Although mutation provides the fuel for phenotypic evolution, it also imposes a substantial burden on fitness through the production of predominantly deleterious alleles, a matter of concern from a human-health perspective. [. . .] a consideration of the long-term consequences of current human behavior for deleterious-mutation accumulation leads to the conclusion that a substantial reduction in human fitness can be expected over the next few centuries in industrialized societies unless novel means of genetic intervention are developed.I know Hamilton expressed similar concerns, but to the extent accelerated accumulation of deleterious mutations under modern conditions is a real/serious problem this author's suggestion of "multigenerational cryogenic storage and utilization of gametes and/or embryos" seems preferable to some of Hamilton's goofier "solutions" (such as marrying HIV- Nairobi prostitutes to protect one's offspring from impending AIDS epidemic). I'm not too worried about imminent mutational meltdown (some modern "problems" like antibiotics may be in the process of solving themselves), but from a strictly conservationist or even historical standpoint, large-scale, long-term storage of human genetic and/or gametic material makes sense. If we can see the need for plants and animals, why not for ourselves?
Genetic deterioration of modern populations?
A post by Notus Wind brought this paper to my attention:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
559 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 559 Newer› Newest»Anyways Silver you little Nordic wannabe 'house nigger' wake up and smell the coffee. The Northern Europeans are not our biological allies. Ask yourself one question, where does every piece of anti Southern European propaganda come from? It comes from Northern Europeans, no one else.
Me, a house nigger? Listing my pro-wog bona fides would require a book length production. (One of my favorites: forming a local basketball team calling itself "Ozzieboys," all of us dagos with aussie names like "Johnno," "Gibbo," "Macca," "Gav," "Nige" on our jerseys. Plenty of laughs.)
I never said they were our "biological allies." Only Jews are more aware of how much these people hate the living fuck out of us. But give them credit where it's due: a lot of them have overcome it, or are at least willing to act as though they have (which is not nothing).
Look, I grew up around these people. Virtually pure anglosaxon for miles and miles around where I lived (or at least it felt like it). I can see what's being lost and, call me a sentimental fool, I feel for them a bit. My attitude is this: if there was going to be any racial dispossessing being done, I want people like me doing it. If it's going to be niggers, spics, hindoos, gooks, islanders doing it, then fuck it, best to call the whole thing off. Your attitude of cheering on their demise, while I can understand where you're coming from, is not only morally indefensible it's a strategic blunder -- the rest of the world that has it in for them has it in only slightly less for us.
I say that the best of liberal antiracism can be retained: you can be pro-self-kind to the hilt without necessarily hating the other guy, especially when he's willing to extend to you the same courtesy. Politically, this requires some form of separatism, and I believe it can be achieved without necessarily requiring bloodshed, although that would be a price worth paying when you consider what is at stake.
Desmond, the evidence is all around you in the form of race-mixers.
White diversity boosters associate with plenty of non-whites. That it's typically serves their self-interest to do so is coincidental -- and so obvious a point I would have thought it went without saying.
I'm not interested in discussing this further. You're the most obtuse individual I've ever come across.
"Putnam's recent study on diversity involved nearly 30,000 people in 41 communities. He found that the more diverse neighborhoods are the less social capital they create. People in diverse communities volunteer less, give to charity less, vote less and work on less community projects. The simple fact is that people do not trust people they share little in common with.
But he's not saying they feel revulsion towards them (a sense of deep racial disgust). It's a state of neither positive emotional attachment nor burning hatred.
They don't care about race or anything that we care for, because they are the result of race mixing so there is nothing that they can nor want to preserve, they can only and want to destroy what they can never achieve for themselves, as a way to bring everything down to their level and hence make themselves "equal".
To be honest, a surprising number do seem to think this way. I doubt it has anything to do with "making themselves equal," though, as most of them go about their lives without it ever entering their minds that you're supposed to be "superior" (came as news to me, and while I'd agree there's a case for it "on paper," it's nothing I feel in my bones). What they're usually aware of is that you and we are fundamentally different and that you don't like us and that you have demonstrated this to us on numerous occasions -- so hating you back is just a reaction.
They're extremely short-sighted, though. They might rejoice at nords mixing with niggers, like my interlocutor above, but they don't realize that that just makes it all the harder for us to extricate ourselves from the mess also, and that unless we do extricate, long term we're dead too.
Anyway, you're a thoroughgoing dolt whose only effect is drag discussions into racial minutiae that precious few in the mainstream have in any interest in. The point is to win the support of a mainstream audience, which your brand of blather is not about to do any time soon.
"They don't care about race or anything that we care for, because they are the result of race mixing so there is nothing that they can nor want to preserve, they can only and want to destroy what they can never achieve for themselves, as a way to bring everything down to their level and hence make themselves "equal"."For example jews and mediterraneans knows that they are not pure europids"
-----> We have a unique biological history and ethnogenis just as the Northerners do. And no one else on the planet has our exact genetic characteristics, just like with Northern Europe..or any other specific place for example.
You're nothing special, nor are you 'pure'. As 'pure race' from a scientific/empirical perspective does not exist. Northern Europeans for instance are genetically intermediate between Sub Saharan Africans and Amerindians. Northern Europeans are genetically closer to Sub Saharan Africans than Amerindians are, and so forth. So much for your 'pure race' fantasy.
If we don't care about race then why do Northern Europeans mix at a rate like 50 fold Southern Europeans do? The reasons South America is mostly Amerindian is because the Spaniards were not genocidal like the Anglo-Saxons, not because the Spaniards couldn't refrain from non European genitalia like you're current women can't.
