Many writers today have shown concern for what’s been labeled by some as “global catastrophic risk,” which has been defined as a risk that could inflict “serious damage to human well-being on a global scale” or “threat the destruction of humanity’s long-term potential.” The list of possible threats here is long and growing: nuclear war, out-of-control artificial intelligence, nanotechnology or biotechnology, cyberwarfare destroying the electrical grid, and even global warming have been suggested as possible “existential risks.” Some have even suggested that the folks at CERN, using their Large Hadron Collider, could accidentally create a microscopic black hole, which, once created, would be pulled to the center of the Earth by gravity and begin to “eat” the Earth from the inside. It’s hard to tell if this is science fiction or not.
In his 2020 book “The Precipice,” Toby Ord calculated the risk of human extinction from human technology at 1 in 6 per century, suggesting we have a 17% chance of exterminating ourselves before the year 2100. Ord is not the only one who raised the alarm here. In May 2023, hundreds of top AI scientists, researchers, and others—including OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman and Google DeepMind chief executive Demis Hassabis—signed a one-sentence open letter to the public that read as follows: “Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.”—pretty serious stuff. The “existential risk” concern seems to be slowly picking up steam. So far, the proposed solutions have been pretty mundane, like creating some UN-type agency to dole out regulations or a global agreement between nations. It’s not hard to see that these solutions are doomed to failure. Devising a solution will not be easy, but it may help to understand where all this dangerous technology came from so a very brief history of technology is needed here.
For thousands of years, the people of Europe were engaged in constant migrations. Not only were they migrating within Europe, but some left and migrated to almost all parts of the Earth except Africa. Greece, Rome, Iran (Aryan), and India all fell to these Nordic Indo-European conquerors. They even ended up in such unlikely locations as the Galapagos Islands, in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. In some of these locations, they were able to settle down and become “civilized.” Understandably, all this ceaseless migration caused endless wars. These groups based their culture on war and little else. Finally, around one thousand years ago, migrations halted, and Europe became civilized, even if just a little.
Under these new conditions, the first thing these Nordic tribes did (racially, almost all of Europe was Nordic or northern European at the time, as the eastern and southern Europeans had either been defeated in war or had not made significant inroads into Europe yet) was turn their eye to the natural world. What made the sun and moon circle the Earth? What made a plant grow? What made the tides rise and fall? These and other questions about the natural world around them fascinated them. Unfortunately, the Catholic Church did not see it this way and quickly ended this “science.” It took 300 years for the church to relax enough to permit science, and when this happened, it was on. Almost overnight, Europe became infatuated with studying the natural world around them. It was not fame or fortune that motivated them, but their unquenchable curiosity about nature. They simply couldn’t help themselves. And it wasn’t everyone who did this, but specifically the Nordic type, that investigated nature, as shown by Ludwig Woltman in his early 20th-century books “The Germans in France” and “The Germans in the Renaissance.” We can see this fascination with nature even today, as observation sports like birdwatching or scuba diving are practiced almost solely by the Nordic type.
You could say science is the result of the Nordic type acting on his ability to feel connections to the external world beyond human boundaries. And technology? Technology is merely the application of science. Increased knowledge about the natural world allows men to develop machines that reduce human labor or empower themselves. Again, this translation of scientific knowledge into technology was primarily done by the Nordic type, as evidenced by the inventors in the Industrial Revolution. So modern technology is a product of Nordic man’s unique way of viewing the world. It is his baby, his child, his beloved creation—for better or worse. And just like a mother instinctively cares more about her child than someone else’s, we can assume Nordic men care more about the fate of technology than other races that had nothing to do with its creation. Since it’s his creation, we can assume that he will treat it with more responsibility than anyone else. So, the primary solution to the threat of “existential risk” appears to be returning the fate of technology back into the hands of those who created it.
If you look at all the technology in modern China and ask what, if any, they created themselves, you’ll find the answer to be none of it—absolutely none of it.[1] It was all created by another race type on another continent and had nothing to do with them. It might as well be alien technology dropped off by UFOs. China’s current attitude towards technology is that of a child in a candy store. Can we expect such people to treat technology with the respect it deserves? If we agree to some global plan to regulate emerging technologies (such as artificial intelligence), it’s easy to see what would happen. The Western countries would abide by it with great responsibility, but China, India, and others would likely see this as the opportunity of a lifetime. The thought of conquering the conquerors—with their own weapons at that—would be too great for them to resist. They would likely become drunk with power and eagerly break every rule in the book.
For this reason, standard attempts at regulating emerging technologies are doomed to failure. So again, the first step here is to put the fate of technology back in the hands of those who created it. If we look at how non-western countries obtained their Western technology, we can see that it was not difficult. The West either gave it to them (in some cases, we forced it on them), sold it to them, or they stole it through espionage. In hindsight, the question becomes, ‘Would anything be different if we hadn’t done this?’. What if, say, one hundred years ago, we stopped giving to, selling to, educating about, or letting the rest of the world obtain Western technology in any way? Would the technological landscape look any different today? Yes, some will say that once the genie is out of the bottle, it can’t be put back in; however, there is no evidence that the non-Western world would have developed this technology themselves, and there would likely be an insurmountable technology gap between the West and the rest of the world. Some countries, like Russia, might have made some slow progress, while others, like China, would have made none.[2] If this strategy of starving the rest of the world from Western technology had worked in the past, it is logical to assume it would work today. The answer to the question is yes; if cut off from the West, all non-Western countries would suffer some form of technological decline. For some, it might be slow; for others, it would resemble falling off a cliff.
