By H Millard:
I recently became aware that others are now using the term “bedroom genocide.” This is a term that I coined several years ago to describe the miscegenation of Whites and non-Whites. I’m pleased that others may have been reading my essays and books over the years and have adopted the term. And, I hope the term causes more Whites to be curious enough to investigate and learn a little more about why we must avoid such mating to avoid our extinction as a distinct people.
Too many people, I’m afraid, only think of genocide in terms of intentional mass killings of various peoples, but genocide really just means the death of genes: gen=genes, cide=death. The death of those genes can be by any cause. Death is death. This is what Whites mating with non-Whites does to White genes. It “kills” them.
Miscegenation between Whites and non-Whites wipes out White family lines and causes those family lines to proceed along a non-White path. It is a break from the White ancestors who were each links in the chain of evolution leading up to the person who commits miscegenation. By committing miscegenation the White person is demonstrating that he or she has no self or group respect and no self or group esteem. In addition, the act of miscegenation is an insult and disrespect for all of the ancestors in the line. And, most importantly, it ends the White genetic line and the White evolutionary path of that family.
A good example of this is the German colony in Jamaica. Today, due to miscegenation, most of the German genes are gone and the present residents of the colony are mostly Black but with German surnames.
The ancient Aryans who invaded India were aware of the dangers of miscegenation, and much of the ancient book The Laws of Manu is about avoiding it. In fact, the caste system in India, which is often incorrectly taught in Western schools as being based primarily on the type of work different castes do, is really about avoiding miscegenation. The Sanskrit word for caste is Varna, which means “color,” and in The Laws of Manu the castes are first described by the color of their skin, with Whites being the highest caste.
The child of a White who has miscegenated can never be White even if he or she may have a White phenotype (external appearance). This is because he or she has half of his or her genes from a non-White. A bucket of pure water with just a little pollution is not half pure and half polluted. It is completely polluted.
Just to hammer this point home, it must be understood that the mating of Whites and non-Whites is always genocide of the White DNA code. To understand why, one must know a little about DNA and evolution. The DNA code is the recipe to make us. Change the recipe just a little and we are not us.
Each human has 46 chromosomes. These chromosomes carry approximately 7 billion individual bits of the four chemicals that make up DNA and which are usually abbreviated as A,T,C,G. These 7 billion letters are joined in pairs that make the rungs of the familiar double helix strands of DNA–that looks a little like a ladder. Half of everything in the DNA code comes from the father and half from the mother. But, one is not half this and half that. Read on.
When humans mate, a male contributes half of his DNA code and a female contributes half of hers. So, a new baby will get 23 chromosomes and 10,000 or so genes from each parent. However, all genes are not equal. Some genes are dominant and some are recessive. Generally, “White” genes are recessive and non-White genes are dominant. Why? Well, it may be because Whites are a later evolutionary development–a more recent splitting off from the masses of humanity–and the genes are thus less well established and perhaps more malleable (more about this malleability of White genes in another essay) and are subject to blending back in with the dominant genes .
Another way of describing dominant genes is to say that it just takes one set of them to be expressed in a new baby while it takes two sets of recessive genes to be expressed. Thus, one non-White person and a White will produce a non-White baby (no matter what the baby actually looks like) while it always takes two White parents to produce a new, truly White child. In other words, it’s harder to make a White person than it is to make a non-White person.
There is no effort needed to make non-White people. Any combination of races will do it. It takes effort to make White people.
Stay White, breed White, expand always and contract never.
By H Millard © 2013
# # # #
Steve
- Edit
To be honest the term “Bedroom genocide” reminds me of a lot of these terms that have a sort of double meaning & originate in the most part from PC culture & thinking.
“Mugging” was one of the first I came across but now we have “Happy slapping”, “Joy riding”, “Love child”, “Honour killing”, “Slept with”, “Gang culture”, “Gun culture”, “Asian”, “Romanian”, “Traveller”, & so on.