I would like to see Northern Europeans go the way of the dodo for 2 reasons. A. They are a capable people and used to have power that could harm us. Just a hundred years ago a North European confederation could have taken over the world, but obviously you all were very short sighted, and controlled by Jews, anyways.
B. Of all the people on the planet, no people are more anti-Southern European and create more anti-Southern European propaganda. I simply do not see us capable of merging with you.
And yes, I delight in how Jews are biologically related to us, and how Jews are now in complete control of the United States, Great Britain, and the puppet government in 'Germany'.
Heil Heidi Klum!
I simply do not see us capable of merging with you.
So the "choice" you've posited is between "Northern Europeans going the way of the dodo" and "merging with you." This "merging" of course would mean the mongrelization of Northern Europeans and therefore the elimination, the extinction of Northern Europeans.
In other words, the only acceptable "choice" to you is one that no matter what involves the genocide, elimination, extinction, death of Northern Europeans.
And yes, I delight in how Jews are biologically related to us, and how Jews are now in complete control of the United States, Great Britain, and the puppet government in 'Germany'.
This guy is not Italian.
And yes, I delight in how Jews are biologically related to us, and how Jews are now in complete control of the United States, Great Britain, and the puppet government in 'Germany'. - Anon
This guy is not Italian. - Cyd
--
Just what I suspect also.
The "anons" at 2:20am and 3:47am is some anti-Southern European mendaciously masquerading himself as a "swarthoid" -- and is having a conversation with himself.
Nice try though.
Wrong. 2:20 and 3:47 are not the same person. It's possible 2:20 is The Undiscovered Jew, a deranged half-Jewish teenager who obsessively hates Northern Europeans. If it's not The Undiscovered Jew, then it's probably a southern European like it says it is.
"Cyd said...
This guy is not Italian."
Yes he is not Italian, he is a Greek living in America (or a Greek-American, whatever you want to call it), he even said it himself on this blog. Though he loves Italians and both of you are pretty much on the same wavelength in your anti-Northern European stances.
____________________________________
"Anonymous said...
The "anons" at 2:20am and 3:47am is some anti-Southern European mendaciously masquerading himself as a "swarthoid" -- and is having a conversation with himself."
"Anonymous said...
If it's not The Undiscovered Jew, then it's probably a southern European like it says it is."
The anon at 2:20 is neither a jew nor is he a "anti-Southern European mendaciously masquerading", it's some yellowishly brown swarthoid who goes by the name of "Sir Infamous" on forumbiodiversity.com and http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/index/.
Yes he is not Italian, he is a Greek living in America (or a Greek-American, whatever you want to call it), he even said it himself on this blog. Though he loves Italians and both of you are pretty much on the same wavelength in your anti-Northern European stances.
He's not that either.
You're nothing special, nor are you 'pure'. As 'pure race' from a scientific/empirical perspective does not exist. Northern Europeans for instance are genetically intermediate between Sub Saharan Africans and Amerindians. Northern Europeans are genetically closer to Sub Saharan Africans than Amerindians are, and so forth. So much for your 'pure race' fantasy.
Boasian nonsense. Northern Europeans are pure and have no kinship with Negroids or Amerindians. Negroids are primitives who are closer to Homo erectus by morphology than to Homo sapiens sapiens. Amerindians are East Asian by ancestry but are yet genetically distinct even from modern East Asians due to genetic drift. Northern Europeans are a pure race of Homo sapiens sapiens, proven by our dictinctiveness in appearance and genetics, and pale skin which indicates no admixture from tropical races.
"""Boasian nonsense. Northern Europeans are pure and have no kinship with Negroids or Amerindians. Negroids are primitives who are closer to Homo erectus by morphology than to Homo sapiens sapiens. Amerindians are East Asian by ancestry but are yet genetically distinct even from modern East Asians due to genetic drift. Northern Europeans are a pure race of Homo sapiens sapiens, proven by our dictinctiveness in appearance and genetics, and pale skin which indicates no admixture from tropical race""
----> you are retarded, any Northern European population geneticist will tell you Northern Europeans are genetically intermediate from Negroids and Amerindians, as are Southern Europeans.
Europeans, including Northern Europeans are closer to Negroids than Amerindians are, it's a genetic fact.
"the "choice" you've posited is between "Northern Europeans going the way of the dodo" and "merging with you." This "merging" of course would mean the mongrelization of Northern Europeans and therefore the elimination, the extinction of Northern Europeans."
-----> The few Southern Europeans in America or Australia have no where near the numbers to genetically annihilate Northern Europeans. If the two groups were to merge, then a Northern type would assuredly still predominate and the Southern type would be pretty much overwelmed. That is at least in the U.S.A or something. Unfortunately Southern European white nationalist clowns don't seem to mind this.
It will take much more, low birth rates + mating with far more alien races like Blacks or predominately Amerindian Mestizos, or Muslims and Chinese and so forth to totally get rid Northern Europeans. Why do you think the Jews brought in 'Third World' immigration to the states? They know Southern and Eastern Europeans wont be sufficient enough for the task. That would just change them a bit, not totally wipe them out.
"To be honest, a surprising number do seem to think this way. I doubt it has anything to do with "making themselves equal," though, as most of them go about their lives without it ever entering their minds that you're supposed to be "superior" (came as news to me, and while I'd agree there's a case for it "on paper," it's nothing I feel in my bones). What they're usually aware of is that you and we are fundamentally different and that you don't like us and that you have demonstrated this to us on numerous occasions -- so hating you back is just a reaction.
