H. L. SHAPIRO
Old New Yorkers
A Series of Crania from the Nagel Burying Ground, New York City
AXEPIICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY, VOL. XIV, NO. 3
JULY-SEPTEMBER. 1930
Among the various elements which make up the heterogeneous population of the United States, there is one which may conveniently be called Old American. Its exact proportion in the present population is unknown, and naturally would vary with the arbitrary standards one might adopt for such a classification. Following, however, the precedent of Hrdlicka (1) , Old Americans are “those American whites who those Americans whose ancestors on each side of the family were born in the United States for at least two generationsin other words, all those whose parents as well as all four grandparents were born in this country. The third native generation of adults means roughly an ancestry on each side of the family of at least 80 to 150 years American.” On the basis of this classification HrdliEka has made in his “Old Americans’’ an important contribution to the study of the somatological characteristics of the oldest American white stock in the population of this country. Unfortunately, up to the present time there have existed no data on the actual ancestors of the population with which HrdliEka was dealing. Consequently, a study on the stability of this physical type was hardly possible. One might, for example, compare Old Americans with the inadequate data on living Englishmen, but that is hardly as satisfactory as a comparison with ancestral whites of the colonial period, for inevitably the question of selection comes up. What has been needed, then, is data on the physical type of the colonial immigrants to the United States.
In this paper I am presenting such data on the actual American ancestors of the old American stock. The principal problems dealt with are the characteristics of a local New York group, their relationship to Old World types, whether they represent a random or selected type, and, finally, if their descendants have preserved the same characters under the influence of the American environment. The answers to these questions are vital in both a practical and a theoretical sense, but they can only be regarded as tentative until vastly more material is available to confirm or alter the conclusions suggested by the material in this paper. [. . .]
Late in November, 1926, I became aware that during the course of some excavations for the 207th Street Yard of the Rapid Transit System of New York City an obliterated burial ground was discovered between 212th Street and 213th Street, near the Harlem River. This district is in the northernmost part of Manhattan and within the present city limits of New York. Upon investigation by the Board of Transportation, it was learned that this site was the former Nagel, or Nagle, Cemetery, [. . .]
The origin of the Nagel cemetery was apparently as a family burial ground for the Nagels and the Dyckmans, who were settled in the neighborhood in the second half of the seventeenth century. [. . .]
The national origin of those buried in the Nagel cemetery is mainly Dutch and English. The principal landholders who inhabited the neighborhood of the Nagel cemetery were, in the late seventeenth century, the Dyckmans, the Nagels, and the Kortrights. Jan Dyckman and Jan Nagel, the original immigrants, were from Westphalia. Kortright was Dutch. Another important neighboring family was the Vermilyeas (Vermilye, Vermilya). The first Vermeille was a French Huguenot, who, after residing in Holland, emigrated to America. By 1800, when the headstones were generally inscribed in this cemetery, the Kortrights were no longer residents of the district. Many of the Nagels had moved to Westchester as a result of the Revolution, but William Nagel, the surviving brother of a large family, continued to live here until after 1800. Of these original families, only the Dyckmans and the Vermilyeas are marked by inscribed headstones. Nevertheless, we know from town records that this district of upper Manhattan was occupied principally by Dutch families in the early days. Intermarriage was the rule, so that the few Huguenots were soon absorbed in the dominant Dutch strains. Genealogical records also indicate that the Dyckmans and Nagels very early married into Dutch families. After Manhattan was taken over by the English in 1674, very few new Dutch settlers migrated to New York. During the eighteenth century the English immigration attained considerable proportions, coming in part from the New England colonies and from the home country. Just when the displacement of the Dutch in upper Manhattan by newer English settlers took place is difficult to estimate. Mr. Bolton is of the opinion that by the second half of the eighteenth century upper Manhattan was already largely English or mixed Dutch-English, for many of the original families were marrying the newer stocks. At any rate, when our information becomes definite, after 1800, the names recorded on headstones are predominantly English.
