A brief history of

human migration

Contents
Out of Africa
Adaptation to environment
Homo sapiens vs other animals
Homo sapiens vs Neanderthals
Homo sapiens vs Homo sapiens
Historical and modern migration

Out of Africa

Multi-regional theory
Not as widely accepted as the
single African origin theory
Not so different the theory
posits interbreeding
But it doesnt matter much
either way, since humans
interbred with Neanderthals
and Denisovans anyway

Out of Africa

Out of Africa
In general, intelligence increases with brain size
Though not always humans have smaller brains than late
Neanderthals, but are more intelligent
Within species, brain size does correlate with intelligence

Out of Africa

Bradshaw Foundation

Adaptation to environment
Tropical people tall and lean to lose heat
Arctic and mountain people short and wide to conserve heat
Pale skin for vitamin D photosynthesis in dim climates
Disease resistance: malaria, plague

Adaptation to environment
Eskimos alleles for processing fatty acids
Altitude adaptation
Tibetans greater lung capacity. Only since 3000kya and ongoing!
Andeans more oxygen per haemoglobin
Ethiopians more haemoglobin. Side effect: with thin ankles and calves,
make good long-distance runners [whereas sprinters tend to be Jamaican or
African American narrower hips]

Lactase persistence in Europeans adaptation to domesticated cattle

10kya-5kya
Amylase for carbohydrates
Alcohol hydrogenase in Chinese, Japanese and Koreans

Adaptation to environment
On the origin of species
Races are subspecies
Adapted to different environments, but not enough time for speciation
Races precede speciation
Speciation could not happen without races
Races are the origin of species

A race is an extremely extended family, inbred

For populations to evolve into races, there must be less than 2% gene flow between
populations per generation
For differences to accumulate in the neutral (unselected) genome, there must have been
< 1 immigrant per generation for tens of thousands of years or more
As much as 250,000 years for Bushmen/Pygmies vs other humans

Homo sapiens vs other animals

Most predators are specialised, co-evolving with their prey
Cant quickly evolve overwhelming superiority

Predators rarely drive their prey to extinction. If they do, they go

extinct themselves
Newly introduced predators

Unspecialised predators dont tend to do very well

Not many omnivores like bears
Neanderthals didnt wipe out any species, as far as we know

Homo sapiens vs other animals

Humans are the ultimate predator
Originally the prey!

Intelligence allows us to wipe out species and move on

Inventions allowed humans to reach new areas and climates
Boats, rafts, clothes

Homo sapiens vs other animals

Whenever humans turn up, species go extinct
Dodos, mammoths (humans finished them off)
Giant tortoises

2.5mya in Africa
Out of Africa: India, Indonesia, Australia, Americas, Madagascar
Survive in Aldabra and Galapagos Islands, but only just!
Humans had tools which other animals lacked, like wooden spears

Homo sapiens vs other animals

Where human are not, other species flourish
Rabbits by the Berlin Wall
Musk deer and asian black bears extirpated from Europe, now found in the
Korean Demilitarized Zone!
Sleeping sickness created virtually human-free zones

Homo sapiens vs Homo neanderthalensis

Competition for resources in a Malthusian world
Occupying the same or similar ecological niche
Human arrive in Europe 41-39 kya. Neanderthals extinct 45-43 kya
Shared territory for ~4000 years
Limited interbreeding (at least once!)
Also limited interbreeding (at least once) with the Denisovans (discovered
2010)

Homo sapiens vs Homo sapiens

Farmers replace foragers
Hunter-gatherers and farmers cannot use the same territory
Zero-sum game
Farmers win
Even though farmers have worse lifestyles they have more children!

Homo sapiens vs Homo sapiens

Aryans conquer Northern India from 1500 BC, replacing the Indus
Valley Civilisation
Dorset people replaced by Inuit. Dorset driven extinct about 14001500 AD
Aztecs conquered by Spanish in 16th Century
Smallpox and typhus
Population declines 80% in 60 years

Inca conquered by Spanish, despite better adapted to the altitude

China twice conquered by people from countries to the north, but not
from the south

Homo sapiens vs Homo sapiens

Bantu expansion from 1000BC/500AD up to 18th/19th centuries

Homo sapiens vs Homo sapiens

North America
Whites replace Native American tribes
Remaining Native Americans have substantial admixture
Ideology: Manifest Destiny

Albions Seed different parts of American settled by peoples from

different parts of the British Isles, and Germans
Texas
Whites vs Hispanics
Mexicans replaced by Whites. Mexico became independent, then joined the
US. Nowadays, the process is reversing: the Hispanic population is
overwhelming low-fertility Whites

Historical migration
No state control
Diversity is unusual
Either population replacement in prehistoric societies
Plus marriage between tribal bands

Or extremely low levels and assimilation in modern societies

To Britain: measured in the 1000s per year
e.g. Huguenots; refugees from the French revolution; German Poor Palatine
From nearby countries with similar populations

Modern day migration

Unprecedented levels
To Britain: in the 1950s, less than 50,000 per year
Now, over 500,000-600,000 per year gross (and emigration of 300,000)
Britain today receives more immigrants in a single year than it did in the
entire period from 1066 to 1950
Refugees do not go back afterwards

Some state control

Some immigration is subsidised. Some is banned
European navies collecting economic migrants from the waters of the
Mediterranean and bringing them here
Welfare state
Legal immigration is expensive and time-consuming

Historical and modern migration

Robert Putnam on diversity

More ethnic diversity leads to less trust both between and within
ethnic groups
Less altruism, less community cooperation
Reduce social solidarity, social capital

William Easterly on fractionalization

Ethnic fractionalization
Ethno-linguistic fractionalization

Ethnic mix leads to low schooling, political instability,

underdeveloped financial systems, distorted foreign exchange
markets, high government deficits, and insufficient infrastructure
As long as institutions sufficiently bad

Findings broadly accepted

Polarization metric also used
See also Paolo Mauro (1995) Corruption and growth

Diversity
With some things, diversity is not good
Intelligence
More is better!

Institutional quality
The world does not benefit from having some countries with bad institutions

Religion?
Christians believe Christianity is correct and everyone should be Christian
Muslims believe Islam is correct and everyone should be Muslim
Etc.

Conclusions
Modern migration should be seen as part of a process which has been
going on for tens of thousands of years
Migration is invasion
Disruptive, not simple
To food chains; to local ecology

Replacement is not the answer to pathologically low Western fertility

It is possible to restrict immigration
Japan, Australia, Israel, Hungarian border fence

Temporary immigration? Is it possible to have guest workers but

prevent them gaining or agitating for political power? e.g. UAE

Conclusions
Mass migration is like a slow and steady current of water which
washes away the shore. It appears in the guise of humanitarian
action, but its true nature is the occupation of territory; and their gain
in territory is our loss of territory.
Viktor Orbn
15 March 2016

Orbn opposes immigration to Hungary, but supports emigration

from Hungary!
Doesnt want Hungarians called migrants
Opposes restrictions on Hungarians collecting in-work benefits around the EU