They're extremely short-sighted, though. They might rejoice at nords mixing with niggers, like my interlocutor above, but they don't realize that that just makes it all the harder for us to extricate ourselves from the mess also, and that unless we do extricate, long term we're dead too."
----> Why is it you seek to join them so much? "case on paper"? You must absolutely believe in Mediterranean (intellectual) inferiority then.
You realize if we merge with Northern Europoids, A. we would be sacrificing our own identity as well as biological uniqueness.
B. The ideal would be a Northern one and they would put Northerners above Southerners.
you are the one who is short sighted, and you must learn to resist.
Mediterraneans don't need to merge with Nords (at least not in any large scale level, maybe we could assimilate a small amount but that's it), we need Nords to go, and we need them to lose all power they have, Which is taking place. Once that happens we can take control of our own destiny. For one thing we must breed our highest stock at far higher numbers than our lower stock..and keep doing that over and over. Any nation with a racial goal and upward ideal should do this. You think the fat Northern slobs you see at your local Walmart are superior to yourself or the highest of us? lol
Currently, on average they are superior at some things, but we can easily pass that up. Northern Europoids also have many inherit weaknesses that are currently being exploited. They would not even be in this situation if they didn't have an inherit ability to be easily swayed, and often a child like naiveness in them (often in their women especially).
We will explore the stars and they will be left in the dust with their niggers, degeneration, and other filth they are so susceptible too love. : )
But we have a long way to go.
"To be honest, a surprising number do seem to think this way. I doubt it has anything to do with "making themselves equal," though, as most of them go about their lives without it ever entering their minds that you're supposed to be "superior" (came as news to me, and while I'd agree there's a case for it "on paper," it's nothing I feel in my bones). What they're usually aware of is that you and we are fundamentally different and that you don't like us and that you have demonstrated this to us on numerous occasions -- so hating you back is just a reaction.
They're extremely short-sighted, though. They might rejoice at nords mixing with niggers, like my interlocutor above, but they don't realize that that just makes it all the harder for us to extricate ourselves from the mess also, and that unless we do extricate, long term we're dead too."
----> Why is it you seek to join them so much? "case on paper"? You must absolutely believe in Mediterranean (intellectual) inferiority then.
You realize if we merge with Northern Europoids, A. we would be sacrificing our own identity as well as biological uniqueness.
B. The physical ideal would be a Northern one and they would put Northerners above Southerners.
you are the one who is short sighted, and you must learn to resist.
Mediterraneans don't need to merge with Nords (at least not in any large scale level, maybe we could assimilate a small amount but that's it, it would be too dangerous otherwise), we need Nords to go, and we need them to lose all power they have, Which is taking place. Once that happens we can take control of our own destiny. For one thing we must breed our highest stock at far higher numbers than our lower stock..and keep doing that over and over. Any nation with a racial goal and upward ideal should do this. You think the fat Northern slobs you see at your local Walmart are superior to yourself or the highest of us? lol
Currently, on average they are superior at some things, but we can easily pass that up. Northern Europoids also have many inherit weaknesses that are currently being exploited. They would not even be in this situation if they didn't have an inherit ability to be easily swayed, and often a child like naiveness in them (often in their women especially).
I want us to explore the stars and want them to be left in the dust with their niggers, degeneration, and other filth they are so susceptible too love. : )
But we have a long way to go, and the first crucial step is getting rid of them.
I double posted on accident.
Anyway, I'm done with writing on here. I have unashamedly given my true opinion on a blog owned by a Nordicist. Fear not Northern 'friends' I'm not in any position of power. Although I do see your demise as inevitable, ..it's just I hope Meds can eventually take advantage of this situation and better themselves, if not as Silver said we'll end up just like you. But unlike Silver, I have real ideals and I also realize the Northerners are not our allies.
We will explore the stars and they will be left in the dust with their niggers, degeneration, and other filth they are so susceptible too love. : )
LOL. Are there any viable swarthoid space programs? Swarthoids haven't even mastered industry.
Let's see what Lewis Terman (The inventor of the Stanford-Binet IQ test amongst many other things) had to say about racial intellectual contrasts:
"The intelligence of the average negro is vastly inferior to that of the white man. The available data indicate that the average mulatto occupies about a mid-position between pure negro and pure white. The intelligence of the American Indian has also been overrated, for mental tests indicate that it is not greatly superior to that of the averge negro. Our Mexican population, which is largely of Indian extraction, makes little if any better showing. The immigrants who have recently come to us in such large numbers from Southern and South-eastern Europe are distinctly inferior mentally to the Nordic and Alpine strains we have received from Scandinavia, Germany, Great Britain, and France." - Lewis M. Terman (1922)
In the same context Robert Yerkes says the exact same thing in corroboration from testing results acquired from an army test that has been carried out on over one million (1.75 million to be exact) residents of America:
"The new figure became a rallying point for eugenicists who predicted doom and lamented our declining intelligence, caused by the unconstrained breeding of the poor and feebleminded, the spread of Negro blood through interbreeding, and the swamping of an intelligent native stock by the immigrating dregs of southern and eastern Europe. European immigrants could be graded by their country of origin. The average man of many nations was a moron. The darker people of southern Europe and the Slavs of eastern Europe were less intelligent than the fair people of western and northern Europe. Nordic supremacy was not a jingoistic prejudice. The average Russian had a mental age of 11.34; the Italian, 11.01; The Pole, 10.74. The Polish joke attained the same legitimacy as the moron joke - indeed, they described the same animal.
