IF THIS biography is a shade partial the fact is surely not surprising, for Miss Blackwell is not only Lucy Stone’s daughter but also a firm believer in all of the reforms that she advocated, excluding, I believe, Prohibition. Indeed, it would be natural for any biographer who knew Lucy Stone [pictured] to be her advocate, for despite the touch of acid that always goes with the passion to serve, she must have been a very piquant and charming woman, and so it is no wonder that the handsome Henry B. Blackwell fell violently in love with her, and pursued her all over the nation with amatory epistles in the best Victorian manner, and then married her triumphantly and spent the next thirty-eight years squiring her about, and admiring her vastly, and unearthing new evils for her to put down. Henry was himself a reformer of no mean technique, but his main business in life was acting as herald and manager for his wife. When, in his old age, she left him a widower, “he had,” as his daughter naively puts it, “more leisure than in former years.” In her heyday he must have been busy indeed, for she had a hand in every reform that engaged the country between 1835 and 1890, and of most of them she was a leader, always on the go. She began her melodramatic tours in stage-coaches and canal boats, and if she had lived a few years longer she would have ended them in automobiles and airships.

When she first set up her booth reform was a dismal business. The gentlemen who pursued it all arrayed themselves in the contemporary garb of ministers of the Gospel, with white neckclothes, plug hats and long-tailed coats. Two-thirds of them shaved their upper lips and wore their beards in the manner of Dunkard elders. They avoided alcohol save to counteract snake bites and the night air, and pronounced their anathema upon smoking, though some of them stealthily chewed. As for the ladies of the movement, they wore black bombazine over crinolines, and spoke of themselves, very delicately, as females. Their virtue was of a granitic, almost a basaltic character. Traveling alone, as they sometimes had to do to save the world, they wrapped themselves in ten or fifteen petticoats, and offered silent prayers to God. When one of them, united in holy marriage to one of the chin-bearded brethren, honored him with offspring, the event became a national indecorum; just how it was achieved remains unknown, indeed, to this day. Life in that age was real and earnest, and sensuous indulgence was not its goal. The ideal was a world devoted exclusively to moral indignation.

Upon such scenes the saucy Lucy Stone burst with paralyzing effect. She was a pink-cheeked little country girl with a turned-up nose, and it is impossible to believe, as her daughter heroically hints, that she was not pretty. A daguerreotype of the 40’s gives the lie to that judgment. It shows a young woman who was pretty indeed– not in the florid, Hollywoodian fashion of today, but in the sedater but just as dangerous manner of those times. Beaux began to lurk about the home farm at West Brookfield, Mass., before she was well into her teens, and by the time she set off for Oberlin to wolf the whole corpus of human wisdom she was the belle of the countryside. The Oberlin professors, though all of them were dour reformers, at once discovered another charm: Lucy had a low-pitched and very agreeable voice. So they made an orator of her, and presently she was on the stump, whooping for Abolition and woman’s rights. No greater knock-out, as the vaudevillians used to say, has ever been recorded in the annals of the uplift. Mobs that fell upon the male reformers with horrible yells, pulling off their coattails and uprooting their chinners, received lovely Lucy with loud huzzahs, and listened to her politely to the end. Often she would make a speech against slavery, and then launch straightway into another for temperance, female emancipation, or some other such fantastic novelty of the day. But no matter what she denounced or advocated, the gallery was with her, and when she finished one harangue it was always ready for another.

Miss Blackwell tells her story in a clear and interesting manner, and incidentally throws some new light upon the history of the woman’s suffrage movement in the United States. As everyone knows, it split into two halves in 1869 and for more than a generation thereafter it was represented by two distinct national associations and published two national organs. The schism was due in part to Susan B. Anthony’s weakness for such clownish allies as Victoria C. Woodhull and Citizen George Francis Train, and in part to Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s tolerance of the extremer sort of radicals, including even Stephen Pearl Andrews, who believed that marriage ought to be abolished, and that a few superior men in every community should be told off to become the fathers of all its children. Such doctrines greatly outraged Lucy Stone, who, despite her refusal to use her husband’s name and her three years’ experiment with bloomers, remained a high-toned Christian woman at heart, and she was also opposed to the monkey-shines of Train and La Woodhull. So the movement divided, and for years the suffragettes belabored one another almost as fiercely as they belabored the antis. But all the while Jahveh Himself was watching over them, and they triumphed everywhere in the end, and brought in the millennium that we now enjoy. Lucy herself lived to see it, though most of her old allies, by that time, were dead. She reigned in her last years as the mother superior and cherished museum piece of all the suffragettes, and was greatly honored and respected.

