Will History End – Or Just Our Posterity?
The preamble to the U.S. Constitution says its
purpose is “to form a more perfect union… [for]
ourselves and our posterity” – the
Founders` posterity, not posterity in general. Now
Last week I pointed out that the triumph of
capitalist democracy over communist tyranny didn`t bring
end of history" (as Francis Fukuyama forecast in his
famous article by that name) because the stuff of
history is not so much conflict between ideologies as
Lenin called with brutal brevity:
I then came across a new population genetics
study (in PDF format) that offers a remarkably lurid
example of “Who? Whom?" in action. (Here`s my UPI
article on the subject. Nicholas Wade, the excellent
genetics reporter, should have his version of the
story in the New York Times on Tuesday, Feb. 11.)
A famous historical figure left such a massive
genetic footprint on a continent that his impact leaps
out of the data. (I won`t tell you right away who it was
so that you can try to guess.)
The Y-chromosome is found only in men. So it is
passed down virtually unchanged from father to son to
grandson and so on, like a surname. The world population
has grown about 20 times since this famous historical
figure was in his prime about eight centuries ago. So
his male contemporaries on average now have 20
descendants alive today, carrying their Y-chromosomes.
(Of course, many men who were alive in 1200 now have no
direct descendants in this paternal lineage—or in any
In contrast, this famous historical figure`s
Y-chromosome is now found in about 16 million men across
a vast stretch of Asia from Afghanistan to Manchuria. In
some regions, at least a quarter of the living males are
his direct male line offspring.
He has been roughly 800,000 times more successful at
propagating his Y-chromosome than the average man of his
So, who was this mega-Who?
Genghis Khan had six Mongolian and many foreign
wives, and a rule that he got the pick of all captured
women (and horses).
Of course, this
Darwinian imperative to
spread ones` genes is all ancient history now,
because nobody in our sophisticated modern world
competes for land, resources, and status for their
descendants` sake. That`s so barbaric.
Oh, except that—as you see in the newspaper every
day—people everywhere still do exactly that.
Personally speaking, the dynastic urge burns less
vigorously in me than it did in Genghis Khan. Still, I
do have certain hopes for my progeny.
For example, I would like my sons to be able to
marry and have grandchildren before I`m dead and
gone. (Everybody who has gone through the work of having
children wants the pleasure of having grandchildren.)
Here in Southern California, though, judging by the
weddings I`ve attended recently, it`s becoming more
common for middle class men to delay getting married
until they are approaching 40. Marriage out here is
increasingly reverting to what it was in Jane Austen`s
luxury that many cannot currently — and some may
never — afford.
A big cause: the increasing difficulty Californians
now face in scraping together the money to buy a
house large enough to raise a family in. A
television character actress recently bought the home
next door to me in not terribly fashionable
Studio City (1700 sq. feet on a 1/5th acre lot)
Beyond real estate prices, state income taxes are a
severe burden—in sizable part to pay for
educating the children of illegal aliens.
And most of us in Los Angeles` bourgeoisie don`t want
to send our kids to public schools full of
illegal aliens` kids. So we must also shell out for
Obviously, mass immigration has hit
Southern California harder than in most of the
country. But these kinds of impacts are spreading
nationwide—as both immigrants and California natives
find the once-Golden State increasingly unsatisfactory,
Sure, housing is still reasonable in, say, Lancaster
out in the high desert, where the scorching winds blow
the dust every afternoon. But if you want to buy a house
with a yard somewhere close enough to the Pacific Ocean
to enjoy a Mediterranean climate (say, 50 miles) well,
then—like Austen`s characters—you should choose your
Namely, pick ones who will make a big wad and then
kick the bucket young, leaving it all to you.
My sons, however, definitely chose imprudently in
regard to parental wad-making (and, I hope, in regard to
bucket-kicking as well).
Is it too much to ask that my family get some help
from our elected officials?
Merely enforcing the immigration laws would be a
It would be very unfortunate if Genghis Khan`s
reproductive strategy turned out to be the best.
[Steve Sailer [email
him] is founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute and