from the annals of … duh!

via amren, segregating ethnicities makes for more peaceful coexistence:

“Good Fences: The Importance of Setting Boundaries for Peaceful Coexistence”

“Abstract: We consider the conditions of peace and violence among ethnic groups, testing a theory designed to predict the locations of violence and interventions that can promote peace…. Switzerland is recognized as a country of peace, stability and prosperity. This is surprising because of its linguistic and religious diversity that in other parts of the world lead to conflict and violence. Here we analyze how peaceful stability is maintained. Our analysis shows that peace does not depend on integrated coexistence, but rather on well defined topographical and political boundaries separating groups…. A similar analysis of the area of the former Yugoslavia shows that during widespread ethnic violence existing political boundaries did not coincide with the boundaries of distinct groups, but peace prevailed in specific areas where they did coincide. The success of peace in Switzerland may serve as a model to resolve conflict in other ethnically diverse countries and regions of the world.”

see also:

“Scientists show how to make peace”

“‘Trying to get people to ignore cultural, religious and ethinc differences is often counterproductive. There is an alternative that allows an active role for diversity,’ said Professor Yaneer Bar-Yam, who heads NECSI and is a co-author of the paper. ‘Boundaries that give groups some amount of autonomy can serve to mitigate conflict where people naturally seek to live near others of their own group….

“‘According to the theory, well mixed or well separated groups don’t engage in violence. Groups of a particular size next to each other interfere with each other leading to conflict and violence.”

(note: comments do not require an email. good fences make good neighbors…)

7 Comments

  1. This will probably become a new academic endeavor, unwittingly proving the efficacy of segregation.
    I mean, it’s not as if they have any successful examples to refer to, only almost every human society on earth for all of recorded history, as well as every animal species you can think of.

    Reply

  2. @caleo – “I mean, it’s not as if they have any successful examples to refer to, only almost every human society on earth for all of recorded history, as well as every animal species you can think of.”

    heh! exactly!

    Reply

  3. the tragic thing – and it is going to be unbelievably bloody without the sedative of mass prosperity – is people already knew all this. people have known for thousands of years.

    this distortion of western culture came about as a deliberate act of conscious cultural warfare begun in the 1920s aimed at changing American immigration laws. all the blood that follows will derive from that.

    Reply

  4. @g.w. – “this distortion of western culture came about as a deliberate act of conscious cultural warfare begun in the 1920s aimed at changing American immigration laws.”

    yes. the changes were definitely deliberate.

    the thing i have found curious for a long time is why we westerners bought it at all (all the pc stuff, i mean). almost no one else on the planet does. a lot of them pay lip-service to pc ideas sure, but they don’t seem to really believe it. i mean, do the arabs believe in all this cr*p? obviously not!

    people (humans) are stupid and will believe en masse any d*mn thing — think all the witch trials and burnings or tulip mania or whatever. but most peoples don’t seem to adopt self-destructive ideas — at least i’m hard-pressed to think of other examples. maybe there are others out there, i dunno.

    pc ideas have only found fertile ground in our universalistic, individualistic society. and, as you know, i think i know how we got that.

    @g.w. – “the sedative of mass prosperity”

    sedative. well put!

    Reply

  5. “i think i know how we got that.”

    yes i agree. tight-knit groups don’t need it. their morality box is filled with genetic morality: “us is us and them is prey” or “If it’s good for us then It’s good. if it’s bad for us then it’s bad.”

    not only don’t they need it i don’t think they can even understand it properly because the genetic morality is dominant in them. they can learn to emulate it and even manipulate it but it doesn’t come naturally.

    if a population steps outside of those natural bounds they enter a biological void and *need* to develop an alternate mechanism for generating a unifying group morality to provide the cohesion that would otherwise come from blood-ties. that glue by neccessity has to be cultural and that need for a cultural glue leads to a weakness to cultural assault.

    It’s ironic that the capability for massively large-scale cooperation which i believe also comes from the outbreeding, and which made the outbred nations so incredibly strong in material terms, also led to this soft weakness. It’s like the film “Independence Day.”

    this also shows that it’s absolutely vital for outbred populations to maintain complete control over the means of production of their culture. other nations heading towards western levels of outbreeding should take note vis a vis their media and academia.

    Reply

  6. @g.w. – “that glue by neccessity has to be cultural and that need for a cultural glue leads to a weakness to cultural assault.”

    one of the main reasons i want to keep pursuing the line of thinking that i’m (we’re) on here on this blog is that, if the theory is correct — if by loosening the genetic ties too much you wind up with a society full of completely “atomized” individuals no longer working as a natural (i.e. genetic or biological) society — i want to work out what, then, will it take to get whites (’cause that’s pretty much who we’re talking about, of course) to stand up against the destruction they’re facing?

    i mean, what exactly sort of ideological call is required here? it can’t be the typical sort of call that’s used by most peoples, because we’re not like most peoples. what sort of ideology will bring about unity? is it even possible at this stage? i dunno. admittedly, i’m the last one to ask about ideology since i’m not really prone to it.

    like many, i’m pretty sure that when things get bad enough (a situation that i am not looking forward to) — bad economic times, i’m thinking — whites will start to wake up out of sheer necessity. hopefully it’s not too late then. and hopefully it doesn’t get too ugly. i don’t want any peoples to get hurt out of all this (i’m such a girl!).

    i think europeans — especially some of the less outbred groups — are going to wake up first. some of them already are. i just hope things don’t get too bloody (makes me depressed ’cause i know that that’s wishful thinking on my part). =/

    Reply

  7. @g.w. – “this also shows that it’s absolutely vital for outbred populations to maintain complete control over the means of production of their culture. other nations heading towards western levels of outbreeding should take note vis a vis their media and academia.”

    well, we already missed that train, didn’t we? =/

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s