[. . .] the series, represented in this paper, are in all probability largely of English origin, with some Dutch admixture, and dating from the eighteenth century. [. . .]
In spite of what we might reasonably expect in a former Dutch colony, the physical type of the New Yorker in the eighteenth century was similar in most respects to that of the seventeenth century Londoner and the Lowland Scot. In relation to both these types, the Nagel series appears to represent a group from the same fundamental population, with the discrepancies one would expect in a small sampling. The one notable exception to this broad but tentative generalization is the marked difference in cranial height between the Nagel and London crania. This map be accounted for by regarding the Londoners as variants of the generalized English type in the direction of low-vaulted crania. The other alternative is that in New York the presence of a Dutch strain has made for a cranium much higher than is to be found in the London cousins of the New Yorkers of the eighteenth century. This latter hypothesis is unnecessary, in view of the presence of the same degree of head height in other British series.
[. . .] by estimating cephalic means from the cranial averages of the Nagel series, a cursory comparison with living Old Americans was possible. Recognizing the error inherent in such a procedure, it is interesting to note that, even after a century, apparently the Old Americans have remained similar to their colonial ancestors of New York.
21 comments:
This blog has an explicit and unabashed pro-Northern European perspective -- which is what I like about it. In my opinion, far too many American “White nationalists” think in terms of the global White race. They seem to think that White Americans are completely interchangeable with Italians, Portuguese, French, Bulgarians, Ukrainians, and basically anyone from the European continent. To me this outlook is very stupid -- and perhaps dangerous -- because White Americans are very different racially from the vast majority of Europeans. The truth is that European immigration to America was very selective. The vast majority of European immigration came from a relatively small area of Northwestern Europe. As a consequence, White Americans have characteristically light skin, hair and eyes. Many Europeans, whether they are from France, Southern Europe, the Balkans, or even Central and Eastern Europe are rather dark in comparison to us. Additionally, there is a degree of Mongoloid admixture in Eastern Europe -- especially amongst the East Slavs.
I just wish that more American White nationalists would take pride in their Nordic heritage as opposed to their European heritage. In addition to opposing non-White immigration to this country they should also oppose non-Northern European immigration as well. Otherwise, when we finally do achieve racial separation we might well squander it anyway by letting in incompatible racial types from Europe.
I agree with the above comment.
The topic is interesting. I find it hard to imagine that as late as 1930 there were still a core of Anglo-Americans and Dutch-descended people in New York City.
On my first trip there I couldn't help noticing that among European-descended people, the Southern and Eastern European (Jewish) types seemed much more visible there than in heartland America. Also I met very few people with English or Dutch surnames there, and those I did meet were transplants from other regions.
I wonder when the population changed over? After the big immigration wave of the late 19th and early 20th centuries?
-VA
"They seem to think that White Americans are completely interchangeable with Italians, Portuguese, French, Bulgarians, Ukrainians, and basically anyone from the European continent."
Interchangable in what way exactly? Can you substantiate, in a scientific manner, the claim that someone from the Ukraine or from France is less "compatible" than someone who is British or German?
"The vast majority of European immigration came from a relatively small area of Northwestern Europe. As a consequence, White Americans have characteristically light skin, hair and eyes."
Yes, it is true that northwestern europeans tend more towards the Nordic mean than people who are from the south and east. Nonetheless, racial elements you disparage are found in waves of British and Germanic immigration to America.
The only thing that makes them special is the particular admixture of European racial traits that makes these populations unique, not some sort of notion of purity.
"Many Europeans, whether they are from France, Southern Europe, the Balkans, or even Central and Eastern Europe are rather dark in comparison to us."
Nonsense. There are dark Britons and Germans. Germans especially have a high concentration of the darker Alpine features. Do you reject those individuals on that basis?
Additionally, there is a degree of Mongoloid admixture in Eastern Europe -- especially amongst the East Slavs.
This claim is not supported by genetic evidence (i.e., ~0% Mongoloid Y-DNA in Russians). Nor, for that matter, by my subjective observation. Russians, Poles, etc more closely resemble North Euros than South Euros and are definitely not Asiatic.
