Main Page - Latest News

Does white guilt run in the family?


Exclusive to the CofCC (Originally published in our newspaper, the Citizens Informer)
by Kyle Bristow

Scientist James Fowler claims to have discovered “the liberal gene,” which is purportedly a variant of the gene designated as DRD4. After interviewing 2,000 subjects, Fowler’s team of researchers discovered that those who had larger social networks of acquaintances tended to have a unique version of the DRD4 gene. Through the assumption that liberal-minded individuals tend to have larger social networks due to their open-mindedness and tolerance for dissimilar lifestyles, the scientists were able to posit that the DRD4 gene in question could induce one to be liberal.

The National Science Foundation funded Fowler’s research, and the research was focused on the correlation between genes and dopamine production. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter that affects one’s emotions, among other processes of the brain. Research that had been done prior to Fowler’s study revealed that there is a correlation between “novelty-seeking behavior” and a variant of the DRD4 gene, and scientists believe that “novelty-seeking behavior” is a personality trait that is central to the ideology of liberalism.

According to Fowler in an interview with FOX News, he stated that “Ideology is about forty percent heritable.” He went on to suggest that one who is not blessed with having the liberal gene is not all that bad, because “If it made sense for us all to be liberal, natural selection would have made us all liberal.”

The conclusion of Fowler’s study was not the first time that scientists suggested that a correlation exists between genetics and politics. Nicholas Rule, for example, conducted an experiment at Tufts University to assess whether a correlation exists between a person’s phenotype—their physical appearance, which is determined by their genes—and a person’s political views.

To conduct his experiment, Rule had volunteers look at grayscale photographs of strangers and guess whether they were liberal or conservative. Amazingly, nearly sixty percent of the time they guessed correctly, which is a statistic too high to happen by mere chance.

To investigate things further, Rule used yearbook photos of members of College Republicans and College Democrats at other schools and had his volunteers rate them for qualities of power and warmth. When Rule correlated the ratings of each person with that individual’s political views, he realized that those who are viewed as exerting power overwhelmingly tend to be conservative, whereas those who are viewed as exerting warmth overwhelmingly tend to be liberal.

The aforementioned studies show that genetics plays a significant role in forming a person’s political views, and the results of these studies raise very interesting questions: If liberalism is the ideology of the “suicide of the West” as James Burnham argued in his magnum opus, then how could natural selection permit the liberal gene to exist if one who has it is racially suicidal? How and when was the liberal gene introduced to the White population?

If liberalism is permitted to exist by natural selection, then there must be some sort of evolutionary advantage for it. But what could this be? Liberalism promotes sexual perversion—especially homosexuality and miscegenation—, which debases the White race. Neither homosexuals nor interracial couples, after all, produce White children. Liberals also statistically have fewer children than do conservatives, which would prevent the liberal gene from gaining ground in the gene pool. The liberal gene, therefore, makes about as much sense as a lamb having a gene that predisposes it to being tolerant of and friendly towards wolves—it is downright suicidal and genocidal of one’s own people.

Scientists may have found the liberal gene, but it will take them many more years to figure out how it entered the White population. This is, because historically Whites practiced eugenics to prevent people who exerted “warmth”—to use the euphemism the researcher used for the antonym of power, which is weakness—from coming into existence. Throughout history Western cultures killed off the male offspring of their people who were deemed pathetic and unmanly. Being that the Greeks, Germanics, and Norse all prevented those who exerted “warmth” from living to reproduce, the origin of the liberal gene is an utter mystery—there is no evolutionary basis for it whatsoever, and this is supported by the fact that the creed that is liberalism is an affront to the spirit of Western Man, which is Faustian Dynamism and the will-to-power. Western Man does not have a will-to-warmth, after all!

The existence of a liberal gene raises many interesting political and legal questions. For example, will liberals come around to opposing abortion when right-wingers begin to use prenatal genetic testing to determine whether their unborn baby has “the liberal gene”? If a person lacks the liberal gene and commits a so-called “hate crime,” could that person raise the defense of insanity on the basis that their biological makeup induced them to think and act a certain way? If being liberal is an immutable characteristic—i.e., “They are born that way”—then can and should laws be passed to prohibit discrimination against them?

The discovery of the liberal gene raises many questions and ethical issues now lurk on the horizon, but for me, I am just happy that I was born healthy and normal and without a certain variant of the DRD4 gene.

Kyle Bristow is a second-year law student at the University of Toledo and the author of White Apocalypse, which is available for purchase from Amazon.com.