The idea of physical beauty — and its plastic, graphic, or verbal expression — is of European origin. The grotesque reality is that non-White races and ethnicities know this fact, but for obvious reasons do not wish to admit it. Or rather, over the last half a century, they have been forced, by their White repentant masters, along with their leftist Marxist acolytes — not to admit it. The irony is that even when racial out-groups publicly rebuke the European idea of beauty for its alleged Eurocentric and xenophobic message, or when they forcefully attempt to express their own endogenous beauty — they end up mimicking the White European style and form.
Therefore the much vaunted noun ‘diversity’ is both a lexical and conceptual fraud — whose victims are not just Whites but also non-Whites. Diversity presupposes that that there is a plurality of beauties. Yet in real life within Western societies, ‘diversity’ carries the denominator of distorted Whiteness — in style, looks, form, narrative, etc.
The examples are startlingly numerous — beginning with the physiognomy of Oprah Winfrey to that of Barack Obama, or for that matter to movies from Bollywood (India) in which, as a rule, a Hindu hero displays some European features, sports a quasi-dolicochephalic face, or short of that, postures with his tall stature. Soap operas throughout Latin America notoriously feature blond, blue-eyed Whites in the main roles.
Racial Self-Image: The Ideal of Beauty
Theologies and ideologies come and go but the merciless laws of racial biology are here to stay. One can flee his country’s oppressive rulers, but one cannot escape his heredity. It was not some wicked proverbial “Nazi,” but the Jewish British Prime minister and author Benjamin Disraeli, who said: “The difference of race is one of the reasons why I fear war may always exist; because race implies difference, difference implies superiority, and superiority leads to predominance.”
Not tons, but megatons of book titles were seized, burned down or simply shoved down the Orwellian memory hole by the victorious Allies in defeated Germany. And among those were works by prominent European geneticists, anthropologists, artists and biologists, whose work long predated the National Socialist seizure of power. The entire Allied inquisition against European scholarship and science was euphemistically called the “The List of the literature to be singled out (Die Liste der auszusondernden Literatur); see here and here. The Lamarckian-Marxian idea of racial equality and human interchangeability has become so powerful that the most modest academic skepticism regarding contemporary “self-evident truths” is severely punished.
Figurative and plastic forms of art are the best vectors for studying racial types and subtypes, but also an ideal mirror of physical beauty among Western men and women. Ideas of race and beauty were perhaps best described by Paul Schulze Naumburg, the much acclaimed art critic and artist himself in the Third Reich, and Hans Günther, a racial anthropologist. Both were among the thousands of authors banned by the post-WWII Inquisition.
One does not need to be an expert in anthropometry or eugenics to distinguish between racial ugliness and racial beauty. Glancing at classical art exhibits in European museums tells us all.
As a rule, artistic creation reflects not just the personality and the race of a depicted human, but also of the subject, i.e., the artist himself. Portraits and pictures of naked women tell us much about the idea of race and beauty of a given nation, at a given historical time period. Schulze Naumburg writes that every artist crafts his characters in his own image. Sandro Botticelli’s face, his blue eyes, lank stature, and his racial Nordic-Mediterranean (“westisch”) makeup found their way on his canvasses, particularly in his famous, elegant and long-limbed Nordic looking, beauty with high cheekbones, the Primavera — albeit embellished in a timely fashion.
Botticelli: Primavera
Botticelli: Self-portrait
So does Rembrandt’s own facial combination of a Nordic-Dinaric-Mediterranean man, including his stocky limbs, find its way on his canvass. The portraits of Titian’s naked females tell us two things: a) the idea of female beauty in Europe of his time; b) the personality and Nordic racial makeup of Titian himself. A Black artist or an Asian artist can never ever have such racial empathy.
One could probably explain the relationship between the artist and his work simply as a preference of every human being for his own race and his own type. It appears quite obvious that each artist presents that which in his perceptions lives and what is preferably his subject of preoccupation. Decisive is the choice of the role model based on preference for his own race or (corporal) type. (p. 31–32)
When two races mix, there is a likelihood that the rhythm will be upset or that it will disappear. Surely, there are cases in which harmony occurs — which is more likely the closer the races that are to be mixed are. Thus the relation between the Nordic and the Dinaric man will be easier achieved than the relation between a member of the Nordic race and an Oriental man (“einem Mongoloiden”) (p. 34) (my translation) Schulze-Naumburg, Kunst und Rasse (Art and Race) ( 1928, 1942)
Les mer Occidental Observer