There is similarly no evidence to back up the claims that Slavs are incompatible with white culture. I suppose the achievements of, for example, Lithuania-Poland or Imperial Russia mean nothing to you?
I would only exclude the Southern Euros who have obviously non-white blood - i.e., Greeks and Southern Italians who are probably genetically Semitic anyway.
For founding Americans like Henry Cabot Lodge, it was about precedent. He viewed the English as an alloyed Germanic people, for which there was already precedent for assimilating other Germanic people even before arrival in the US.
"It will be observed that, with the exception of the Huguenot French, who formed but a small percentage of the total population, the people of the thirteen colonies were all of the same original race stocks. The Dutch, the Swedes, and, the Germans simply blended again with the English-speaking people, who like them were descended from the Germanic tribes whom Cæsar fought and Tacitus described."
DJ
"This claim is not supported by genetic evidence (i.e., ~0% Mongoloid Y-DNA in Russians). Nor, for that matter, by my subjective observation. Russians, Poles, etc more closely resemble North Euros than South Euros and are definitely not Asiatic."
Sorry my friend, but you are grossly exaggerating.
Indeed there are many Slavs that could pass for British or German, but certainly not most of them.
Additionally, many Slavs that look German indeed ARE German -- the descendants of German farmers, soldiers and elites, that where often invited in by various Slavic nobility, whom often also intermarried with them.
Obviously then, it is not strictly about genes, as the way some get obsessive about it (as here).
Fundamentally, it is really more about protecting the unique Northern European Weltkultur, and its People, whether or not their eyes are blue or brown, or whether they are 'Nordic' or 'Alpine'.
I just wish the gene fanatics would see and appreciate this.
VA,
The living "Old American" sample Shapiro used for comparison is Hrdlicka's, which included individuals from around the country. I don't have exact numbers on hand, but your sense that the population of 1930 NYC was predominantly "new immigrant" in origin is correct.
Searching just now, I don't immediately find numbers for 1930, but I found the following estimate for 1960:
Glazer and Moynihan further note that in 1960, roughly 5 percent of the city's general population could be characterized as "old stock" or "WASP"
[White ethnic New York: Jews, Catholics, and the shaping of postwar politics By Joshua Zeitz]
I see my comment attracted a few responses.
Anonymous #1 (couldn’t you at least choose a pseudonym?),
“Interchangable in what way exactly?”
I said that non-Northern Europeans are not interchangeable with Northern Europeans, though many people in this country seem to think so. Intermixture between Northern Europeans and these other populations would dilute the unique racial characteristics of Northern Europeans.
“Can you substantiate, in a scientific manner, the claim that someone from the Ukraine or from France is less "compatible" than someone who is British or German?”
If you want substantiation for this claim all you have to do is actually meet European people. Northern Europeans have markedly lighter skin, hair and eyes (among other things) on average than other Europeans. And of course there are genetic differences between European populations with the largest genetic difference being between Northern and Southern Europeans.
“Nonetheless, racial elements you disparage are found in waves of British and Germanic immigration to America.”
It’s only found in a small minority of these populations.
“Nonsense. There are dark Britons and Germans. Germans especially have a high concentration of the darker Alpine features.”
As I said above, dark skin and other non-Northern European racial characteristics are only found in a relatively small minority of these populations.
Fascist,
“This claim is not supported by genetic evidence (i.e., ~0% Mongoloid Y-DNA in Russians). Nor, for that matter, by my subjective observation. Russians, Poles, etc more closely resemble North Euros than South Euros and are definitely not Asiatic.”
Your observations differ from many others then. Mongoloid strains are only weakly present in Eastern Europe, but they are there. And you can see this in the eye shape as well as in the other features of some of the people of that region.
