Have Some Cheese with that Whine: Cheddar Man as Migrant Avatar

Cheddar Man

After sequencing the genome and performing facial reconstruction on the fossil of 1903 finding, “Cheddar Man,” researchers now surmise that the approximately 10,000-year-old hunter-gatherer was a dark-skinned, dark-haired, blue-eyed lad in his twenties who originally came from either Africa or the Middle East—which might speak to why at least 75% of Europe’s incoming migrants are fighting-age men. Perhaps the “powers that be” anticipated this “revelation” by simply trying to recreate the phenotypical characteristics of Cheddar Man and other Mesolithic fossils found in Spain, Belgium, and Luxembourg. This is cause for celebration, because it is yet another cudgel to pound Whites with, all in the interest of dispossessing them of their ancestral homelands via a deluge of Third World immigration. Europe is going back to its roots!

Genetic research published in 2016 indicates that all Europeans are descended from a single population that arrived in Europe 37,000 years ago and persisted throughout the Ice Age. Were they Cheddar Man’s ancestors? We don’t know. I don’t need to point out the irony of the same commentariat using genetic sequencing to hysterically trumpet the supposition that Cheddar Man may be of a darker pigmentation while simultaneously declaring that race is only skin-deep, as Steven Austad does, which seems to belie the volume at which this latest “discovery” is being broadcast. That Cheddar Man may not even be indigenous to Britain is never interrogated, nor that his supposedly bright blue eyes are extraordinarily rare for people with dark skin. The mere possibility that Cheddar Man might be darker than Prince Harry—that, and the fact that 12,000 years ago “immigrants” arrived in Britain, thus making it “a nation of immigrants”—is an open invitation for the entire world to swamp Old Blighty, evidently.

If, for argument’s sake, Cheddar Man did have dark skin, this speaks more to the rapid pace of evolution than anything else. There’s plenty of evidence debunking the “Out of Africa” theory with respect to the European population, and we should not forget that the average European has about 2% Neanderthal DNA as opposed to naught-point-naught for Africans, which helps explain different immune systems, per the Pasteur Institute. But race is only about skin colour, right? Also lost in the deluge of using dubious science to invalidate indigenous Whites’ credible claims to a homeland of any kind was the discovery last year that hominin fossils in both Bulgaria and Greece dated from 7.2 million years ago—200,000 years or more before the heretofore oldest known hominin fossils from Africa.

In The Tribes of Britain, archaeologist David Miles notes that the preponderance of red hair in native Britons is more concentrated than anywhere else: “Recent studies have shown that there is more red hair in Scotland and Wales than anywhere else in the world. It’s a mutation that probably occurred between 8,000 and 10,000 years ago”—around the time of Cheddar Man. He also notes that the earliest settlers were cut off from the mainland due to rising sea levels and as such, “It’s now more or less agreed that about 80 percent of Britons’ genes come from hunter-gatherers who came in immediately after the Ice Age” 12,000 years ago. “The gene pool of the island has changed, but more slowly and far less completely than implied by the old invasion model,” archaeologist Simon James writes. This 80% of Britons’ genetic material being traceable to the core Younger Dryas settlers is even less than the Irish, who can trace 88% of theirs to the island’s founding population.

Of course populations migrate, die off, and intermingle, but for CNN’s Dan Jones this means only that, “There are just a bunch of people who happen to be here, right now”—right, and the Bantu, like the Boers, were not indigenous to South Africa, but the prevailing narrative only demonizes one group as conquerors and thus as illegitimate interlopers. The fluidity of nationhood only seems to apply to Western countries. Afua Hirsch (whose Guardian book review opens with: “‘England is an island but not I land,’ say the Rastas. They may have been born in Birmingham or Bristol but they don’t believe they belong in the UK. The same feeling courses through every fibre of Afua Hirsch’s being.”), echoes Jones’s sentiment by stating, “Everyone’s ancestors were immigrants at some point.” But surely she and Jones must understand that nations also have a significant cultural component, especially if the primary take-away from a genetic sequencing is “just” skin colour; in this case it wouldn’t matter in the slightest if Cheddar Man were white or black.

Following Hirsch’s claims to their logical conclusion, this must mean that there are no indigenous peoples since populations have always been fluid, which invalidates all criticisms of European colonialism. If everyone’s ancestors came from somewhere else, certainly there can be no objection to the settlement of New Zealand, New Hampshire, and Rhodesia, right? Even if we accept that we all have common African ancestors, then it would simply be Hirsch’s “Whites [who] weren’t always White” returning home. Surely no one would object to these perfectly natural population movements? Sadiq Khan is just as British as Nicolas Ovando y Caceres was Dominican, n’est-ce pas? And if Whites weren’t always White, how do we explain the fact that, far from WE WUZ KANGZ, ancient Egyptians were much closer genetically to modern Europeans than to the current population of the country? Less than one percent of modern Egyptians, likely almost all Coptics, can trace their genetic heritage back to the ancient Egyptians, but the rest are Arab with some sub-Saharan admixture. Now that’s a nation of immigrants!

John Q. Publius writes for Defend Europa and runs the blog The Anatomically Correct Banana.