by Robert Frenz
25 November 2000
The process of reproduction requires hardly a shred of talent or intelligence. First there is the brainless erection followed by the search for an available orifice – usually by trial and error. This is why so many end up engaging sheep, llama, heifers, and even orifices not equipped for reproduction. If finding an orifice was an intellectual feat, then there wouldn't be so many perversions of such a simple act. Once the orifice is stuffed, a transient burst of "whoopee" follows and it isn't long before Mr. Sperm finds someplace to bury his head. Junior is on his way.
Inbreeding is the breeding of that which is biologically similar. The paramount example of inbreeding would be between a lifeform and itself. As far as mammals are concerned, the closet biological combinations are brothers and sisters. I shall refrain from any discussion of incest, or forbidden marriages, as they are rooted in tradition and religious taboos. Also, I have no interest in the insupportable "we are not animals" poppycock.
Outbreeding is the breeding of that which is biologically dissimilar. (Recently, the word twisters have tried to make this a variation of inbreeding – as from klan to klan or from one lion pride to another.) This means spanning the kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species thingumajig.
Let's start with the Aryan – a blond, blue-eyed, white-skinned entity. I am not aware of any crossing of this type with monkeys or apes which would represent a jump across the genus lines. I understand that in several museums there are rare specimens of crosses between and apes and Black men. There are crosses over the species line – in fact, there are hundreds of examples of which I have mentioned in earlier essays – and some of these crosses in the human arena are often referred to as mulattos, sambos and mestizos. Whether yes or no, let's, for the sake of argument, say that the most extreme example of outbreeding is between the White and the Black.
Over the ages, there are those who favor inbreeding and those who favor outbreeding. Inbreeding, we are told, produces idiots and freaks of nature. Outbreeding, we are also told, produces exceptional specimens of humanity carrying desirable traits uncounted. Race-mixing – actually species-mixing – in the current vernacular, is the extreme form of outbreeding.
Breeding this with that never produces anything which wasn't there in the first place. You cannot produce scales, feathers, venom glands or beaks from any combination of human genes. Before I continue with an explanation of the topic, let's survey only a few of the examples of inbreeding.
In the plant world, self-pollination (the extreme case of inbreeding, what?) is quite frequent and is the rule in wheat, oats, blue violets, garden beans, and most orchids, yet we fail to find any freaks or misfits as a result.
The African reedbuck usually brings forth two offspring, one male and one female – a brother a sister which mate and continual the cycle. This is true among the red deer and most of the other smaller antelope. The result of such terrible "incest" is more healthy, alert, and beautiful animals.
The ponies of Shetland, the cattle of Guernsey and Jersey, the goats of Angora – all have been inbred for centuries without deleterious effects. Most male monkeys mate with their daughters and sisters, and continue with this until driven out by a son or brother who then continues the family tradition.
All of the rabbits of Australia, the pigs of New Zealand and the cattle of South America – all offspring of a few individuals. If the "inbreeding is horrible" crowd were correct, we'd be submerged in critters all physically defective to marked degrees. From the Clysdale horse to the Austrian Kladrub, we see that the finest specimens have always resulted from close inbreeding.
Professor Castle has inbred the Drosophila (fruit fly) for 59 generations without an observable diminution in their appearance or vigor. Inbreeding of laboratory rats has never complimented the predictions of those who advise outbreeding.
Millennia ago, the Greeks, Romans, Angles and Teutons were huge, statuesque people. The soldiers of the earlier legions had an average height of 6 foot 4.
Let's examine the monarchs of the 'glorious' XVIIIth Dynasty.
Ahmose I was the grandson of Tetishera and her brother, and the son of Aahotep and her brother. Thus he was the result of two incestuous unions which, in all probability, were from other such unions.
Ahmose I first crushed the Hyksos power and brought forth a new state out of the chaos. His greatest contribution was the Dynasty itself.
Ahmose married his sister, Nefertari, and by her had a son, Amenhotep I. He was also a great conqueror and married his sister, Aahotep II, by whom he had a daughter, Aahmes. This daughter's portraits adorn the walls of the temple of Deir-el-Bahari and her beauty and fine features have never been disputed.