Also, this claim is backed up by genetic evidence. Take a look at this study:
“The data on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) restriction polymorphism in Czech population (n = 279) are presented. It was demonstrated that in terms of their structure, mitochondrial gene pools of Czechs and other Slavic populations (Russians, Poles, Slovenians, and Bosnians) were practically indistinguishable. In Czechs, the frequency of eastern-Eurasian (Mongoloid) mtDNA lineages constituted 1.8%. The spread of eastern-Eurasian mtDNA lineages belonging to different ethnolinguistic groups in the populations of Europe was examined. Frequency variations of these DNA lineages in different Slavic groups was observed, with the range from 1.2 and 1.6% in Southern and Western Slavs, respectively, to 1.3 to 5.2% in Eastern Slavs, the Russian population of Eastern Europe. The highest frequency of Mongoloid component was detected in the mitochondrial gene pools of Russian populations from the Russian North and the Northwestern region of Russia. This finding can be explained in terms of assimilation of northern-European Finno-Ugric populations during the formation of the Russian population of these regions. The origin of Mongoloid component in the gene pools of different groups of Slavs is discussed.”
But actually a lot of the Mongoloid features that are present in the Slavic and East Baltic peoples don’t come from intermixture with actual Mongoloids. Rather, these features come from an indigenous element to Eastern Europe that has partially evolved in the Mongoloid direction: the Lappoid. Intermixture with actual Mongoloids has only compounded the pre-existing problem.
David Smith,
You are obviously conflating what was/is the idealized northern European phenotype with what is the average of what most north European people actually are and look like.
Don't get me wrong, I highly esteem and admire Nordic culture in so many ways, and believe it should be protected -- it is just intellectually wrong to say, OR imply, other European sub-races should be discounted or overlooked in the role they played in European civilization, INCLUDING northern European civilization.
And don't kid yourself my friend, Alpine and Mediterranean genes are emphatically not a "relatively small minority of these populations".
Even Madison Grant and Carleton Coon admitted there is an appreciable amount of Med genes in the British Isles, and it is pretty well established that *most* Brit's, whether Nordic or otherwise, are not the primary descendants of the fifth century Germanic colonists (Anglo-Saxons, Jutes, Normans) of post-Roman Britain.
Additionally, the Germans have a very strong Alpine/Slavic admixture, with a trip to most German cities will quickly indeed attest to this fact (my visits to Berlin and Frankfurt-am-Mein certainly did).
As I pointed out before, culture is as important as biology in so many respects, and indigenous people of the north of Europe are just that: Northern Europeans, whether they are Nordic, Alpine or Med, or any combination thereof.
Nordman,
Yes, I of course know that there are some non-Northern European racial elements in Northern Europe. For example, I know that there is some Mediterranean admixture in the British Isles, and that there is some Alpine admixture in Germany—especially Southern Germany. However, I stand by my statement that Northern European racial types dominate in Northern Europe. I got my estimates for the racial composition of this region here.
“[I]t is just intellectually wrong to say, OR imply, other European sub-races should be discounted or overlooked in the role they played in European civilization, INCLUDING northern European civilization.”
I never said or implied that Alpines or Mediterraneans didn’t play a role in European civilization. (Though obviously Northern Europeans played a dominate role in Northern Europe and may have also played a strong role in other places as well.) I just said that Northern Europeans should separate from other European races for the sake of racial preservation.
“As I pointed out before, culture is as important as biology in so many respects, and indigenous people of the north of Europe are just that: Northern Europeans, whether they are Nordic, Alpine or Med, or any combination thereof.”
You have to take biology into account if you want to preserve the Northern European race. Like it or not, Alpines and Mediterraneans are racially different from Northern Europeans. Significant intermixture with Alpines or Mediterraneans would destroy the Northern European race.
This is why once we achieve racial separation in America we should have a very strict immigration policy. I’ve already said that we should only allow immigration from Northern Europe. However, this doesn’t mean that we should let everybody from Northern Europe into our country. It would be foolish to let a German Alpine come here just because he or she is from Germany.
