Racial cohesion is a result of different factors, important ones being similar physical appearance and behavioural patterns (whose aggregate phenotype is a ‘culture’ or ‘civilization’). The difference in physical appearance between races is obvious and results in implicit negative attitudes towards racial others. Aggregate behavioural differences can also be stark and are a major cause of the displacement of native Whites via ‘White Flight’.

One of the main weapons in the elite arsenal to weaken criticism of race-replacement has been the PC mythology on race: that it doesn’t exist, that differences are only skin deep, that differences are the legacy of White racism, and corrective social programs can equalize achievement. Although researchers have long ago taken the hammer to many of these idols, their worship in the popular press and political class continues. The torrent of data coming from projects like HapMap, however, now portends a coming twilight. Heretical musings bubble up in establishment organs like Slate and the NYT (though orthodoxy still prevails overwhelmingly). Social programs, like No Child Left Behind, continue to fail. The general avoidance or dismissal of heritable differences between human groups by the left (who do the elite’s ideological programming) is becoming less viable as a strategy for suppressing dissident views on race.

The crumbling of the dominant racial mythology and increasing racial tension undermine the legitimacy of Western elites who impose, or fail to prevent, race-replacement. As Whites become increasingly displaced and dispossessed, their discontent weakens the foundations of the current political structure.

What is to be done?

Within the left there is a growing awareness that the strategies that worked in the past are no longer viable. Some, like Peter Singer, have called for the creation of a Darwinian Left. However, the acceptance of inherent differences will be difficult for many to accept, let alone celebrate. A revival of Lamarckism would be a more natural strategy, and today we see the possibility of this happening to at least a limited degree.
In this month’s Quarterly Review of Biology, Eva Jablonka and Gal Raz (both from Tel-Aviv University) have written a review of the evidence for epigenetic inheritance. Epigenetic changes are alterations in phenotype or gene expression that are not the result of changes in DNA sequence, DNA methylation being the best-known example. While epigenetic modifications have now been established to play causative roles in diseases like cancer, it has not been conclusively demonstrated that these changes are heritable in humans. It is not entirely unexpected however, as strong evidence exists for epigenetic inheritance in mice and there is some evidence for it in humans.

A neo-Lamarckian mechanism for inheritance that blurs the distinction between acquired and inherent traits gives new life to the environmental scapegoat that prevents all men from being equal, buying time for those who promise an eventual multiracial utopia. Recently, the epigenetic legacy of slavery has been suggested as a cause for American Negro health problems. But even if the left can, however credibly, continue holding the environment responsible for racial differences, we are still left with these differences. If the races are to be equal, what’s required is a change in phenotype. To paraphrase Marx, scientists have only interpreted the phenotype, the key is to change it.

White Like Me?

Any attempts to change racial phenotypes must deal with the fact that the Western public (let alone the left) is not enthusiastic about genetic engineering. In a 2005 study by the Wellcome Trust, most people surveyed said that they would prefer that gene therapy does not result in genetic changes, especially for non-life threatening conditions. Gene therapy that would be employed to equalize racial phenotypes would ideally not affect the underlying DNA sequence. For this reason, epigenetic therapies would be preferred. The problem with current epigenetic therapies is that they are not specific and often show pleitropic effects. But this may now be changing.

Avon has published a patent for reducing pigmentation using a novel technique for gene therapy. This new technology acts by silencing gene expression and has a number of advantages over current approaches to genetic engineering. It does not require the integration of DNA into the genome (which can be technically difficult and result in tumours), should not alter underlying DNA, dosage can be controlled, and specific genes can be targeted. Once technical issues are solved (like delivery, which appears to have been overcome at least for this skin application), we can expect many new drugs that act by directly altering gene expression.

Could this be the harbinger of an era of genetic communism that seeks to equalize phenotypes between races, thereby reducing resistance to race-replacement? If Whites are largely unwilling to marry non-Whites and accept them as neighbours, maybe a change in phenotype will help suppress their instinctual fear that the propaganda matrix may be telling lies and reduce their anger at being dispossessed, thereby stabilizing the current political system.

(Note that this also has implications for societal relations of a non-ethnic nature, but my focus here is the implications for ethnic politics in the West)

One might object that making non-Whites look and behave more like Whites reduces diversity and devalues the differences that we are supposed to celebrate. All true, but it should be obvious that the left does not value true diversity. They are genetic globalists. And even if many non-Whites will refuse such therapy, there would be enough takers that it would speed along the replacement process. I suspect, though, that there are many non-Whites in the West who, despite what they are told about the value of non-Whiteness, would like nothing more than to blend into society as Whites (or at least stand out less). Some will see it as adaptive. For companies that sell these drugs, it will be big business. Race-replacement enthusiasts in media and academia, who have been able to convince otherwise intelligent people that race does not exist, should have no problems promoting the advantages of such a genetic ‘booster shot’ (and because it is epigenetic, the current line about no inherent differences can be maintained).

Replicants Dreaming of Dolly?

Resistance to race-replacement has increased as the implications of group averages and group dynamics come into sharper focus. Ideally, Whites would reject the multiracialism and genocide being imposed on them and come to some type of arrangement with a new set of elites that work to undo the damage done. But what if current elites can convince Whites that the damage will be undone through scientific advances? Could gene therapy be used to ensure that racial differences are attenuated or disappear, creating a truly dystopic future for those who seek to defend their genetic interests?

Many factors make such a scenario unlikely in the foreseeable future. Complex behavioural traits will not be as amenable to gene therapy as something like pigmentation, where turning down expression of a single gene can achieve the desired effect. Linkage scans and association studies suggest that complex traits like IQ depend on a network of genes. Many phenotypes are also the result of genes being differentially expressed during development. No change in adult gene expression will alter the shape of the nose or skull (though plastic surgery may be able to alter some traits).

Furthermore, changes in gene expression levels cannot compensate for differences in protein sequence (though compromise solutions which do not alter the genome sequence, like artificial chromosomes, may provide more flexibility and still meet required ethical standards). While the current revolution in RNA biology suggest that expression regulation is much more important and ubiquitous than previously thought, there will be practical limits to modifying phenotypes via control of gene expression.

However, despite theoretical and technical difficulties, the Promethean spirit driving Western science virtually guarantees the eventual emergence of therapies allowing varying degrees of mimicry of complex traits. Those Whites who define their identity as a phenotype (e.g. Civilization) will have trouble defending their genetic interests. Our defence must be grounded in the ontological foundations of our racial identity.