It is marvellous to observe the success of all the reforms that she advocated. Slavery has been abolished in the South, and the meanest Afroamerican in Arkansas or South Carolina now basks in the sunlight of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, to say nothing of the Bill of Rights. In his choice between working hard and saying nothing or pressing his views and getting lynched he is as free as the King of England. Even the whites down there are now liberated: a citizen of Jackson, Miss., may choose freely between believing in Genesis and having his house burned down, and the lowest linthead in a Georgia cotton-mill may quit whenever he pleases, and starve at his will. Meanwhile, Prohibition is everywhere in force, North, East, South and West, and all the evils of rum have been obliterated. So also, international peace has come into effect, and the nations no longer suspect one another and prepare for battle. Finally, the human female has been emancipated and her vote has purged our politics of evil; nay, she has promoted herself from voter to stateswoman, and in the person of such idealistic sisters as Ma Ferguson and Ma McCormick she has shown the male some varieties of Service that he never thought of. All these great reforms Lucy Stone advocated in her day, tramping up and down the highways of the land. Other females derided her, but she hoped on. Where is her monument, reaching upward to the stars? For one, I believe that it is too long delayed.

— The American Mercury magazine, December 1930

by H. Millard

IN OUR BELIEF SYSTEM for ourselves alone, our thinking on morality is based on the belief that each of us as White individuals must multiply and expand our particular DNA Code to its maximum during our lifetimes.

In what follows, you can substitute “God” or the “First Cause” for “Nature” and vice versa.

The DNA code: We believe that what is most essential in each individual is his or her DNA code and that we, as the individuals we see in the mirror, are the means to the spread of that internal DNA code. It would be an error in thinking, however, to believe that we — who we see in the mirror —  are nothing but robots who exist for the pleasure of some internal “being” that orders us about. We and our DNA code are one, and are inseparable, and the DNA code is not a separate being and is not capable of thinking or willing anything. The basic core DNA code — that we believe is the same in all life — is, speaking metaphorically, like a tiny machine that has been programmed to constantly, endlessly, and tirelessly make more like itself by tinkering, changing, and modifying the add-ons to the basic core DNA code. We as humans and specifically as White humans are examples of those add-ons as are all other forms of life, and each form of life has its own particular DNA code surrounding the basic core DNA code. We call our White subspecies DNA code “Code A.”

The basics: As you read on, remember that humans have 46 chromosomes with about 3.1 billion combinations of the four letters of DNA — A,T,C,G (think of them as genetic playing cards) — and about 20,000 genes. When we are conceived, we get 23 chromosomes from our father and 23 from our mother. That means a child will receive approximately 1.5 billion genetic playing cards from the father and 1.5 billion from the mother, and in those genetic playing cards will be 10,000 genes from the father and 10,000 from the mother. If the father and mother are of the same subspecies (subspecies is a better term for race), and in our case this means if both parents are White, that child will be fully of that subspecies. If the father and mother are not of the same subspecies, that child will be mixed.

Remember, also, that It takes two White parents to produce a new White child. A White person and a person from any other subspecies cannot produce a White child. Why? Simply because that child will never have the full complement of White chromosomes and genes. Remember, it takes 46 White chromosomes to make a new White child and every child gets 23 chromosomes from each parent.

Our internal clocks: Nature has set things up so that females of our species can only get pregnant about once every year. And, Nature has also set it up so that our females usually only produce one child at a time. A female’s internal clock starts young and runs out fairly young. That’s one of the reasons why females of our species mature faster than males — to increase their child bearing years so they can produce the maximum number of children. The other reason why human females mature faster than males is that her eggs get old as she ages and they are better when they are fresh.

Men, on the other hand, can impregnate several women a day every day of the year. Men can also produce children late into life as their internal clock keeps running until they die. Nature is a frugal inventor and just as it has designed females in a certain way with a certain internal clock in order for the species to survive and expand to its maximum, it has also designed males with certain other attributes to also help the species survive and expand — but more of this below.

If we followed Nature’s way, with Nature’s true morality, we would not have males tied to a female’s internal clock, which is exactly what happens in a traditional one man, one woman marriage.