Aahmes II married her half-brother, Thutmose I. They had a brilliant daughter, Hatshepsut, who married her half-brother Thutmose II.
This intermarriage between brother and sister continued through the earlier dynasties. It is neither desirable nor possible to deny that the majority of these rulers were debauches. But that they were degenerates, in the sense of being biologically or psychologically below normal, is false. Cleopatra was the last reigning member of that family. Since that time, Egypt was governed by foreign rulers imposed by conquest. Egypt had endured for over four thousand years, and, through the INCREASING MISCEGENATION – race-mixing – of her people (outbreeding, in case you have to be reminded), her institutions were tottering. The children from these incestuous marriages were equally strong, handsome, capable, intelligent and sadly so, wicked, especially the Ptolemies.
Old Egypt collapsed. Today it is little more than a pottage of relatively useless mongrels all displaying the blood contamination which led to that collapse. The later Pharaohs showed the distinct lip fullness, and hair kink, of the Negro component.
From Abraham and Lot, the Bible relates incestuous marriages. The great King David was the result of a union between Lot and one of his daughters. This did not cease with Lot and his daughters, but lasted far beyond the days of Moses and Aaron – both the fruit of incest.
Only the unsound, self-despising, have the instinct to marry outside of their kind. (I am personally acquainted with two of the most promiscuous women I know. Both are the blue-eyed blond type and have always chosen as partners men with the same attributes. One said to me, "I may be loose but you'll never find me in bed with a nigger, chink or jew." These woman simply cannot be classified as degenerate.) Accordingly, we may always safely assume that crimes forbidden by law are crimes which many men have a propensity to commit. Segregation is the normal state of things as condensed in "Birds of a feather flock together." People who see value in race-mixing are a danger to any healthy society of either race. This, in part, explains why each woman and man, from a failed marriage, usually seeks a spouse more degenerate than the first. A failed marriage always registers, foremost, as a failure bringing with it a parcel of self contempt which is proven to the extent that the partner is blamed.
Many of the recently modern Royal marriages have produced physically ugly and repulsive specimens with either a warped or feeble mind. Most of these marriages were for purposes of alliance where the participants had no choice but to marry what was presented. For instance – for reasons of state Louis XIV of France sacrificed his first love, the healthy and brilliant Marie Mancini, for an ugly, rather stupid and unhealthy woman from Spain, the Infanta Maria Theresa.
I use the term degeneracy to mean a deterioration of the biological and mental soundness of a person. With this deterioration comes ugliness. Continued outbreeding only tends to HIDE inherent defects, not to exterminate them, and inbreeding only tends to BRING THEM TO THE SURFACE. Wings don't just pop up on a snake. No attribute ever appears which was not hidden somewhere deep in the genetic makeup. Our policy of continually drawing 50 percent of the blood of our healthy stocks into the contaminated pool from which each new generation springs, is not and cannot be successful, seeing that DEGENERACY IS SHOWING NO SIGNS OF ABATING BUT RATHER THE REVERSE.
We are therefore living in a fools' paradise.
Nearsightedness, an inherited and recessive defect, is rapidly on the increase. Resistance to disease is on the decrease. Average intelligence, by whatever measured method, is on the decrease. Ugliness is on the increase, both physical and behavior-wise. When health goes, so does beauty.
Race-mixing is the sine qua non for the most extreme impetus to degeneration. Most civilizations ultimately yield to this superior adversary and only societies, such as Japan, with their essentially inbred population, will survive to retain their place on the world stage.
Although it is still too early to count 10 in the bout of White people against their enemies, the projections are not good. Degeneration manifests itself in the unwillingness to safeguard the future generations and each step of descent reduces the probability of ever returning to the previous heights. Only the fool thinks that technology will spare a people from what is essentially a biologically problem. There is a limit to the protection, and health care, which can be afforded the idiots and decrepit.
The great unknown remains – that silent multitude of White people who still provide the backbone for the western countries in Europe, the Americas and Australia.
Remain true to your kind and think long and deep, before you mate.