"This is why once we achieve racial separation in America we should have a very strict immigration policy. I’ve already said that we should only allow immigration from Northern Europe. However, this doesn’t mean that we should let everybody from Northern Europe into our country. It would be foolish to let a German Alpine come here just because he or she is from Germany."
__
David Smith,
You are way too extreme in your perceptions, since the Alpine and Med elements in most Northern European countries are indeed heavily amalgamated with the Nordic. Even RacialCompact points this out, that is why he calls it the 'Nordish Race' rather than Nordic.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for Nordish preservation, racially and culturally, but let's keep it real, where, like I said, most NW Euro's (with the overall exception of Scandinavia), even if they look 'Nordic', indeed have appreciable amounts of Alpine and Med genes in their family tree, ESPECIALLY in Britain, where much of the indigenous population was Pictish/Cambrian/Caledonian, who later merged with the Celts and the minority Germanic Anglo/Saxon/Jute settler/colonists.
For you to make such an odd claim that 'we' should 'prohibit' Alpine Germans from immigrating to the US is downright weird, if not needlessly provacative.
I'll leave you with a quote from Tanstaafl, the sentiments of which of his I highly agree with -
"If you sincerely seek strict genetic purity for yourself and your family you'll get no objections from me. But it seems to me this is more often a position taken falsely by provocateurs who fear White unity and wish to keep us weak and fractured into many little squabbling ethnies.
"Which is it in your case?"
It seems to me that you are attempting to delegitimize North Euro racial preservation by exaggerating the level of intermixture with other races.
According to Richard McCulloch’s estimates the North Euro race (which he refers to as the “Nordish” race) is 100 percent of Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, and the Netherlands. It is also 95 percent of Belgium and 80 percent of Germany. (For the rest you will have to go to the Racial Compact website yourself.) Granted, some of what Richard McCulloch calls “Nordish” (I hate that word) are the products of intermixture with non-Nordish races. However, the North Euro racial elements are, in McCulloch’s words, “generally more numerous and predominate” in these cases. Moreover, in NW Europe the only racial types that are the result of intermixture with non-North Euro races are the North-Atlantid, the Palaeo-Atlantid, and the Noric. And the Noric type is mainly only found in the southern periphery area of NW Europe.
The estimates McCulloch uses are, according to him, “a synthesis derived from several sources, chief among which are John R. Baker's Race (1974) and Carleton S. Coon's The Races of Europe (1939).” In other words, they provide a good rough estimate.
By the way, your quote from Tanstaafl is misplaced. I don’t want division amongst White Americans. Rather, I want White Americans united around North Euro racial preservation. After all, the vast majority of White Americans are of NW Euro racial stock.
North America is like the Promised Land for the North Euro race. In Europe this race is confined only to the northern fringes of the European continent. But in North America this race has an entire continent north of the Rio Grande. This is why the concept of North Euro racial preservation is so important here. In a lot of ways the existence of the North Euro race is completely dependent upon North America.
David,
Let me say this again: I am all for Nordish, or Nordic preservation, but I am also a realist on the origins of the Northern European peoples, and not just an idealist.
For one thing, as much as I like McCullough, he, and his site, is not the final, be-all-and-end-all of Nordish anthropology (and yes, even he uses the term Nordish correctly, for with the exception of parts of Scandinavia, there is no completely homogenous Nordic group).
Yes, the Nordish elements certainly predominates in Northern Europe as a whole, but they are certainly by no means the overwhelming majority everywhere. For example, the Paleo-Atlantid and related groups are the indigenous stock of the British Isles, the people who were there before the arrival of the Celtic and post-Roman Germanic invaders --and they are not just relegated to the fringes of the Isles. (*I always get a kick out how the British wish to so strongly desire to identify as Anglo-Saxons, yet forget or overlook where the "Angel-Sächsiche" actually came from.)
Their genetic imprint is realistically much higher than McCullough, or some others, may want to believe:
[...] But geneticists who have tested DNA throughout the British Isles are edging toward a different conclusion. Many are struck by the overall genetic similarities, leading some to claim that both Britain and Ireland have been inhabited for thousands of years by a single people that have remained in the majority, with only minor additions from later invaders like Celts, Romans, Angles , Saxons, Vikings and Normans. [...]