So, either Nature is wrong about how humans should make more like themselves, or we humans are wrong. In fact, it is we humans who are wrong with our artificial morality. We have arrogantly overruled the survival and evolution methods that Nature has engineered for our species. Instead of maximizing our reproduction, as Nature intends, we have minimized it. This artificial morality holds down our birthrate and is a prescription for our extinction. In fact, this one man, one woman morality has been going on for so long that many humans incorrectly think it is natural. It isn’t. In our world today, we’re seeing a similar attempt to overrule Nature as humans begin accepting homosexuality and homosexual marriage as normal. Normal? This is absurd. How can anyone think homosexuality is normal? Such relationships produce no children. And, Nature screams out to go forth and multiply your kind. That’s why we have males and females.

Sperm and eggs: But there’s more to this that needs to be understood. In our species, men constantly produce new sperm, while a woman produces her lifetime’s worth of eggs just once and then automatically rations them out each month — unless she’s pregnant, and then, in this case, the rationing stops until after she gives birth and then the eggs start being rationed out again.

Because of the constantly produced new sperm, changes can and do occur in the sperm caused by everything from temperature in the environment, to cosmic rays, and even emotional pressures of the world around the man, such as wars and other situations, both external and internal, that cause the man’s brain to have various stresses and reactions which in turn cause his body to release hormones differently, which then affect the sperm. It is these changes in the sperm that bring about most mutations in our species. That is why men produce sperm all the time until they die of old age; to allow for changes in the species as changes in the world happen, so that the species can adapt genetically and survive. The goal of Nature is to bring forth a new life that is ready for the way the world is when the child is born. But, too many changes, too fast, could have a deleterious effect on the species, because some of the changes in the world might just be temporary, and will change back to the way it was before; so a woman’s eggs provide a check on the changes and give stability to the species. To express it in somewhat exaggerated words: We wouldn’t want to have our children develop thick pelts of fur after just one aberrant and especially cold winter.

To put all of this in slightly different terms, Nature has set things up this way with the sperm and the eggs for two major reasons. The first reason is that it wants stability of the type. This is afforded by the eggs which are not changed once they’re made and will give a new child half of its chromosomes that have not been changed. Yet, Nature needs to be able to bring in changes to the species when necessary so that the species can adapt to ever-changing conditions. The constantly produced new sperm of males allow necessary changes to be introduced into half of the chromosomes.

Mutations: Up until recent years, it was thought that mutations were mostly rare and harmful. This was because the mutations that were easily seen were usually major things that caused deformities in the child. We now know that’s not the way it is. We now know that mutations happen all the time and that most are very minor and often not seen, but they are still there and they can have a cumulative effect. The reality is that Nature constantly shuffles those 3.1 billion genetic playing cards of our DNA code, but the shuffle only usually changes a few cards in the order of the deck at a time and if the changes give a survival advantage to the organism, then, in time, the changes may spread throughout the whole population. In fact, that’s how we White people came into existence. Among other changes, we mutated to have our White skin so we can produce more Vitamin D than darker peoples.

Our belief: In this faith, we believe that the important part of each of us is our particular DNA code and that we are commanded by Nature (again, read God if you prefer) to multiply and expand that code that we carry within us as much as possible. This means that we must have as many children of our kind of human as possible. But note that this command is given to each of us as individuals. Thus, every male is commanded as an individual to have as many children as he can during all the years that he can produce children. And, every female is also commanded to do the same thing. So you can see right away that we have a problem with the present artificial morality that demands a man and woman be a traditionally married couple to be the parents of children. This prevents a man from spreading his particular DNA code as Nature commands and slows down mutations, the expansion of our DNA code, and our evolution. If human evolution is stalled as some have maintained, it may be because of the false morality as outlined above.

* * *

From the above comes a natural morality for the survival, expansion and evolution of the White subspecies:

1. Marriage or mating arrangements that hold a male to the female one-child-a-year body clock are artificial and hold down our birthrate. Polygamy and similar forms of marriage and arrangements are most likely to help a male expand his particular DNA code to the maximum, and will still offer stability and support to the mothers who will not just be abandoned by the males.

2. Women are precious and special, precisely because they can only usually produce a new one of us just once a year. This means that we must protect them and keep them from harm’s way. This also means that women in the military should not serve in combat and women should not be put in danger. Men are more expendable.

3. Homosexuality is wrong because it does not allow us to multiply and expand our DNA code to its maximum.

4. Miscegenation is wrong because it does not multiply or expand or help evolve our particular DNA code because it produces children who are not White.

5. Birth control in all its forms and celibacy and family planning are all wrong because they limit the multiplication and expansion of our DNA code.