The Negro lay at bottom of the scale with an average mental age of 10.41. For example, at Camp Lee, Blacks were divided into three groups based on the intensity of skin color; as might be expected the lighter groups scored higher!" - Robert M. Yerkes , Psychological examining in the United States Army (1921), summarization by Stephen Jay Gould (1981)
(To be continued)
PART 2:
Another quote from Joel N. Shurkin this time, that also corroborates with what has already been said:
"Immigrants were classified by nation of origin, with the smartest ones coming from Northern Europe and the dumbest from Southern Europe. The lighter the skin, the brighter the recruit." - Joel N. Shurkin (1992)
As it says negroes are at one extremity and Whites are at another extremity, between each extremities is the mulatto who is not as dumb as the pure negro but not as smart as the pure White.
The Southern European and Southeastern European is smarter than the negro but a moron compared to the Nordic and hence closer to the mulatto than to the Nordic, he is therefore inferior in terms of intellectual capabilities (amongst many other things) to the fair individuals of Northwestern European descent.
The so called "meds" are the result of genetic deteriotation and alteration of the Caucasoid proper (Nordic), by mixing the Nordic with some amount of negroid strains as well as an added variety of other exotic strains you get a an exotic "caucasoid" which would falls under the "mediterranean" category. The so-called mediterranean is just like the mulatto, between smart and dumb, between tall and short, between black and white etc.
Even the walnut sized brain of a mediterranean could make the necessary processing to come to an understanding about the implications of this, but just in case:
Pure Whites = Intelligent
Pure Negroes = Stupid
Mediterraneans/Arabs/Jews = Not too stupid, not too intelligent.
Since you seem to like PC science, there is this study that basically says that jews are mongrels:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100826141331.htm
They admit that "Ashkenazi Jewish population is genetically more diverse than people of European descent", of course you can not expect them to say the truth in proper manner.
Jews are the result of mongrelization, just like meds, arabs and all of the other swarthoid sub-nigger races.
I see the anti-Southern European, basement-dwelling troglodytes are out in full-force here today.
C'mon guys, its Sunday -- can't y'all take a break from your keyboard-Viking crusades against "Swarthoids" and take a pretty Nordish girl out on a date??
(*oops - silly question)
Anyway, I'm done with writing on here. I have unashamedly given my true opinion on a blog owned by a Nordicist. Fear not Northern 'friends' I'm not in any position of power. Although I do see your demise as inevitable, ..it's just I hope Meds can eventually take advantage of this situation and better themselves, if not as Silver said we'll end up just like you. But unlike Silver, I have real ideals and I also realize the Northerners are not our allies.
Yeah sure, like you and Silver-stein are actual Meds or actually care about Southern Euros - LOL.
Keep having that conversation with yourself, 'Odin'.
"The anon at 2:20 is neither a jew nor is he a "anti-Southern European mendaciously masquerading", it's some yellowishly brown swarthoid who goes by the name of "Sir Infamous" on forumbiodiversity.com and http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/index/."
Christ Almighty Rassenhygieniker, why on earth did you send us to that wretched dungeon? I've scarcely visited a more dowdy and embarassing place on the net. Populated by a few Southern European lost sheep striving to confirm their membership of some mythical all-European abstraction, and even sadder Mohammedan Near-Easterners and a 'Eurasian' gaily assuming they're as white/European as John Wayne, don't cha know?
Iranians are white? May be as part of an abstract, utterly meaningless racial division opposed to Mongoloid, Negroid, etc. But otherwise, yeah, I always think I'm in Stockholm or Minneapolis whenever I visit Teheran. Lord.
These seriously deluded wannabe 'whites' cause me as much dismay as the Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Turks and Cypriots claiming to be nations of Europe. From Herodotus (actually you could mention Homer's epics too) heretofore, the boundaries of Europe haven't extended to the Tigris or Persian Gulf.
As to this theory around which this debate ought to have been centred, genetic deterioration among modern Europeans and their overseas progeny, from observation - whatever its accuracy - I affirm that people are fatter, duller and coarser-looking than of past days.
Racial logic favoured by patrons of http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/index/ as follows:
I'm obviously not Chinese or Negro, so what's left? Caucasian. And you're Caucasian too. And Algeria/Turkey/Baluchistan are so much closer to Europe than the Sudan or Korea, therefore incontrovertibly I'm a European who just happens to come from outside of Europe. Is your daughter Tiffany/Carla available on Friday night?
Aussies in dense, Antarctic-like forests on the farthest south cape of Tasmania have more genetic community with Europe than a Tunisian or 25:25:50% Burmese/Filipino/'Briton' ever will. No offence meant to specific persons.
Another choice specimen from their notice-board of estimable minds on ethnography:
"Not only middle easterns but also north africans and other caucasians (iranians, afghans...) since they are from the same race. Even half somali people sometimes look white.
The two kids also have broad faces in opposit to their father's nordic long face."
So true, I always hoped that if my blonde, pale-as-a-bedsheet mother were to remarry after the divorce it would be an Afghan.
I see the anti-Southern European, basement-dwelling troglodytes are out in full-force here today.
Are you insane? Southern Europeans are filling this thread with posts saying they want Northern Europeans to be exterminated.
C'mon guys, its Sunday -- can't y'all take a break from your keyboard-Viking crusades against "Swarthoids"
Hi Kulaks. It figures you would interpret southern Europeans hoping for the genocide of Northern Europeans as "anti-Southern European, basement-dwelling troglodytes are out in full-force here today."