"English, Irish, Scots: They’re All One, Genes Suggest"
http://tinyurl.com/meu7ao
I have been all over the US and to many countries in Europe (northern and otherwise), and again, most White Americans and White Brits do not look very different from the European average (with the overall exception of the Greeks, southern Italians, Portuguese, for example), nor do they (the average British and Americans) look like your average Swede or Norwegian.
Again David, I stand by my position that since British and American Northern Euro's have fairly appreciable amounts of Alpine and, to a lesser extent, Med genes, it is provocative, to say the least, to unnecessarily alienate them by suggesting, or even hinting, that they are somehow 'not welcome' in participating in a movement for the future of their country(ies) and their People.
As precarious as the position is for the Nordic and other White sub-races, it is extremely dangerous to think we, or anyone else, has the luxury to cherry-pick.
Priorities, guys, priorities.
Nordman,
If you are a friend of North Euro racial preservation then I would hate to see what you would be like if you were an enemy!
First off, why do you refer to McCulloch as “McCullough?” Is that supposed to be some kind of joke/insult?
“For example, the Paleo-Atlantid and related groups are the indigenous stock of the British Isles, the people who were there before the arrival of the Celtic and post-Roman Germanic invaders --and they are not just relegated to the fringes of the Isles.”
According to McCulloch and the SNPA the Brunn are the original indigenous Paleolithic inhabitants of the British Isles. Also, according to the SNPA, “Paleo-Atlantids do not comprise an important element in any northern European population.” So if anything McCulloch is probably overestimating their presence in the British Isles.
“I have been all over the US and to many countries in Europe (northern and otherwise), and again, most White Americans and White Brits do not look very different from the European average”
This statement couldn’t be more false. White Americans have significantly lighter skin, hair and eyes than most European populations. Pigmentation is significantly darker in France, southern Europe, the Balkans, and even parts of central and eastern Europe. Also, some eastern Europeans exhibit Mongoloid features.
But, Nordman, even you admitted that North Euros are distinct from other Europeans in your first comment when you said that “there are many Slavs that could pass for British or German, but certainly not most of them.” Why are you contradicting yourself now?
“it is provocative, to say the least, to unnecessarily alienate them by suggesting, or even hinting, that they are somehow 'not welcome' in participating in a movement for the future of their country(ies) and their People.”
It’s not provocative in the least bit because the vast majority of White Americans are of NW Euro racial stock. Besides, I would not exclude White Americans who are Alpines or assimilable Mediterraneanids. Instead, I would only exclude the incompatible Mediterranid elements. Also, I would heavily restrict future European immigration by only allowing the most distinct and central North Euro racial types to come here. Alpines, Mediterranids and the peripheral North Euro racial types would be prevented from immigrating. After all, immigration policy should improve the racial stock of a nation, not denigrate and destroy it. Though I must say that I would be perfectly fine with absolutely zero European immigration as well.
By the way, Nordman, what is your ethnicity? Are you Northern European?
David,
All I am saying is that the average British or American White is not as genetically Nordic as you may wish for them to be, and it is not such a problem, for they are still Northern Europeans, most all of whom possess a greater or lesser degree of Nordic ancestry. When you act as if it is so important and insistent on "Nordic" or "Aryan" purity, you (not you personally, anyone) can come across as a crank that is going to potentially scare off members of a future White movement, even, and especially, intelligent and altruistic Nordic Whites.
Obviously you did not read the article that I provided from a major British anthropologist on the more realistic origins of the UK, and instead keep citing McCulloch (sorry to originally misspell his name, it was not a joke, just an accident). Whatever the earliest Britons were racially, Med or otherwise, the British today certainly are not majority Germanic, i.e. Anglo-Saxon-Jute-Norman, in spite of the desire to identify as 'Anglo-Saxon'. Britain is far more Celtic than Germanic (who are the truest Nords). BTW, you ask if I am N. Euro (I am), and I would like in return to ask just how 'Nordic' is your family tree?
