golden dawn

so, they got 6.97% of the vote in yesterday’s election in greece.


they got the most votes in a couple of regions in and around athens: korinthias (12.0%), argolidos (9.9%) and attikis (9.7%). they also got a lot of votes further south on the peloponnese peninsula in lakonias (10.2%) and up north in kilkis (8.2%) which is not too far to the north of thessalonika. here’s a map – the darker the shading, the more golden dawn votes:

here’s another map. which is prolly kinda out of date since it’s based on the 2001 greek census, but it was the only one i could find showing the percentages of non-eu immigrants in the various regions (municipalities) of greece (click on maps for LARGER views):

and here’s one for eu immigrants living in greece, also in 2001:

looks like the peloponnesians are tired of all the non-eu immigrants, and that other greeks up north are tired of eu immigrants. not sure who those might be. romanians? bulgarians? dunno.

the peasants are revolting.

(note: comments do not require an email. revolting peasants.)


“Wanderlust: Iceland, where everyone’s related to Bjork”

“Genealogical website helps couples avoid incest, and of course, to see if Bjork is a cousin.

“The television commercial for a local mobile phone company here wouldn’t work in many places outside Iceland.

“It portrays a curly-haired couple who just woke up next to each other after what appears to be a one-night stand. (That isn’t the scandalous part in this famously liberal society.)

“The two are pictured lingering in bed, on their smart phones, checking out a genealogical website called Íslendingabók. Their smiles freeze when they find out they are related. Closely.

“While other nations might find the commercial funny — mainly for its ‘as if’ value — Icelanders can relate on levels unimaginable in larger countries. The commercial works here because, in this isolated island country of 300,000 people, these situations actually happen. Regularly….”


(note: comments do not require an email. good times in iceland!)

sperm donation and possible inbreeding – oops!

from the nyt (ghengis khan, move over!):

“One Sperm Donor, 150 Offspring”

“Cynthia Daily and her partner used a sperm donor to conceive a baby seven years ago, and they hoped that one day their son would get to know some of his half siblings — an extended family of sorts for modern times.

“So Ms. Daily searched a Web-based registry for other children fathered by the same donor and helped to create an online group to track them. Over the years, she watched the number of children in her son’s group grow.

“And grow.

“Today there are 150 children, all conceived with sperm from one donor, in this group of half siblings, and more are on the way. ‘It’s wild when we see them all together — they all look alike,’ said Ms. Daily, 48, a social worker in the Washington area who sometimes vacations with other families in her son’s group.

“As more women choose to have babies on their own, and the number of children born through artificial insemination increases, outsize groups of donor siblings are starting to appear. While Ms. Daily’s group is among the largest, many others comprising 50 or more half siblings are cropping up on Web sites and in chat groups, where sperm donors are tagged with unique identifying numbers.

“Now, there is growing concern among parents, donors and medical experts about potential negative consequences of having so many children fathered by the same donors, including the possibility that genes for rare diseases could be spread more widely through the population. Some experts are even calling attention to the increased odds of accidental incest between half sisters and half brothers, who often live close to one another.

oops! i wonder what the odds are for such accidental incest between half-siblings living in the same area? the calculation shouldn’t just be a numerical one (x number of half-siblings divided by the total population, or however the h*ck you’d do the math). no, you’d also need to factor in the fact that siblings would more likely be drawn to similar interests and, therefore, might be even more likely to meet: they both might wind up in the same discipline at the same local university or both wind up taking guitar lessons or whatever.

and when they do meet, there are good chances that they’d be — as they’d prolly experience it — inexplicably attracted to each other in the strongest possible way:

“Fast-forward then to 20 years later when another young man and woman, this time James and Maura [half-siblings that never knew each other], meet in eerily similar circumstances.

“Both of them happen to be out socialising with friends in a town which neither of them is from. They are instantly smitten. So strong is their incredible mutual attraction for one another, that a week later both of them feel they have known each other for a lifetime.

that’s because they share a great number of genes with one another.

normally, when children are raised together (and they have to actually have physical contact with one another as children, i.e. play together) between the ages of 0-6, a kind of imprinting happens which typically makes them NOT sexually attracted to each other when they grow up — i.e. the westermarck effect. siblings or half-siblings raised apart miss out on this imprinting, so if they meet each other as adults, they often experience this “incredible mutal attraction.”

the couple in the story above, james and maura, actually married and have had a couple of kids together. i don’t think this is a problem. even though we have a taboo against siblings mating, it’s really not morally despicable for siblings to mate if you think about it. as a society, we wouldn’t want it to happen all of the time on a regular basis — too much inbreeding, not good. but occasionally? i’ll give ’em a pass — especially in these accidental cases.