> I want us to explore the stars and want them to be left in the dust with their niggers,
Now, now, don't be rude. We'll be cooperating. It's natural. We need allies, you need allies, and we're cousins.
> But unlike Silver, I have real ideals and I also realize the Northerners are not our allies.
Man, I just bought some of that tomato sauce y'all invented, and this is the thanks? I also watched Taxi Driver and the entirety of The Sopranos!
Just kidding.
Alliance runs on geographic proximity and on blood. We're natural allies, even before you consider our cultural ties. I think that most Nordicists are not interested in wiping y'all out, or cross-breeding you with Andaman Islanders or something. We like you, and we like Slavic peoples. Hell, you invented Europe.
Hi Kulaks. It figures you would interpret southern Europeans hoping for the genocide of Northern Europeans as "anti-Southern European, basement-dwelling troglodytes are out in full-force here today."
Hi MGLS...
Now, now, don't be rude. We'll be cooperating. It's natural. We need allies, you need allies, and we're cousins.
Are you kidding? They can't even manage First World economies, let alone viable space programs. Any sort of space alliance would be with Russia. The swarthoids would just leech off of our work and ingenuity.
Southern European economies are much higher than Russia, lol
"Anonymous said...
Currently, on average they are superior at some things, but we can easily pass that up."
We have always been superior, though you are right we are too kind (it is not however an inferior nor superior trait, it is a trait pertaining to our good nature toward our own folk, though we usually make the mistake of extending it to individuals who are not of our blood which is something inferior races like to take advantage of).
Take the case of Ireland for example and the story of your fellow swarthoids the Firbolg, the Firbolg were nothing but a bunch late-to-the-party invaders who were constituated by bunch of small and weak runaway mediterranean slaves, they fought against the White people of Ireland and were unsurprisingly defeated by the Tuatha Dé Danann. The Tuatha Dé Danann were kind (like all Aryans) because even though they defeated the invading hordes of medish sub-niggers, they allowed them to choose a piece of land were they would be able to live in and the Firbolg chose the western part of Ireland which they named "Connacht", this is why you can find some swarthy individuals with black hairs and/or black eyes in the province of Connacht scattered between county Sligo, Roscommon, Galway and so on. Though black hairs and/or black eyes are an oddity in Ireland and is present in only 3% of the Irish population and only concentrated in Connacht(Thank God).
Description of the characteristics of the Firbolg race:
"Every one who is black-haired, who is a tattler, guileful, tale-telling, noisy, contemptible; every wretched, mean, strolling, unsteady, harsh, and inhospitable person; every slave, every mean thief, every churl, every one who loves not to listen to music and entertainment, the disturbers of every council and every assembly, and the promoters of discord among people, these are the descendants of the Firbolgs, of the Gailiuns, of the Liogairné, and of the Fir Domhnanns, in Erinn. But, however, the descendants of the Firbolgs are the most numerous of all these." - Passage quoted by Dubhaltach Mac Firbisigh in The Book of Genealogies (1650)
Description of the characteristics of the Tuatha Dé Danann race:
"Every one who is fair-haired, vengeful, large; and every plunderer; every musical person; the professors of musical and entertaining performances; who are adepts in all Druidical and magical arts; they are the descendants of the Tuatha Dé Danann, in Erinn." - Passage quoted by Dubhaltach Mac Firbisigh in The Book of Genealogies (1650)
(To be continued)
Southern European economies are much higher than Russia, lol
This is the big joke that a lot of these guys tend to overlook - that much of the Slavic countries, in spite of their appreciable amount of Nordic (or Nordish) genes, are still relatively underdeveloped, in spite of this, at least relative to Western Europe, including part-Med France and Italy.
(PART 2)
_____________________________________
"Anonymous said...
Once that happens we can take control of our own destiny. For one thing we must breed our highest stock at far higher numbers than our lower stock..and keep doing that over and over. Any nation with a racial goal and upward ideal should do this."
Mediterraneans have always been a race of slaves, the only "high stock mediterraneans" that exist are the ones who have Northwestern European admixture (such as Tyrolean Italians) contrasted with the near retardation of the Southern Italians which is not even worth to demonstrate, same thing for "high stock jews" and "high stock arabs".
Take the Mizrahim jews and Sephardic jews who are just as febble-minded as their mediterranean cousins and their arab neighbours. Typically the more mediterranean it gets the dumber it is, due to it's low intellectual capabilities the only control a med has over it's destiny is choosing which hand to use when serving dishes to it's master.
____________________________________
"Anonymous said...
Hi Kulaks. It figures you would interpret southern Europeans hoping for the genocide of Northern Europeans as "anti-Southern European, basement-dwelling troglodytes are out in full-force here today."
Does that reminds you of this proverb?
"The Mediterranean cries out in pain as he strikes you."
Actually the real proverb has "jew" instead of "mediterranean", but I figured changing it would still fit perfectly, and it does.
____________________________________
"Anonymous said...
Christ Almighty Rassenhygieniker, why on earth did you send us to that wretched dungeon?"
I know how you must feel mate, after visiting that putrid place of crass and feces, I feel the same way. But after seeing it do you not think the brown "humanity" to be truly repulsive both in mind and body, wouldn't you say? Truly a bunch to be pitied...
Take the case of Ireland for example and the story of your fellow swarthoids the Firbolg,
Wow, we actually have a 'Nordicist' admit the fact that Northern Europe is not exclusively "Nordic" -- and has "swarthoids" in its gene pool.