What is a bit unsettling about the sub-text of what you say is that it can come across as only 'blond, blue eyes need apply'. Don't get me wrong, I highly esteem these traits, but, as I mentioned with the Slavs, that culture is just as important to Northern European civilization, not just light coloration (which many Slavs indeed possess).
Again, only the Germanic Danes, Norwegians and Swedes are by-and-large the most Nordic members of the White race, and they are relatively few in number (I believe, 3m, 5m, and 8m, respectively). The two major Northern European nations, Britain and Germany, have certainly non-negligible amounts of Alpine and Med genes, and this cannot be denied, nor should it, since this is what makes the them the countries that they are. For goodness sake, even Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard recognized this -- the civilizational creativity of the Med and the tenacious, stoic character of the Alpine. C'mon, even the hierarchy of National Socialist Germany were obviously rather sub-racially mixed, yet they were the bravest, most tenacious warrior-leaders the White race has seen in centuries.
This ties into my point regarding your calling attention to what I said on the Slavs. My point was, even though many Slavs are Nordish, their culture is not Northern European, and hence, even a part-Alpine or part-Med North Euro is culturally more 'White' than even the 'blondest Russian'.
Most importantly, due to the tremendously precarious position that all White sub-races and groups are in, it is the height of folly to potentially alienate them by implying that We all shouldn't work together to secure a stable future for our progeny.
And don't worry, Whites are still going to retain their historical and linguistic homelands.
I have definitely carried this discussion with you on far too long and have no intention of continuing it. You either fail to comprehend what I am saying or are purposely misinterpreting my views.
All I want is to preserve White Americans as they are today. They are indeed exactly as distinctly NW European as I could wish for them to be. You are the one who is the gene fanatic as shown by your ravings about “Med genes” and “Alpine genes.”
And you definitely intentionally misspelled McCulloch’s name. I have seen a couple of other people spell it the same way you did; too much coincidence. Also, you were indeed originally saying that Slavs are racially different from the British and Germans. Here’s what you said:
“Indeed there are many Slavs that could pass for British or German, but certainly not most of them.
Additionally, many Slavs that look German indeed ARE German -- the descendants of German farmers, soldiers and elites, that where often invited in by various Slavic nobility, whom often also intermarried with them.”
Hello again David,
First of all, control yourself.
Secondly, I did not mean to deliberately misspell McCulloch’s name. It was an accident (why you are overly concerned about this is a bit strange).
Additionally, you are misconstruing what I had to say about the Slavs. I originally meant to say they were distinct from Us Northern Europeans more culturally than they are racially (of course, eastern Slavs do have somewhat of a tendency to look somewhat Asiatic -- this is what I also meant regarding average looks vis-a-vis the Germans).
This is why I said that I wish that 'gene fanatics' would get over the fact that since many Slavs ARE indeed Nordish, that they are completely compatible and interchangeable with the American and North(West)ern European Majority, since I agree that we should not act as if all White populations are an undifferentiated whole, culturally AS WELL as racially.
Most importantly, in this 'eleventh hour' of White Survival, let us work -- from whatever sub-group/race we come from -- as White Americans of the Dispossessed American Majority, and not squabble or insult each other on who is more (or, more pointedly, who wishes they were) the archetype of the 'idealized Aryan'.
[...]
"Apart from being a derogatory, value-laden word that immediately lends itself to an array of catastrophic fantasies and judgment day scenarios, the word "Nazi" also gives birth to a schizoid behavior among a number of White nationalists, particularly in America. Many of them seriously project in their minds National Socialist Germany as a country populated by Albino-like Nordic- Übermenschen) possessing a hidden force that could be resuscitated any day either in Patagonia or on astral UFO's. As noted previously in TOO (see here and here), the false reenactment of political events leads to their farcical repetition — with dangerous political consequences. In our postmodernity, the overkill of false images leads to the real kill. The often rowdy and infantile behavior of such "proud Aryan internet warriors" scares off serious White people who could otherwise be of some help in these decisive days of struggle for Western civilization. We must ask ourselves: Cui bono? Who benefits?
