by Professor Revilo P. Oliver
The epidemic of Immunity Deficiency,(1) now in its early stages, incidentally directs our attention to a primary problem in biological evolution.
The dread and deadly disease was first identified in 1981, appropriately enough in the multiracial cesspools of Los Angeles and San Francisco. It is known that it originated among the niggers of the Congo some years earlier, and if it is not a coincidence that it closely followed the idiocy of "anti-colonialism," it is a nice irony that American boobs brought the disaster on themselves.
The invariably lethal infection is caused by an extremely minute virus that is now believed to have first appeared, by some process of mutation, in one or more species of Central African monkeys, to whom it is harmless. It is assumed that the virus was transmitted from the monkeys to Congoids and, perhaps by a further mutation, became epidemic in what is next to the lowest extant species of human beings.(2) No one seems to have considered the alternative explanation, that the virus was transmitted from niggers to monkeys.(3) However that may be, White homosexuals, so depraved that they were without "racial prejudices," carried the disease from the Blacks to the White races. From that point, everything is clear.
Now, as everyone, except persons whose minds have been congealed by epidemic superstitions, well knows, the development and evolution of organic life on earth has been determined by two processes, the gradual process of natural selection and the sudden appearance of mutations, which may be caused by some reaction between organic compounds and some form of cosmic radiation. The mutations may take place in the deoxyribonucleic acid that determines the character of the higher organisms, or a mutation in a kind of virus may indirectly affect the evolution of the organic species by eliminating or altering the character of the species it infects.
The process of natural selection was discerned by the best minds of Classical Antiquity, as is generally known from the great poem by Lucretius, who, in the last part of Book V, observes that the force that created life from inorganic matter must have produced many species that became extinct, because, by the inexorable law of nature, only the fittest survive, and that the extant species of animals (including the human species) survived because they were able to cope with the competing species in their habitat, preying upon some and defending themselves from others. In the modern world, the law of the survival of the fittest was formulated by the great Charles Darwin in his "Origin of Species" in 1859. The biological effect of genetic mutation was first expounded by Hugo de Vries in "The Mutation Theory" (1901-1903). A virus was first isolated and studied by William M. Stanley in 1935.
Historians try to trace the development of human knowledge in the civilization created by our race, and I write this note to call their attention to a work that should have suggested some anticipation of the mutation virus, although it was written long before the discovery of mutations and virus. So far as my necessarily limited knowledge extends, this work has been totally forgotten for more than a century and has escaped the notice of all historians of science.
In 1869 Charles Angalda, Professor of Pathology in the University of Montpellier in southern France, published at Paris an impressive tome of 648 pages: "Etude sur les maladies eteintes et les maladies nouvelles pour servir a l'histoire des evolutions seculaires de la pathologie." He was, to the best of my knowledge, the first to perceive that Darwin's biological evolution should be extended to the minute and still imperceptible organisms that caused disease in the complex forms of life.,
He based his conclusions on a critically analytical study of the terrible epidemics which, generated in the multiracial fetor of Asia, swept through Europe and destroyed a large part of the Aryan population. The best known of these are the fearful epidemic of which the outbreak at Athens in 430 B.C. was described by Thucydides (and Lucretius); the great epidemic in the time of Atonines that hastened the decline of the Roman Empire and may have triggered the outbreak of Christianity; and the Black death, which reached Europe in 1334.
Angalda proved that the first of these plagues eventually became extinct as the survivors developed some resistance to it. We would say that their immunity systems were, or became, able to cope with the infection. He also proved that the Black Death was a new disease which appeared in the world for the first time some years before it was transmitted to Europe, and that it must have been in some way generated in a district of the Orient, whence it spread by rapid contagion. We would now say that the virus underwent mutation.
I do think that Angalda deserves credit for having anticipated, so far as he could with the data available to him,(4) identification of one of the crucial factors in biological evolution.
(1) Is it not time that the awkward and misleading acronym "AIDS" be replaced by a specific medical term? Acronyms are always objectionable, and this one is incorrect, since Immunity Deficiency is not a syndrome but is a specific and terrible disease. Why not call it "aphylactosis"?
(2) The distinction of being absolutely the lowest extant species called human must be reserved for the Australoids, over whom Australians, made feeble-minded by Jewish propaganda and implanted superstitions, are now waxing sentimental.
(3) It is assumed that the monkeys transmitted the virus to Congoids by biting them, but it is also possible that the monkeys ingested infected blood from the bites. Since the virus is harmless to the monkeys, it could have spread rapidly through a species in a given area.
(4) Incidentally, a modern reader may be astonished that Angalda considers what is now called the psychosomatic factor as possibly contributing to resistance to some infections. He quotes as his source A. Schoencke's "De peste Periclis Athenienses Affligente," Lipsiae, 1821.