“Racist” tends to mean only one type & “Anti Semite” is a distortion & much misused.
In the old days you had press terms like “Tired & emotional”, “Confirmed bachelor”, “Didn’t suffer fools gladly”, often used in obituaries.
Even the term “Politically Correct” suffers from that.
Steve
- Edit
It reminds me of that thing about if I pee in your drinking water, how many parts per million are acceptable to you?
frederickdixon
- Edit
Excellent article. The more we plug the counter-cultural message that race mixing is an unmitigated evil – and say precisely why – the better. Because the message is heard so seldom there are very many who believe that there IS no message, merely unreasoning bigotry.
frederickdixon
- Edit
I think I agree. Conscious miscegenation must always be avoided, but it will not be miscegenation where a white person has children with another white person who they believe, on a balance of probabilities, is likely to have some remote and invisible non-white ancestry. A cousin of mine is married to a South African girl of Afrikaner origin, and the Afrikaners are known to derive a minor part of their ancestry from remote Asian and African forebears – should I disapprove of their marriage on those grounds? Of course not.
I have sometimes wondered if, through the random selection of just one half of each parent’s genes in each generation, a person who can trace his or her ancestry from a particular individual might actually end up with none of that individual’s genes?
Steve
- Edit
They say we share 50% of our DNA with a cabbage but I’m not green & have no leaves.
I am 87%(?) water but don’t go down the plughole with the bathwater!
If I heard someone say of someone they only look 1/64th of William the Conqueror, I would say that is patently ridiculous as for example, in living memory anybody knows that some descendents are very like particular Grandparents or parents & some are not.
So someone who is 1/64th of William the Conqueror would not neccessarily have 1/64th of the looks or DNA of him, maybe he could be 50% of him?
Steve
- Edit
My simple uneducated understanding of DNA is that there is basically a bucket of it but no one person has the whole bucket, we maybe have 75% of it in almost infinite variations.
In fact it would be impossible to have the whole 100% as it would have parts that would directly contradict other parts including mistakes & errors, so the resulting human would die or not exist in the first place, they wouldn’t be viable.
A bit like there are 49 Lotto numbers but you can only pick 6 & there are many combinations that might be winners.
That reminds me of the old quote about to be born an Englishman is to truly have won the lottery of life.
I don’t know if he would say that now.
Steve
- Edit
Liberals often argue that skin colour is just that, like eye colour.
There was an infamous classroom experiment where white children were divided into blue & brown eyed groups, the blue eyed were favoured & this demonstrates how bad racism is to the children & how unreasonable it is or that was the theory behind it.
A far as I know this was never done in a class with any non whites in it.
So as some have said it was to guilt trip whitey as non whites aren’t racist, they are only victims of it.
But medically it’s very obvious there are racial differences with diseases peculiar to one race or another & transplants being generally race specific with severe problems for mixed race people not having a match to anyone or very few.
There also seems to be particular racial characteristics emerging if you have large numbers of a race together in an area.
If an area is moslem or black you see certain things peculiar to those cultures as you would see different ones in a white area.
There are plenty of areas in this country I could go & say this does not look like Britain to me but others would say it’s diverse & multi cultural but I see only a foreign monoculture as a fairly solid thing that makes little concession to me as an indigenous white person.
Franks
- Edit
A clearer and more precise term than bedroom genocide may be the simpler, racial defilement.
Steve
- Edit
Racial dilution, racial destruction?
Louis
- Edit
All the white girls where I live under the age of 25 are with blacks I’m not joking in Leeds uk it is so sad to see, I suspect quite rightly that none of them have fathers. If this is allowed to continue we are finished as a race wiped from existence along with our history like we didn’t exist in the first place.
Max Musson
- Edit
That is sad to hear Louis, but more important is the question of what you are going to do about it?
.
In crazy, modern Britain, we can all find things to despair about, but its the people who contact us and volunteer to join our struggle to put an end to this madness that count.