i would recommend such a couple to have some genetic screening done first, tho, before having kids, just to be safe. half-siblings are, obviously, not as related to one another as full-siblings; but, rather, to the same degree as an uncle-niece/aunt-nephew. iow, more than first-cousins. (the same as double first-cousins, tho, which is a common form of cousin marriage in places like saudi arabia.)

the question remains, however, what does all this sperm donation mean for our society? what does it mean when one man fathers 150+ children? well, it’s really just a form of polygamy in a way, isn’t it? or, at least, it kinda-sorta has a similar side-effect — a greater number of individuals who are related to one another as half-siblings.

what if this were done on a huge scale? what would the effects be? i’m not sure. if you did it repeatedly over many generations, i guess you’d eventually wind up with some sort of clannish or tribal society. maybe more clannish than tribal (you’d need some focused inbreeding for that, i think) — but only if everybody stayed put in the areas in which they were raised.

if you — and this is obviously only an extremely hypothetical situation that would never happen in reality — if you made sure to move everybody, or maybe half the population, around every generation, shuffled them up, i guess you’d get a more cohesive society than we have today, for instance, because everybody would be more related, but we’d avoid the effects of clannishness from too much local inbreeding. you would’ve narrowed the gene pool by making almost everyone in society the descendants of, say, 1M men as opposed to 87M men. what you’d do with the 86M men who didn’t get to breed?…i dunno.

oh! i guess you could just arrange it so that all women had to have one child via a sperm donor but the rest she could have with her husband! that would narrow the gene pool, too. man, my skills are wasted. i’d be GREAT at this cultural revolution stuff! (those are all copies of “the selfish gene” that my followers are displaying.) (~_^)

if the idea that too much outbreeding has lead to too loose genetic ties in the west and, consequently, to the fragmentation of the west is correct — maybe more sperm donation (or polygamy) for a while is just what the doctor ordered! you wouldn’t want to do it forever, tho, ’cause then you’d just be left with some messed up tribal society or something.

(note: comments do not require an email. every sperm is sacred!)

“and gentlemen in england now abed…”

“…shall think themselves accurs’d they were not here,
and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks
that fought with us upon saint crispin’s day.”

and those that were there for the fight should’ve been glad that they weren’t wearing heavy armor like the french!:

“Why the French lost the Battle of Agincourt: Heavy armour made troops too exhausted to fight”

“As they [the French] advanced across the fields of sticky mud, trampled down by the sheer volume of numbers, their breathing was restricted and tiredness kicked in quickly.

“Their burden was much greater than the modern soldiers’ backpack leading experts to believe that the armour played a decisive role in the 1415 battle….

“The findings, published today in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B, showed that the net energy cost of walking was 2.1 to 2.3 times higher when wearing armour than when not wearing armour while running incurred a 1.9 times higher energy cost.

“Post-Second World War soldiers can carry a similar weight but, unlike a backpack, armour with interlocking steel plates may have played a part.

“Dr Graham Askew, lead researcher from the University of Leeds, said: ‘We found that carrying this kind of load spread across the body requires a lot more energy than carrying the same weight in a backpack.

“‘This is because, in a suit of armour, the limbs are loaded with weight, which means it takes more effort to swing them with each stride.

“‘If you’re wearing a backpack, the weight is all in one place and swinging the limbs is easier.’ The energy costs associated with wearing armour were higher than those predicted by experiments in which loads are added to different parts of the body….”

previously: medieval military organization

(note: comments do not require an email. ni!)

more missing girls?


Millions Fewer Girls Born Due to Nuclear Radiation?

“‘Unexpected’ findings suggest bomb tests, plant accidents boosted male births.

“Nuclear radiation from bomb tests and power plant accidents causes slightly more boys than girls to be born, a new study suggests. While effects were seen to be regional for incidents on the ground, like Chernobyl, atmospheric blasts were found to affect birth rates on a global scale.

“The result: Millions fewer females have been born worldwide than would otherwise be expected, researchers estimate….”

not so good.

edit: research article available online: The human sex odds at birth after the atmospheric atomic bomb tests, after Chernobyl, and in the vicinity of nuclear facilities

previously: india and china’s missing girls

(note: comments do not require an email. or … omg! … it’s full of bubbles! wait. wha?)

oh, those wacky germanic peoples!

first the germans (from late last year: “Why 13 percent of Germans would welcome a ‘Führer’“), and now the swedes:

Many young Swedes favour dictatorship

“Over 25 percent young Swedes think that it would be ‘good or very good’ for Sweden to be less democratic and ruled by a strong and dictatorial leader, according to a new study….