Gee, can just wonder what/who is in your family tree?
LMAO!
'High stock' Jews are the Ashkenazi Jews as they have Southern and Central European admixture, as well as more importantly having undergone intense selective pressures during their time in Europe, which made only the smart survive. That's why they are smarter than NOrthern Europeans.
"due to it's low intellectual capabilities the only control a med has over it's destiny is choosing which hand to use when serving dishes to it's master"
This Nordic circle Jerking is hilarious, wake up....you outnumber 'Mediterranean' Jews 40 to 1 and they STILL dominate you. They control your societies and run circles around you. They control your destiny.
The United States and Britain, places full of NorthWest Europeans are dominated by hooked nosed wogs, lol
Why did you lie and say you were "done with writing on here"?
Gee, can just wonder what/who is in your family tree?
This is probably why 'Rassenhyjerker' is such a
holier or more-Nordic-than-thou paranoid, he is probably worried about his own 'illuminous' ancestry (or lack thereof).
FYI - mental hygiene is just as important as racial hygiene.
"Anonymous said...
Wow, we actually have a 'Nordicist' admit the fact that Northern Europe is not exclusively "Nordic" -- and has "swarthoids" in its gene pool.
Gee, can just wonder what/who is in your family tree?
LMAO!"
And you bothered reading the whole thing, did you? Seeing as how fast you replied I doubt it, because if you did, you would have noticed that in the same post I made mention that only 3% of the population of Ireland has dark hairs.
But yeah there are some meds in Nordish countries, though they are seen as (undesirable) oddities, for example in Scandinavia meds are called "Svartskalle" (black heads) or "Blattar" (swarthy idiots).
Or in Germany Joseph Goebbels (a med) was regulary referred to as a "nachgedunkelter Schrumpfgermane" (shrunken Teuton gone dark).
Like I said oddities.
As this thread has proved, James Bowery was absolutely right when he called Mediterraneans junior partners to Jews.
That's why they are smarter than NOrthern Europeans.
This is not necessarily true.
I'm Southern European, and don't always like the antics of some of the more extreme Nordicists, but I do believe they (Northern Europeans, not necessarily Nordicists) are still very intelligent, perhaps even more so than Jews.
The problem is how they go about using their intelligence. In other words, go and get a good job or a good career -- or spend so much time online attacking South Euros, virtually all of whom I know have not an ounce or a scintilla of animosity toward them.
As far as average intelligence
Ashkenazi Jews >> Northern Europeans > Southern Europeans.
You don't see Ashkenazi living in trailers or breeding with beaners and spooks. No such thing as a hillbilly Ashkenazi either, lol
The comments by Kulaks Never Learn are very revealing. We have a Southern European calling for Northern European genocide, and Kulaks Never Learn's response is to complain about "anti-Southern European, basement-dwelling troglodytes."
virtually all of whom I know have not an ounce or a scintilla of animosity toward them
A Southern European on this thread has revealed his true feelings. He hopes Northern Europeans ago extinct, and he takes pride in Jewish domination. He says the "first crucial step" in the destiny of Southern Europeans is exterminating Northern Europeans.
Why are you ignoring the question, genocidal southern European? Why did you lie and say you were "done with writing on here"?
Not breeding at replacement rates and mixing with Negroids and Mestizos, importing hordes of non whites/non Europeans, so forth and so on, does not constitute as genocide. I don't want N. Euros to be gassed, I don't want to give any living Northern Euro pain. I just want them to kinda fade out...which is happening thank god.
I can't help but do anything but chuckle when some naive blonde haired girl comes up to me talking about civil rights for blacks or immigration reform or something, lol : )
Real 'genocide' is a N. European invention anyways. Maybe Karl Earlson was right, maybe Genghis Khan was Nordic man.
You don't see Ashkenazi living in trailers or breeding with beaners and spooks. No such thing as a hillbilly Ashkenazi either, lol
Not completely relevent.
For one thing, there is plenty of Ashkenazis in Israel that live a (somewhat analogous) 'trailer' lifestyle the way, unfortunately, a fair amount of North Euros in America do.
Secondly, Ashkenazi 'Jews' have the least amount of actual 'Jewish' (Semitic) blood - and the most amount of European blood (and this includes a fair amount of Nordish as well). So biologically speaking, you can just as well attribute Ashkenazi intelligence to heavy European admixture -- otherwise the Sephardic and Mizrahi, who are much more racially and biologically Jewish and Semitic, would be just as smart, if not smarter, than their European Ashkenazi 'Jewish' cousins.
One thing is for certain (and I say this as a Southern European): It is unfair to compare Ashkenazi Jews (especially for IQ purposes), a select group within the 'White' population, with the White Euro population (especially the Nordish one) as a whole -- rather than with other select White population groups.
This deceptive problem is also encountered when comparing amorphous "Whites" against select and specific "Asian" groups.
Not fair.
Why did you lie and say you were "done with writing on here"?
--> Ok you're right, I did say I w ould leave. I will, I mean it this time.
Bye
No such thing as a hillbilly Ashkenazi either, lol
Ever heard of the Israeli settler movement?
The comments by Kulaks Never Learn are very revealing. We have a Southern European calling for Northern European genocide, and Kulaks Never Learn's response is to complain about "anti-Southern European, basement-dwelling troglodytes."
MGLS - stop being so paranoid. I am not "kulaks", and the other guy I highly doubt is a Southern Euro, just masquerading as one to shit-stir.
"Anonymous said...
