By Dave Yorkshire. Communists, liberals and other assorted leftists are always quick to point to man’s origins as laying in Africa, as though this means we are all really Africans who ‘emigrated’ to other climes, which in turn somehow legitimates the vast influxes of colonisers from that particular continent in the present.
One can easily see how flawed their reasoning is. Even if this were so, the fact we have physically and mentally adapted to different conditions and evolved different, or rather disparate, cultures according to the new racially stimulated ideas of aesthetics means that racially disparate peoples are nigh impossible to integrate into our society.
However, it now appears the much-vaunted ‘out of Africa’ theory itself has been exploded.
Evidence that humans existed in what is now Israel prior to emerging from lower primates in Africa has emerged. Professor Avi Gopher and Dr. Ran Barkai of Tel Aviv University’s Department of Archaeology, who have conducted excavations in the Qesem Cave, a pre-historic site located near Rosh Ha’ayin, and Professor Israel Hershkowitz of the university’s Department of Anatomy and Anthropology and Sackler School of Medicine, together with an international team of scientists, performed a morphological analysis on eight human teeth found in the Qesem Cave, which showed the teeth to be approximately 400,000 years old.
Will the liberals now demand that we all convert to Judaism or must this be taken as a sign from Yahweh that we must cede everything to the whims of those behind global Zionism?
Indeed, not to be outdone, last year, the Chinese also found human skeletons that are at least 100,000 years old in the Zhirendong.
While these are not as old as the 200,000 year-old skeletons found in Africa, it does show that new fossils are being unearthed all the time and that the ‘out of Africa’ theory is just that: a theory – and one based on incomplete evidence. In any case, skulls have been discovered in Spain that are at least 300,000 years old and that may be as old as 600,000 years.
What can a nationalist make of all this? The answer is quite simply nothing. Science has nothing to do with politics – but yet to the leftist everything is politics.
It matters not a whit whether the various subspecies of the human race emerged from Africa, Asia or Europe, for simple observation tells us that we have developed marked differences in physicality, intellect and behaviour since.
One possibility that is never explored is that modern man did not emerge from one specific place, but from various locations, but this, of course, would be too fearful for the leftist to contemplate.
Ironically, the leftist will often accuse our Georgian and Victorian predecessors of pseudoscience especially when addressing issues of racial and gender differences. We are now expected to absorb unquestioningly that which is real pseudoscience, propounded by the likes of Bhikhu Parekh and Harvard University, that ‘race is a social and political construct, not a biological or genetic fact.’
As stated, one only has to use the naked eye and ear to realise this pseudoscience is the new ‘Emperor’s New Clothes’.
Even more ironically, leftists will often use what George Orwell identified as ‘doublethink’ to use inherent racial difference when abusing people of Caucasian ethnicity. One immediately thinks of a famous 1992 film entitled White Men Can’t Jump. Dr Frank Ellis, a former professor at Leeds University, mused upon the possibility of a film with the title – No Black Society has Ever Produced a Written Language or Mathematics. He was subsequently forced into early retirement.
Another good example of science being used as a vehicle for leftist propaganda was evident earlier this month, again after another archaeological find of human remains, this time around caves north-west of Johannesburg.
The BBC webpage’s opening paragraph ran thus (although there were many similar): ‘Analysis of early human-like populations in southern Africa suggests females left their childhood homes, while males stayed at home.’
This sentence is clearly posited to subvert traditional ideas of gendered norms, a typical neo-Marxist stratagem. The underlying inference is that this is evidence to support a hypothesis that women are naturally more outgoing than males and that any forms of domestication were forced upon them at some time in the history of the human race. Note the final emphasis on ‘while males stayed at home.’
What Professor Julia Lee-Thorp of Oxford University, who was part of the archaeological team, actually said was this: ‘What [the results] show was that the females were more likely to come from outside the dolomite valley region than the males. It wasn’t too far away but it wasn’t the same natal group in which they grew up. We don’t know whether they drifted, or they went across deliberately, or they were abducted; we have no way of knowing that kind of detail, but on the whole most of the females came from somewhere else.’
Furthermore, both Professor Darryl de Ruiter of Texas A&M University and Professor Peter Wheeler of Liverpool John Moores University were concerned about the sample size. Samples from just eight Australopithecus Africanus, which is merely believed to be our direct ancestor, and eleven Paranthropus Robustus, which is not even believed to be our direct ancestor, were used.
‘You’ve got to be cautious when drawing conclusions from a relatively small sample. You’ve got even greater concerns when combining data from more than one species,’ Professor Wheeler said.
Exactly – so why the misleading subhead from the BBC? The headline from the pro-Communist Daily Mirror was even more biased: ‘Cavemen stayed at home while the women went exploring’. The crude article that followed even lacked the concessions of that of the BBC.
All this shows how little faith we can put in the ‘results’ of the scientific research of today and how it is reported. It shows moreover the difference between any investigation by the Marxist and by our forebears during the great scientific Enlightenment, which was founded on Classical ideals towards the search for truth.
As the Communist Manifesto states, ‘But Communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality’.
3
An excellent article by Dave Yorkshire which helps to blow away some of the myths on the origins of man implanted by progressive educationalists and liberal-leftist journalists.
Many of these myths arise from the influence in America of the anthropologist Franz Boas, who died in the mid-forties. Being German Jewish in origin it is perhaps understandable that with the rise of Hitler he became a spokesman for Communist and Leftists in general.
Dave Yorkshire states above that “one possibility that is never explored is that modern man did not emerge from one specific place, but from various locations, but this, of course, would be too fearful for the leftist to contemplete”.
In 1962 this fear became a reality when anthropologist Professor Carleton S. Coon published his magnum opus “Origin of Races”. He was immediately attacked as a “racist” by those of his contempories who were influenced by Boas.
Carleton Coon held the then common view that modern mankind existed as five races, or subraces. In his book he said that each had followed a separate evolutionary path for tens of thousands of years. He emphasised that modern humans, Homo Sapiens, arose in the five separate regions and at different times from Homo Erectus, “as each subspecies, living in its own territory, passed a critical threshold from a more brutal to a more ‘sapient’ state.”
He added: “Wherever Homo arose, and Africa is at present the most likely continent, he soon dispersed, in a very primitive form, throughout the warm regions of the Old World…If Africa was the cradle of mankind, it was only an indifferent kindergarten. Europe and Asia were our principal schools.”
I’ve never quite understood why Marxists and ‘liberals’ and people of African origin like to boast about black people being “the original man”. It always raises in my mind questions about differences in the pace of evolution rather than some sort of admiration because they apparently were the first to stand on two feet. A more important question would surely be, what have they done since?
There are as the article mentioned at least 2 theories regarding the anthropological evolutionary origins of the races.
My understanding is that the mongloids were the last racial group to evolve and that their origins are thought to be in Siberia where the cold climate necessitated a large brain and high intelligence.
Evolution in Western countries now seems to be taking a large underclass of people in a ‘new direction’ facilitated by the experimental breeding programme that the welfare state has become.
I’m still not convinced however that such subjects are best discussed by a political party which seeks electoral success in a ‘modern liberal’ society.