filósofos, etc) más representativos de la cultura y la sociedad italiana, francesa y española eran, sin duda alguna, de ascendencia germánica, pensando que sus cualidades anímicas y espirituales revelarían siempre los caracteres antropológicos del germano, dolicocéfalo y rubio, aun cuando su apariencia física externa fuera la de un alpino braquicéfalo o la de un oscuro mediterráneo.
Poseído por la obsesión del “racismo rubio”, veía en las élites intelectuales y artísticas de las naciones europeas a hombres de cabello rubio y ojos azules. Hasta un teórico racista de la talla de Hermann Wirth llegaría a decir que «por un error singular de observación, Woltmann y sus partidarios descubrieron en tantos genios y talentos europeos rasgos germánicos. Para ojos imparciales, los retratos que Woltmann agregó como explicación muestran precisamente lo contrario: tipos baskiros, mediterráneos y negros».
Evidentemente, ningún historiador serio pondrá en duda que en todos los países europeos, en mayor o menor medida, existen elementos raciales –o más exactamente antropológicos- del tipo germánico o, en general, indoeuropeo, debidos a las continuas y sucesivas invasiones de estos pueblos. Así, Max van Gruber podrá decir que «cuando examinamos las características físicas de nuestros más grandes hombres en cuanto a su pertenencia, encontramos, es verdad, caracteres nórdicos, pero en ninguno exclusivamente nórdicos … pero a las cualidades de los nórdicos han tenido que agregarse ingredientes de otras razas para producir tan feliz composición de cualidades».
El sueño de una hegemonía germánica mundial de Woltmann tenía, sin embargo, un obstáculo históricamente reiterado y constatado: el hombre germánico es el gran enemigo –y el más peligroso- del hombre germánico. Alemania necesitaba “una regeneración espiritual y una purificación racial internas” destinadas a la lucha final y definitiva, para lograr un grado de civilización superior a todos los precedentes, contra todas las familias de raza germánica.
Unas décadas más tarde, la Gross Deutschland conseguiría la anhelada “unidad racial germánica” (Germanische Blutseinheit) sometiendo, no sólo a los baltos y eslavos parcialmente germanizados (lituanos, letonios, checos, polacos, ucranios), sino también a otros pueblos germanos, como daneses, noruegos, holandeses, flamencos, y enfrentándose, especialmente, con los anglosajones –británicos y norteamericanos- por la conquista del mundo, pero el resultado final fue muy distinto al de la premonición de Woltmann.

dimanche, 10 octobre 2010

Por la creacion de un Romanestan - Los Gitanos, ?Un problema Hindu-Europeo?


Por la creación de un Romanestán
LOS GITANOS, ¿UN PROBLEMA HINDU-EUROPEO?