Cutting off the world from technology is the opposite of what the West is used to doing. For the past two centuries, the West has been turning out non-stop innovations and inventions that it has always been willing to share. Ostensibly, the motive was profit, but the real motive came from a belief that they were at a higher level than the rest of humanity. The West (Nordic man) believed it was at a higher level and felt its duty to improve the rest of the world’s people by teaching them its religion, language, politics, science, technology, etc. Unfortunately, this is a paradigm that has reached its natural conclusion. If the West continues on this path, the problem of existential risk (existence risk) becomes unsolvable, and human history might come to an abrupt end.
There are those, of course, that will offer a different opinion. Some will say that the white man, with all his dangerous machines, industrialization, exploitation, and capitalism, is the real problem in the world, and the best solution is for him to . . . uh . . . commit suicide. With the white man gone, they will claim that the rest of the world will breathe a sigh of relief and get back to living in harmony—with themselves and with nature. This theory, however, isn’t true. The white (Nordic) man committing suicide would be the equivalent of a schoolteacher purchasing an arsenal of firearms, loading them, passing them out to all the schoolchildren, and then going home for the rest of the day. The safest thing would have been for the teacher not to purchase the firearms, the second would be to not pass them out to the schoolchildren, and the third safest would be for the teacher to realize her mistake and collect the firearms from the children—and then contemplate what on Earth she’s going to do with them. The worst option is for the teacher to pass out the firearms (technology) and disappear. That would virtually guarantee disaster.
In the above analogy, between options three and four, option three is by far the safer choice. If Nordic man doesn’t remain strong and in charge of his creations, Ord’s 1 in 6 risk suddenly gets much higher. What would a Western alliance look like if we agree that a Western tech blockade is necessary?
If we define a Western country as a country founded and historically dominated by the Nordic racial type, then the next step is to determine what we mean by the term “Nordic.” Anthropologists divide the human species into three primary races: Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid. They then divide the Caucasian race into as many as 23 sub-races. Defining Nordic or Northern European is a challenge. Richard Mcculloch, in his online book Racialcompact.com, has described what he calls the “Nordish” racial group. He further subdivides this into inner-Nordish and outer-Nordish groups. The inner nordish group is McCulloch’s attempt to define the northern European type as opposed to the southern or eastern, and within it he includes seven subraces: Borreby, Brunn, Hallstatt, Keltic, Anglo-Saxon, Tronder, and Falish. Let’s take the definition of a Western nation as a country where the dominant racial group is white and 50% or more of this white population belongs to Mcculloch’s inner Nordish group. We then come up with the following list of countries as Western nations: Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Iceland. By this definition, Switzerland came close but did not make the list. Germany came in last place. Germany, like all Western nations, is replacing its white population with nonwhites, but in addition, it’s replacing its Nordic (inner Nordish) population with an Alpine (outer Nordish) population.
Interestingly, France did not make the list or even come close. Russia and Ukraine came closer to making the list than France. If we include Mcculloch’s outer Nordish group, then we must include Russia, France, and some eastern European countries—probably not a good idea. So this list of 12 countries, totaling around 7.5% of the world’s population, would make up our Western alliance.
Once this alliance is formed, the next likely step would be to return all high-tech manufacturing to the US or other Western countries. China could manufacture shoes- not computers, cellphones, or other tech devices. The alliance would then refuse to sell or give any new technology (anything new or improved after a starting date) to any non-western country. They would also take steps to prevent the theft of said technology. Possible steps might include:
- Stop offering college education to students from outside the alliance.
- Stop offering higher college degrees to nonwhites from within the alliance countries.
- Stop employing educated immigrants from outside the alliance (H-1B visas).
- Pass laws with severe penalties prohibiting said technology from leaving the alliance countries.
- Stop giving security clearances to anyone from outside the alliance and nonwhites from within the alliance countries.
The whole point is to give the people who created technology back control. Undoubtedly, it was this inner Nordic group that created Western science. Because Western technology (specifically disease control and improved food crop production) created the Earth’s enormous population, the ones who developed it have a right to determine how that technology is used. They also have the right to remove technology from nations that are behaving irresponsibly. This would be the equivalent of a doctor removing life support from a comatose patient. Such an act would be a moral and responsible thing to do.
Once this alliance is formed, the Western countries will eventually gain complete military and technological supremacy. The alliance countries would then become the world’s leaders if they avoided fighting among themselves (an anti-war clause should be written into their constitutions). Using technology as a bargaining chip, the West could guide humanity in any direction. Without competition from other countries, it would be free to question pursuing certain emerging technologies. This is a challenging path, but it is the most realistic way to address the problem of global catastrophic risk.
[1] Similar for Japan and other Asian countries. A brief history of modern Japan might go as follows: the Portuguese were the first to reach Asia by sea and quickly started trading with and sending missionaries to the Asian kingdoms. They were soon followed by the Spanish, Dutch, and English. The Japanese grew alarmed at this and decided they wanted no part of it. They decided to isolate Japan from the outside world, so for 300 years, Japan was a forbidden kingdom where no foreigners were allowed under the penalty of death. The death penalty for trespassing went so far as to include shipwreck victims! After the American Civil War ended, the Americans cruised into Tokyo Harbor in their new ironclad ships and basically bluffed Japan into signing a trade agreement. They set up universities staffed with American and British professors teaching them science, engineering, manufacturing, etc., and to everyone’s surprise, the Japanese loved it. They just couldn’t get enough. They learned everything they were taught and begged for more. They went on to be great at engineering and manufacturing, but the point is this: without Western interference in their lives, both Japan, China and the rest of Asia would be in the same place they were a thousand years ago.
[2] The transfer of technology to the Soviet Union is well documented in Antony C. Sutton’s book ‘The Best Enemy Money Can Buy.’