You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] Commie_Meta ago 

Race mixing creates inferiority, corrupted bloodlines, and severe lifestyle defects like intelligence, eyesight, hair loss, immune system, life expectancy etc.

Only when the other race possesses those traits. Or are you saying that an Aryan-Japanese cross would usually give offspring worse than either race?

0
0

[–] LobYonder ago 

0
0

[–] Commie_Meta ago 

This does not apply to humans. We are all descended from about 2,000 people who lived 50,000 years ago. That is so few individuals that there was a big chance of extinction just from the numbers.

Each of the human races shares most of their mutations because of this. What differs is just the frequency of the mutations. If you could slice and dice the African DNA and put it back together, you could make a Caucasian. You could turn Eskimos into Arabs with a few centuries of selective breeding.

An example of actual outbreeding depression is the mule, produced by mating a horse with a donkey. Most mules are infertile, an evolutionary dead end.

0
0

[–] 18151349? ago 

Yes, definitely. It's an impossibility to create superiority out of race mixing. At best, as witnessed in animal breeding, you can breed towards a specific trait (like raw power, speed, intelligence etc.), but just like with animals it will always come with massive side effects like a reduced lifetime, an immune system prone to failure, certain diseases etc. So Aryan-Japanese cannot create a better Aryan or a better Japanese, they can also not create something that is exactly on par (because that is logically impossible), what they can do is create something that is slightly inferior to each of them, which also comes with an added extra burden of identity loss. The only way you can breed superiority is by mixing healthy bloodlines from the same race, and these healthy bloodlines can only exist when they are protected by a strong racial community. Blood and race together create a collective out of which individuality is born, which manifests by how the individual uses his skills to help the collective aka living in accordance to the laws of nature, by using your given skills to help the collective, which helps the environment, which helps the ecosystem, which at the end will benefit the individual.

0
0

[–] Commie_Meta ago 

That is incorrect. Cross-breeding between compatible sub-species often improves some traits. This is especially true for species that do not have much genetic variation, like humans and dogs. Most traits are created by many genes, so cross-breeding two groups produces a new group whose characteristics are the average of the ancestral group. Animal breeders do this regularly to improve the breeds.

Cross-breeding will usually strengthen the immune system. It evolves very quickly, so cross-breeding lets you pick up new genes quickly.

Cross-breeding can cause problems when the two sub-species are too different. For example, crossing horses with donkeys produces mules, which are generally infertile. This does not apply to humans. We are a fairly inbred species. We are all descended from only 2,000 ancestors who lived about 50,000 years ago. For the most part, every human race shares the same common pool of mutations. The only difference is the relative proportion of mutations. You could turn Japanese into Australian aborigines at the genetic level with a few centuries of selective breeding.