Sebastian J. Lorenz
 
Los “gitanos”, también conocidos como “rom, roma o romaní”, son un pueblo nómada –o mejor decir “itinerante”- procedente de Asia, concretamente del Subcontinente Indio, en la zona que actualmente ocupa la frontera entre los estados de Pakistán y la India. Su pretendido origen egipcio o babilonio (muy difundido por ellos mismos) está descartado. No digamos ya de sus leyendas sobre una procedencia misteriosa. El estudio de la lengua romaní – el romanò-, propia de los gitanos, confirmó que se trataba de una lengua índica, muy similar al panyabí o al hindi occidental. Además, los estudios genéticos corroboran la evidencia lingüística que sitúa el origen del pueblo gitano en dicha área geográfica. Con todo, la inclusión de una persona como perteneciente al pueblo gitano depende no sólo de factores étnicos (únicos reconocidos por ellos, desde su visión etnocéntrica) sino también de indicios socioeconómicos (desde una posición eurocéntrica).
Existen en el mundo unos 12 millones de gitanos, 9 de los cuales reside –o mejor dicho, “se desplaza”- en Europa, continente en el que la mayor cuota se la lleva Rumanía (más de 2 millones) y con importantes minorías en otros países como España (800-000), Francia e Italia, países de recepción de su peculiar diáspora migratoria, que se ha visto incrementada, tras la caída del muro comunista, por una auténtica invasión romaní del occidente europeo procedente de los países del este, y que previsiblemente alcanzará cotas máximas con las actuales medidas adoptadas en varios estados europeos (Austria, Chequia, Italia, Francia).
Los problemas fundamentales de este grupo étnico derivan de su desinterés por la integración y de la discriminación que sufren por parte de las poblaciones europeas de origen. En un principio, su confesionalidad cristiana les hizo ser bien acogidos en todo el continente europeo, pero pronto serían perseguidos por mendicidad y vagabundeo (Carlos V fue un maestro en la materia). La leyenda negra sobre los gitanos gira en torno a su nomadismo, su celo racial, sus costumbres ancestrales (magia, brujería), su falsa sexualidad, su apatía laboral, su tendencia a la delincuencia, su desinterés por la comunidad que les adopta, incluso –con más frecuencia de la deseable- su odio y desprecio a todo aquel que no acepte sus tortuosas leyes consuetudinarias. Con todo, hay que decir que en España los gitanos han logrado reubicarse, aparentemente, en condiciones bastante óptimas, situación, no obstante, que no ha estado exenta de conflictos entre los dos grupos étnicos (payos y gitanos).
La legislación represiva es muy antigua. De 1449 a 1783 -fecha en la que Carlos III equipara jurídicamente a los gitanos con el resto de los españoles, creyendo que la tolerancia aceleraría su integración en la sociedad- se dictan dos leyes punitivas contra ellos, con sanciones que iban desde el destierro o la cárcel hasta la prohibición de hablar su propia lengua. Una disposición de 1878, mantenida todavía en buena parte del siglo XX, establecía que los gitanos debían exhibir ante los agentes de la autoridad cerrespondiente, la cédula personal, la patente de hacienda y la guía de caballería, bajo pena de detención inmediata o embargo (en la práctica, confiscación automática).
En nuestro país, desde luego, sigue existiendo una especie de “apartheid” ibérico en forma de “gitanerías o barrios calorros” (además de los conocidos poblados de chabolas, donde reina el narcotráfico y el crimen organizado), donde la transición del nomadismo y la trashumancia al sedentarismo urbano, provoca el enfrentamiento entre clanes (ahora también, entre mafias), haciéndose difícil el mantenimiento de una mínima cohesión interna (que sólo se manifiesta cuando se unen contra los payos o se alían para seguir siendo subvencionados), todo lo cual explosiona hacia afuera en una acentuada tensión entre las dos comunidades raciales y sociales que no tiene indicios de terminar pacíficamente, sino todo lo contrario.
El proyecto de construir un Estado Romaní, idealizado por una pretendida “nación gitana”, bajo el nombre de “Romanestán”, actualmente es una entelequia. En un principio, este estado se situaba en alguna parte de Somalia o Sudán, posteriormente al norte de la India y Pakistán (una vuelta a los orígenes), actualmente debería pensarse en la despoblada área euroasiática, en las estepas ocupadas por las etnias exsoviéticas de origen turco-mongol (con permiso de los iranios), un espacio geográfico muy apropiado para su estilo de vida nómada (o semi-sedentaria, pero nunca más parasitaria). Pero este proyecto ideal -seguramente, la mayoría de los ciudadanos europeos mostrarían su conformidad- carece de fuertes mentores políticos y económicos que sí concurrieron en la formación del Estado de Israel. Tampoco existe un suelo que reclamar (aunque sea retrocediento varios milenios como los hebreos), donde los gitanos hubieran tenido una vida organizada socialmente autónoma. Sin embargo, considero que la creación de un estado gitano independiente (pero vigilado y tutelado por la Unión Europea y Rusia) es una necesidad acuciante que deberá plantearse en un futuro inmediato. Está mal decirlo (pensarlo en silencio sería lo correcto), pero los problemas étnicos no se solucionan con expulsiones o discriminaciones, aunque tampoco con integraciones y subvenciones.

[Publicado en "ElManifiesto.com"]