“According to the survey, 26 percent of 18-29-year-olds thought that it would be good or very good if a ‘strong leader who didn’t have to care about a Riksdag or an election’ ruled Sweden….”

i’m not big into dictators or “strong leaders” myself, but if democracy hasn’t been that good to you … i mean, if tptb have been busy electing a new people … well, i can understand where the sentiment might be coming from.

btw, the survey was apparently part of the world values survey thingie, but i couldn’t find any new data posted on their website. (*hbdchick shrugs shoulders*)

fyi: germanic peoples.

update: actually, maybe i should’ve entitled the post “oh, those wacky slavs!”

going by the LAST round of world values survey surveys (i.e. not the one referred to the the article about the sveeedes above), it was the slavs who most longed for a strong leader. the mediterranean nations did pretty well, actually (if democracy is your thing, that is) — slightly fewer 15-29 year old italians wanted a strong leader as compared to their german peers. and the young spaniards ranked in between the finns and the french. (greece was not included in the survey, unfortunately.)

but just look at the slavs! 76% of young romanians thought (in 2005 anyway) 69.7% of young ukrainians thought (in 2006 anyway) that a strong leader would be a good idea, i.e. someone who “does not have to bother with parliament and elections.” whoa. (click on charts for a LARGER view. got ’em ranked from lowest to highest.)

the last survey of sweden was in 2006 and at that time 15.7% of respondents aged 15-29 thought a strong leader was a good idea. and now it’s up to 26%? five years later? the times they are a’ changin’….

oh, and the swiss — they luv their democracy! (^_^)

Selected countries/samples: Andorra [2005], Bulgaria [2006], Cyprus [2006], Finland [2005], France [2006], Germany [2006], Great Britain [2006], Italy [2005], Moldova [2006], Netherlands [2006], Norway [2007], Poland [2005], Romania [2005], Russian Federation [2006], Serbia [2006], Slovenia [2005], Spain [2007], Sweden [2006], Switzerland [2007], Ukraine [2006]

previously: slavic values?

(note: comments do not require an email. or a voter’s registration card.)

tribalism on the innerwebs

well, the recent “revolutions” may have been facilitated by fb and twitter, but tptb in saudi arabia are concerned that the internet is facilitating tribalism. and they don’t like it. not one little bit:

Internet reviving tribalism in youth

One would have thought that after nearly 80 years of Saudi Arabian national unity, fervent tribal sentiments would have started to wane as a consequence of a growing national consciousness. [well, not if u keep marrying ur cousins @ a rate of 50%+ – hbd chick.] This might have been the case except for the advent of the Internet and satellite television which have provided platforms for tribal inflamed rhetoric and, sometimes, zealotry. Saudi tribesmen, especially the younger generation, are rediscovering their tribal identities. Arabian tribal ties are maintained through bloodlines which often create a very strong generational consciousness.

From time immemorial, the inhabitants of the Arabian Peninsula have been organized on the basis of tribal and clan kinships, with traditions and customs handed down from one generation to another. With the absence of a real and larger nationhood, prior to the foundation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, this tribal organization was the normal state of affairs for a very long time. It would thus be unrealistic to anticipate the total demise of such tribal sentiments at any time in the near future. [yes. yes it would. particularly if ya’ll keep inbreeding.]

In the last few years, with the arrival of the Internet, individual tribes and tribal clans have started to develop websites so that their members can meet in cyberspace to advertise and document their social events, remember their past, post their poetry, share photographs, and chat with one another. The Internet has been used as an effective means for tribal members to share their rich legacy of memories, express their desire to continue to live together and perpetuate the value of the heritage that they have inherited from their ancestors. All of which is perfectly fine.

The danger, however, arises when these tribal websites are abused by some zealous members to brag in chat rooms about tribal ancestry and past presumed ‘glories’. If one is not careful, these websites can turn into tools for intertribal rivalry and competition, similar to what had been the case with some satellite television stations. This can create a socio-psychological rift between members of the Kingdom’s different tribes and clans, and between them and other citizens of the country, resulting in a setback to years of bridging historical differences between different tribes, and threatening the national fabric of our society.

Tribal websites often have clear and valuable objectives which can unite members of the same tribe or clan, but they must avoid inflamed rhetoric and the demeaning of others.

previously: genetic similarity theory in play on MyFace and cousin marriage conundrum addendum

(note: comments do not require an email.)