As this thread has proved, James Bowery was absolutely right when he called Mediterraneans junior partners to Jews."
James Bowery was not the only one who said it, another one said that as well:
"In politics, it is the Jew who directs, and the Mediterranean who acts. Behind the Mediterranean, there is the Jew. If the Jew wants money, the Mediterranean wants seats." - Gaston Méry, The Meridional Invasion
And some other good (and oh so true) quotes for the road:
"All I can say is this: I hate above all exuberant people. Now all Southerners yell, have an accent that gives me the creeps, and above the market, they make gestures. No, between those people who have curly astrakhan fixated on the skull with fencing ebony cheeks and large quiet phlegmatic Germans, my choice is not doubtful." - Joris-Karl Huysmans (1887)
"Southern race of beggars, cowards, swaggerers and fools" - Joris-Karl Huysmans (1887)
____________________________________
"Anonymous said...
or spend so much time online attacking South Euros, virtually all of whom I know have not an ounce or a scintilla of animosity toward them."
If you think mediterraneans are not in cahoots with the jews and other of our racial enemies, then why do you not take a minute or two of your time to read some of exterminationist stances of swarthoids against Northwestern Europeans that have been voiced by your fellow folks in this very thread?
Contrast that with the fact that even though I depaint an unflattering of meds, neither I nor my fellow Northwestern European preservationists/conservationists made any mention about mediterraneans "having to go", unlike your fellow swarthoids.
You are not Northwestern European so you can not understand, but here is a short quote that summerize the problem we are facing when dealing with people who are not of our blood (which includes meds, jews, arabs, turks, negroes, mongoloids etc...):
"The primary danger to continued Nordish life is not nuclear war or pollution, but the intermixture of the Nordish race with other races into one hybridized race in which its distinct and unique racial traits and characteristics would be submerged and negated, and its existence lost. Intermixture would make the Nordish race extinct. For Northern Europeans, racial intermixture is racial extinction." - Richard McCulloch
Not breeding at replacement rates and mixing with Negroids and Mestizos, importing hordes of non whites/non Europeans, so forth and so on, does not constitute as genocide. I don't want N. Euros to be gassed, I don't want to give any living Northern Euro pain. I just want them to kinda fade out...which is happening thank god.
Gee, why do you want them to 'kinda fade out'??? Aside from some extreme Nordicists perhaps, what is so wrong, in your estimation, with Northern Europeans?
I am Southern European, and I have great respect and admiration for much of Northern Europe and her People. I greatly esteem the beautiful civilizations they created, especially the civic cultures and societies that made places like the (erstwhile) United States the great country that it was/is.
That kind of talk on your part, whatever you are, is really douche and gratuitous.
If you think mediterraneans are not in cahoots with the jews and other of our racial enemies, then why do you not take a minute or two of your time to read some of exterminationist stances of swarthoids against Northwestern Europeans that have been voiced by your fellow folks in this very thread?
Again, this person is highly likely not a Med (at least not a European one), as much as you may wish to believe this.
"Anonymous said...
MGLS - stop being so paranoid. I am not "kulaks", and the other guy I highly doubt is a Southern Euro, just masquerading as one to shit-stir."
No he is a Southern European as I already said earlier, he posts on forumbiodiversity and anthrocsape under the username of "Sir Infamous", when don't you use google? Or are you too lazy for that? He says the exact same things there that he say here, he even posted his picture there if you want to check if he one of your own or not.
Good quote from Tanstaafl on the media-induced fantasy of WASP-Med 'hostilities':
The only time I've ever heard guidos rant about WASPs is in Hollywood productions. Not one I've actually known has made such a whine in my presence. If some of them do feel this way maybe it's because they've seen the same movies.
There is another group however that I do regularly find venting grievances against WASPs in print media and the internet. Their complaints are much like Soprano's, but more subtly delivered. There's less shouting and profanity, more snark and woe-is-me. These people nurse their grudges for centuries. They also have a great deal of influence in Hollywood.
Guess who.
Nope. Not the Irish. Though we've all seen those movies too.
http://tinyurl.com/2c829f9
No he is a Southern European as I already said earlier, he posts on forumbiodiversity and anthrocsape under the username of "Sir Infamous", when don't you use google? Or are you too lazy for that? He says the exact same things there that he say here, he even posted his picture there if you want to check if he one of your own or not.
Rasse,
OK, fine, I believe you.
Why doesn't the little geezer then use his name here?
Anyway, he is one person, and he certainly doesn't speak for all of us South Euros (see my comment above as to why I feel this way). In fact, if he is for real, then he is an envious jerk.
Southern European economies are much higher than Russia, lol
Russia is recovering from communism. The swarthoid economies are heavily subsidized by Northern Europe. The point isn't that Russia is great, but that it has a good space program. Whereas the swarthoids are incompetent and can barely manage First World economies and basic industry when left to their own devices. The swarthoids do have decent agriculture I believe, as they have a favorable climate for it and have been practicing it for thousands of years. Industry just isn't their forte.
Russia is recovering from communism. The swarthoid economies are heavily subsidized by Northern Europe. The point isn't that Russia is great, but that it has a good space program. Whereas the swarthoids are incompetent and can barely manage First World economies and basic industry when left to their own devices. The swarthoids do have decent agriculture I believe, as they have a favorable climate for it and have been practicing it for thousands of years. Industry just isn't their forte.
I think this is where a lot of Nordicist theory misses the mark.
Russia, and most of the Slav lands, have always been backward to Western Europe (even well before Communism), especially including, as mentioned before, France and Italy.