6. Anything that shortens our lives is wrong because this keeps us from expanding our DNA code. Thus false patriotism and wars that are not to advance our particular DNA code are wrong for us.

7. The command to go forth and multiply your kind is the responsibility of each male and each female individually.

Now, to be clear, this is not a call for the wholesale abandonment by Whites of traditional one man, one woman marriages for those who want such marriages — but for those who want to expand their DNA code to the maximum, and who want to help guarantee our survival and our evolution as a people, other forms of relationships that allow this to happen are needed that are more in tune with the biological realities of our species as engineered by Nature.

Furthermore, those Whites who are in traditional marriages where their mate is unable to conceive, often wrongly believe, because of societal conditioning and false beliefs, that they must follow artificial man-made morality and not expand their particular DNA code because of their barren marriage. This is false thinking and false morality and will lead to the extinction of the DNA code of the mate who can procreate, unless that mate follows Nature’s command given to each of us individually, to procreate.

(© 2013 H. Millard)

* * *

“Millard is an original. His books aren’t like your typical fiction. If you don’t know where to put his books, try the same shelf with Kerouac, Kafka, Sartre and Nietzsche…”

Ourselves Alone & Homeless Jack’s Religion messages of ennui and meaning in post-American America by H. Millard In Ourselves Alone and Homeless Jack’s Religion, H. Millard, the hard-to-pigeonhole author of The Outsider and Roaming the Wastelands, has put together some of his category-bending commentaries on post-American America. The commentaries deal with politics, philosophy, free speech, genocide, religion and other topics; all in Millard’s edgy style. They lead up to Homeless Jack’s Religion, in which Homeless Jack lays out revelations he found in a dumpster on skid row. Click here to buy. ISBN: 0-595-32646-3

ROAMING THE WASTELANDS– (ISBN: 0-595-22811-9) H. Millard’s latest sacred cow toppling book, is now available at Amazon.com by clicking on this link or by calling 1-877-823-9235. “A fun—and sobering—thing to read” – Alamance Independent

THE OUTSIDER – (ISBN: 0-595-19424-9) H. Millard’s underground classic story of alienation is available at Amazon.com by clicking on the this link or by calling 1-877-823-9235.

PERHAPS THE MOST intriguing question of all is “Where did I come from?” Or, perhaps stated in a slightly more general way, “Where did humans come from?” Or, “Why are humans the way they are?” “What is consciousness?” “What is intelligence?” “Why are people ethical?” “Why am I able to ask questions?” “Is there a higher power that created humans and is responsible for us? — and If so where did it come from?”

There may be an infinite number of these questions but in fact there is a rather simple explanation to all of the questions stated above if one is willing to observe and weigh a few obvious things. The key elements of modern human evolution are discussed in Intelligent Design – of humans by humans and for humans where the most critical factor is the development of human speech.

The ability to speak permits a selective positive feedback loop to form, vastly improving the selective process and permitting it to be greatly accelerated by what is currently termed artificial selection. With artificial selection it is possible to see intended effects in the offspring in the next generation and if the quality is desirable to inform your peers to keep selecting for that quality in following generations. Part of this process is to select against those qualities which are considered to be inferior. There is always an abundance of qualities which must be weighed and balanced against one another before decisions are made which tend to become locked in for the remainder of the decider’s life and for the lives of their offspring. Because these decisions are realized to be of such importance they are made with great care.

Artificial selection is a subset of Sexual Selection which is a subset of Natural Selection. Ultimately the demands of natural selection must be satisfied because it is a killing process whereby only those individuals who manage to survive are around to produce the next generation. With some species there are vast hordes of perfectly healthy specimens which are killed off with only on average a single typical member surviving to reproduce. By human moral standards this is needlessly cruel — but we are not the ones to make those choices.

With sexual selection there is some degree of purposeful behavior by the species because they choose healthy members for reproduction, not simply the luckiest typical member. This more refined process speeds up the adaptation of the species to its local environment because the members best adapted to it are healthiest. This method has an additional benefit of permitting a broader genome to exist where some outliers survive which is sometimes advantageous for the species — because when the environment shifts a bit those who have not been so narrowly adapted may now be better adapted and get to reproduce more abundantly.

