Apologies for the dull-sounding title. This piece is intended to supplement Kevin MacDonald's work on Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy.
Darwin on competition. Chapter 10 - On the Geological Succession of Organic Beings
... the number of species has not gone on indefinitely increasing, at least during the later geological periods, so that looking to later times we may believe that the production of new forms has caused the extinction of about the same number of old forms.
The competition will generally be most severe, as formerly explained and illustrated by examples, between the forms which are most like each other in all respects. Hence the improved and modified descendants of a species will generally cause the extermination of the parent-species; and if many new forms have been developed from any one species, the nearest allies of that species, i.e. the species of the same genus, will be the most liable to extermination.
The simple point I'm claiming is that Jewish-style behaviour - a group fairly isolated from other of its species, and acting in a wolf-pack like manner towards its 'out group' - is not discussed in what purport to be scientific discussions of evolution.
I noticed this when pondering a book The Herd Instinct published about 1916 by Wilfred Trotter, a surgeon. Trotter thought one-celled creatures were limited; evolution into multicellular creatures allowed fresh scope; then herds, which have further scope. His evidence comes from animals - including sheep and, especially, wolves.
Trotter has quite a convincing argument that herbivores have to spend a lot of time grazing, because their food isn't very high in nutrition. Any herd which acts in a group, and which has warning lookouts, will survive better than single animals. The same sort of thing applies to predators - wolf packs with any sort of organisation presumably will do better than isolated individuals. (Assuming in each case there's sufficient food supply).
Modern sheep are bred, of course, and the breeds (or races) have their own distinctive behaviours; some breeds stick together, but some scatter. But then after all modern 'Jews' are bred, too.
There are individual behaviours - for example pointers are dogs which stand rigidly, their faces pointing to a likely prey creature - a shot bird, for example. This must be quite complicated physiologically - there must be some link between the eyes and perceptual system, and body movements. It's possible there's some bred-in behaviour selected for in 'Jews', helping for example their tendency to tell lies.
Anyway, the subsidiary point here is that discussion on these topics is more or less taboo. To illustrate the point, a popular book of about the same time was Gustav le Bon's The Crowd - ... one of the best-selling scientific books in social psychology and collective behavior ever written - published in English in 1897. This was based on traditional views of the French Revolution, and the whole emphasis is on irrational action, foolish beliefs, impetuous acts etc.
There's a long passage (pages 30-38) in The Culture of Critique by Kevin MacDonald on Stephen Jay Gould [a 'Jew'] including this: '.. despite the widespread belief that Gould has a highly politicized agenda and is dishonest and self-serving as a scholar, the prominent evolutionary biologist John Maynard Smith (1995..) notes that "he has come to be seen by non-biologists as the pre-eminent evolutionary theorist. In contrast, the evolutionary biologists with whom I have discussed his work tend to see him as a man whose ideas are so confused as to be hardly worth bothering with... and followed similar comments by other evolutionary biologists. Gould of course gets promoted by 'Jews' in the New York Times and so on.
(Apologies for putting 'Jews' in quote marks - this of course is necessitated by the Khazar origin idea).
https://www.amazon.com/Instincts-Herd-Peace-War/product-reviews/1171936109/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_pop_hist_2?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&filterBy=addTwoStar