you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]DisgustResponse 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Leftists love to screech, "It's not race, it's class!" but my intuition tells me that class is just another delineation of blood, like castes.

Does anyone know whether working-class whites are racially distinctive from managerial-class whites, per region?

[–]NeoRail[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Caste and class have been drifting apart ever since the advent of modernity as a result of liberalisation, but there is a caste element to class too. One of the clearer historical examples would be Britain. The Normans were a separate ethnicity from their Anglo-Saxon subjects and I believe that to this day, people with Norman surnames are on average richer than those with Anglo-Saxon ones.

Personally, I would not read too much into this, though. The functions of the two highest castes have basically been completely abolished, so almost all of those people are either irrelevant, living middle class lifestyles or involved in bourgeois activities like investment banking etc. I believe I read an article some years back about a Bourbon heir who was managing an investment fund.

[–]DisgustResponse 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Just observing people, it's very easy to guess what sort of person someone is or what kind of job they have people's from their physiognomy, so I would assume that blood has something to do with it.

[–]NeoRail[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Although I haven't read it, I think Evola's book "Synthesis on the Doctrine of Race" is intended to be a detailed explanation of that type of thing. It was recently translated into English.

I have also found that there are a lot of people who do not "match" their physiognomy, so to speak, so I don't see it as a universally valid approach.