An informed horizontal race.
Previous discussion. Excerpts:
Bolton actually supports my contention that Yockey’s opposition to “vertical race” was due to his concerns about intra-European division…Both biological (“vertical”) and spiritual (“horizontal”) race theory have validity and both should be complementary to the other. One first restricts the ingroup to the biological race, broadly defined, and then within that looks for those people whose behavior and accomplishment exemplify the racial ideal…More broadly, if “Verticalism” implies a top to bottom (vertical) hierarchical ranking of groups based on superiority/inferiority, etc. then that is nonsense and rightly opposed (and criticized, for example, on a “materialist” basis in On Genetic Interests).
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with horizontal race as a political concept, as a guiding principle for racial nationalist politics, as long as it is scientifically informed and scientifically literate. Basing horizontal race on a rejection of scientific materialism is counter-productive nonsense, as is a Boasian rejection of racial heredity. But we must remember that Yockey meant horizontal race as applying to Westerners – who he considered to be the Celtic, Germanic, and Latin peoples of Western (North and South) Europe. We can extend that to include Eastern Europe as well; the point remains that Yockey did not mean to assert that Nigerians or Chinamen should be included as Westerners, with all racial differences flattened out in a horizontal race aspect. True, he used non-materialist language – “Culture Aliens” – to justify the exclusion of such peoples, but the practical end result is the same.
On the broad scale, the scale of continental racial groups, Yockey’s horizontal race, practically applied, tracks well with EGI that is based on biological materialism. True enough, one cannot depend on pure instrumentality to ensure EGI. After all, without a proper theoretical grounding, maladaptive paradigms can come into existence. Thus, it is not enough to trust that future activists will interpret non-materialist horizontal race in the proper manner. One must understand EGI, which is based on genetic kinship. The ability to constructively use horizontal race in the political sense, in a manner that stably preserves EGI, ironically absolutely requires an acceptance of, and understanding of, biological scientific materialism about race, contra Yockey. But, again, assuming that EGI is “baked into the cake” of horizontal race concepts, there really isn’t a problem at the level of continental racial groups that crudely track along with civilizational/cultural divides.
Where things get a bit more problematic is when considering intra-European and intra-Western racial differences. Opponents of horizontal race would argue that at this level, acceptance of Yockey’s ideas means that all Europeans are fungible and differences between these will be erased. But if we include EGI – based on accurate measures of genetic kinship and not testing flim-flam that would tell us that James Watson is 16% Negro, that identical twins have different ancestral percentages, and that 13% of someone’s ancestral components can appear or disappear depending on the company doing the analysis – then this problem is obviated. This is the EGI Firewall I have previously discussed – an important topic. Thus, we have an absolute requirement for at least some fundamental consideration of genetic interests, so that acceptance of horizontal race would by necessity include an acceptance of maintaining intra-European diversity, and the genetic interests that derives from this diversity and its constituent genetic differences. In this way, horizontal race can be safely utilized politically, without fear of damaging genetic interests.
All these caveats aside, we get back to the main point that there is value in Yockey’s basic idea about horizontal race, even if we reject the anti-scientific and anti-materialist mindset that informed much of Yockey’s thinking. In this manner the thinking of Yockey and Salter can be productively linked, to synergistically form a product greater than the sum of its parts. Part of this synthesis is a rejection of the anti-materialist school of “spiritual race.”
But just as we oppose that anti-materialism, we should also oppose politically basing Principle and Identity on non-existent “racial purity” or to depend upon mendacious SJW frauds producing shifting ancestry data that are inaccurate, imprecise, non-reproducible, and based upon subjective choices of parental populations, algorithms, and nomenclature. I admit error; I myself was guilty of such dependence, and that was an example of bad judgment on my part. Instead, the science underlying an informed horizontal race concept should be that of genetic kinship that can be calculated from raw genetic data. All the other nonsense is a waste of time and is more or else politically irrelevant. Ironically enough, extant commercially available ancestry testing may not be scientifically informed and scientifically literate either, given the errors, inconsistently, lack of statistical rigor and reproducibility,
Identity has a variety of components and Yockey’s horizontal race concept incorporates all of them, IF the concept is properly linked to genetic kinship and EGI.
I expect that there will be more discussion of this topic here and at my other blog. This is fundamental for the formation of a scientifically-informed Yockeyian movement.