There was a time in the past when our ancestors didn’t speak as modern humans do, and then there was a more recent time when they were fully human and like us in every way but culture. The transition between these two states was between 100 thousand years ago and 40 thousand years ago. For all humans to have evolved so similarly with so many varied and unique human qualities there had to be a small population in a contained area for a sustained period of time. I favor the population isolated in some location such as the islands of Zanzibar during the ice ages. At that location the low sea levels would give these islands the ideal confining conditions for this rapid and thorough human evolution to take place after the basic speech patterns had gotten started, perhaps elsewhere before the population was isolated.

The rest of our human qualities follow on relatively quickly in a few tens of thousands of years — perhaps far less. With artificial selection, massive changes can be brought about in a few generations as may be seen in all sorts of domestic animals. It is particularly conspicuous in the varieties of dogs that have been recently brought into being, but similar changes exist in all of man’s genetically manipulated domesticated life forms.

This human ability to manipulate genetic code is based on the ability to speak – to be able to discuss what is better, to be able to communicate and remember what qualities are best are all dependent upon speech. The thing which is new in this old idea is that it has been applied to humans themselves by themselves for a very long time. We just think about it as mate selection, plain old sexual selection — and such it is, but it is mediated by speech and that gives people the ability to improve their adaptive standing in the world. If one pursues language back to its roots through vast eons of time moving back toward a pre-verbal condition from which it perforce must have come, it becomes apparent that something rather like human verbal development from infancy through maturity recapitulates genetic development from pre-verbal to fully verbal potentialities. The first twenty years of a human’s life recapitulates the first twenty thousand years of humanity’s life.

The birth of a human being is recorded to the minute on a birth certificate but in fact this exact minute could probably be varied by a month or more and still produce a perfectly normal baby. The same can probably be said for the birth of humanity.

The exact moment that some females first communicated verbally to each other the qualities which they preferred in males and passed this ability to the other members of their group is the moment of the birth of modern humanity.

However, this exact moment, just like the exact moment of the birth of a baby, might be varied quite a lot. But, when this local social custom becomes a common habit with these women and then a routinized tradition for the whole society, then the groundwork is laid for this to become encoded into the genes.

That first gene which made conversing just a little bit easier or more efficient might also be considered as the birth moment for modern humans. At first this genetic ability would be almost imperceptible but if it conferred a genetic advantage, which it surely would, then that gene would spread through the whole group and through any group with which they interbred.

In the picture above, we see Michelangelo’s “God creating man” with the usual old-man-God being replaced by Goya’s Naked Maja as the new ancestral-mother-God and we also see her advisers helping her make her choice of Adam over the man portrayed as falling away at the bottom.

Communication with others goes back genetically even to plants where they chemically warn each other of danger. Some monkeys possess some twenty or so single verbal calls linked to single situations and one must suppose that almost modern humans with vastly larger brains than monkeys would have an even larger collection of single words. A big breakthrough comes when there are word pairs which communicate more complex thoughts. Not just single words such as raptor, snake or cat for appropriate warnings and reactions but word pairs such as raptor tree, raptor ground, snake tree, snake ground, or cat tree, cat ground which give the hearers of these communications a new advantage in what is appropriate behavior.

When there are word pairs as part of the vocabulary there arises the problem-opportunity of word order where tree snake means a different kind of snake than ground snake. It seems strange that word order could have a genetic component but much of living processes requires an order of events so there could be a genetic component to paying attention to word order because there might be significance in that quality. This genetic quality would take a while to become stabilized but as it does so it permits ever greater possibilities for potential meaning and for the possibility of pairs of word pairs and then genetically potentiating the possibility of complex sentences.

With each of these improvements in human speaking abilities there comes an improvement in the ability to discuss the qualities of potential mates and with that an improvement in mate selection and a further improvement of all of the genetic qualities of the species.

This has been a positive feedback cycle for quite a long time but now with the development of syntax there comes the possibility and the probability to start selecting mates in quite a refined way for all of the qualities which we call human. Because these people are now fully articulate their selective refinements can become rather sophisticated and move into the realm of art, story telling, music, work habits, morality, kindness, reliability, honesty, knowledge of traditions and a whole host of things we call human virtues.

Most of this process of artificial selection has been moderated by females because their commitment to the next generation is personally greater than males.

Thus it is that most females will have a child or two but there are many males who have none and some males who have a great many. This is simply because females perceive some males as more worthy of breeding. Men pursue many women but women choose a few men. This is the way it is now and there is little doubt that that is the way it has been for a very long time. Thus it is that women have controlled the evolution of humanity and still do. The Gods that created humanity were our foremothers.

Read the full article on Probaway Life Hacks