"Indeed, the surreal image of National Socialism as exclusively Nordic has been promoted by the left — antifascist scholars, environmentalists, Freudo-Boasians, various Jewish and pro-Jewish academic think tanks, the caviar-left, the gated community White liberals, etc. How? For decades they have been cranking out an overkill of one-sided books and movies on National Socialism and racism, and this for two simple reasons. First, it pays well and provides lush media and academic sinecures. Secondly, there has been a well-conceived pedagogical project ever since 1945
to prevent a critical reexamination of race and racism." [...]
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Sunic-RaceIII.html
Also let's never forget the most salient point of all: That the future White American Republic, as well as the future of all White National Homelands, will be built and structured on aristocratic principles, where the Nordish, as well as all other White groups, will have the best reproduce in the greatest numbers, and the best will be brought out of all it's citizens.
Eyes on the prize guys, eyes on the prize.
"--The often rowdy and infantile behavior of such "proud Aryan internet warriors" scares off serious White people who could otherwise be of some help in these decisive days of struggle for Western civilization. We must ask ourselves: Cui bono? Who benefits?--"
__
'Proud Aryan Internet Warriors' better get out of their mom's basement and begin to come to terms with reality.
[...]
"The Many Faces of National Socialism"
"The much discussed German anti-Slavic policies, which were based on the alleged racial inferiority of Slavs, are nonsense — all the more so since at least one out of three Germans carries the name of Slavic origin. Prior to 1945, well over 15 million Germans were born and lived in the Slavic speaking areas of East Europe, including the third-ranking man in the National Socialist command, the Russian-Baltic born German Alfred Rosenberg. Rosenberg's face shows Nordic features with a slight Alpine Slavic streak.
[...]
"Some of the highest ranking German generals in the Wehrmacht were of Slavic-German origin. Their family names are clearly Slavic and their skull morphology points to a large variety of all European subracial types, from the Alpine ("ostisch"), the Mediterranean ("westisch") to the Nordic: Hans Hellmich, Curt Badinski, Bruno Chrobeck, Emil Dedek, Heinrich Domansky, Walter Dybilasz, Erich Glodkowski, Kurt Mierzinsky, Adalbert Mikulicz, Bronislaw Pawel, Georg Radziej, Hans Radisch, Franz Zednicek, Walter von Brauchitsch. So were the other high German officers such as the master of panzer warfare, the round-headed Heinz Guderian, who was of distant Armenian origin, or the tall and big-nosed Wilhelm Canaris, who was of Italian/Greek origin. (See the important book by Christopher Dolbeau — practically unknown in France — Face au Bolchevisme: Petit dictionnaire des résistances nationales à l’Est de l’Europe: 1917–1989. (Against Bolshevism: A Little Dictionary of National Resistances in East Europe: 1917–1989)."
[...]
And, best of all -
"To assume, therefore, that the Institute for Racial Hygiene in Germany or the Gestapo were checking the names or the cranial index of high German officials, before admitting them to high military positions is academic lunacy. Yet a type of deliberate lunacy is still alive in some influential anti-German conspiratorial circles in the West and in America. The alleged racism of Germans against Slavs was part and parcel of the Allied propaganda and later of the Frankfurt School, whose goal was to whip up Slavs during and after WWII into anti-German frenzy. By accepting more than one million volunteers from Russia, Ukraine, Croatia, Slovakia, etc. in the Wehrmacht and by allowing half a million non-German European volunteers in the Waffen SS, the German high military command thought it could create its own version of united Europe and successfully fight the war on two fronts."
... **The alleged racism of Germans against Slavs was part and parcel of the Allied propaganda and later of the Frankfurt School, whose goal was to whip up Slavs during and after WWII into anti-German frenzy.** ...
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Sunic-RaceIII.html
Post a Comment