This in spite of the fact that Russia and other Slavic countries have a significant amount of Nordic, or Nordish genes (even according to McCulloch, who estimates 52-55%), yet they are still, and always have been, backward to Western Europe.
...I made mention that only 3% of the population of Ireland has dark hairs.
But yeah there are some meds in Nordish countries, though they are seen as (undesirable) oddities, for example in Scandinavia meds are called "Svartskalle" (black heads) or "Blattar" (swarthy idiots).
Or in Germany Joseph Goebbels (a med) was regulary referred to as a "nachgedunkelter Schrumpfgermane" (shrunken Teuton gone dark).
Like I said oddities.
Your completely off the mark here. Mediterranean, and especially Alpine and Dinaric blood, is far, far from an 'oddity' in Northwestern Europe.
Ireland has way more than 3% percent of its population that is brown or brunette-haired, and Germany especially is preponderantly of Alpine rather than Nordic blood (north-west Germany near Denmark and Holland is the overall exception).
Nor are today, or were in the past, brunette Germans looked down upon, especially by the National-Socialist leadership
In reality, the actual racial policies of the Third Reich was suprisingly different from many of the stories that we usually hear -- from the usual suspects, i.e. the Media and the Hollywood 'Nazis':
...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).
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 Beauty and the Beast: Race and Racism in Europe, Part III
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Sunic-RaceIII.html
"Anonymous said...
Again, this person is highly likely not a Med (at least not a European one), as much as you may wish to believe this."
"Anonymous said...
Anyway, he is one person, and he certainly doesn't speak for all of us South Euros (see my comment above as to why I feel this way). In fact, if he is for real, then he is an envious jerk."
Okay I have no idea who I am replying to and if I am replying to multiple individuals, since you are all posting as anonymous, so I just quote in bulk.
Anyways, here is the profile of Sir Infamous:
http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/profile/568978/
And here is his picture:
http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/8872/r90r90.jpg
I am not an expert on differencing European swarthoids from non-European swarthoids (he is Greek-American), but to be honest personally if I saw him in the streets of Europe I would think it was a Maghrebi.
And check out his posts, like I said he repeats himself, as the things he says over here have already been said by him before on other forums.
Though he is not the only one, most mediterraneans says the same things as he does, just in a less honest matter.
____________________________________
"Anonymous said...
This is probably why 'Rassenhyjerker' is such a
holier or more-Nordic-than-thou paranoid, he is probably worried about his own 'illuminous' ancestry (or lack thereof)."
My ancestry as listed on Skadi as being from the British Isles and phenotypically I fall under the Atlantid subrace, here are some examplars of the Atlantid phenotype:
http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/1021/r54r54.jpg
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/490/r56r56.jpg
http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/4753/r87r87.jpg
My ancestry as listed on Skadi as being from the British Isles and phenotypically I fall under the Atlantid subrace, here are some examplars of the Atlantid phenotype:
http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/1021/r54r54.jpg
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/490/r56r56.jpg
http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/4753/r87r87.jpg
Mud.
"Anonymous said...
Your completely off the mark here. Mediterranean, and especially Alpine and Dinaric blood, is far, far from an 'oddity' in Northwestern Europe."
I was neither talking about Alpines nor Dinarics, but strictly of mediterraneans (I posted some pictures of mediterraneans from Corsica, Italy and Spain at the beginning of this thread).
Though Dinarics may not be an oddity in Germany, Austria, British Isles and such, they are an oddity in Scandinavia proper (most of the population there is traditionally either Nordid, Cromagnoid or Nordid/Cromagnoid).
____________________________________
"Anonymous said...
Ireland has way more than 3% percent of its population that is brown or brunette-haired, and Germany especially is preponderantly of Alpine rather than Nordic blood (north-west Germany near Denmark and Holland is the overall exception)."
Black hairs is not the same thing as brunette or brown hairs. If we are talking about brown or brunette AND NOT PICTH BLACK HAIRS, then that includes 40% of the Irish population, whereas black hairs in Ireland only revolves around 3% of the Irish population.
Brown haired population is not rare in Northwestern Europe, you can find them on Atlantids, Keltic-Nordids, Cromagnoids and so on.
The oddities are swarthy skin and jet-black hair amongst caucasoids of Europe, which is associated with Southern European strains (traditionally mediterranid source), either they be from Germany (such as Goebbels), Ireland or Iberia.
"Anonymous said...
This in spite of the fact that Russia and other Slavic countries have a significant amount of Nordic,"
The Nordish blood was never too strong in Russia, most of it was abosrded (and hence disappeared) unto the more numerous non-Nordish population and add to the fact that the Bolsheviks exterminated most of the Nordic Slavs is not something that would help either.
So finding a Nordic in Slavic countries is like trying to look for a needle in a haystack. At least you will have more chance of finding a Nordic in a Slavic country than finding one in a medish country.
I think this is where a lot of Nordicist theory misses the mark.
I'm not talking about "Nordicist theory."
I'll repeat myself:
"The swarthoid economies are heavily subsidized by Northern Europe. The point isn't that Russia is great, but that it has a good space program. Whereas the swarthoids are incompetent and can barely manage First World economies and basic industry when left to their own devices. The swarthoids do have decent agriculture I believe, as they have a favorable climate for it and have been practicing it for thousands of years. Industry just isn't their forte."
This is empirical fact, not theory.
http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/3714086/1/
Sir Infamous uploaded pics of himself, or supposedly himself a long time ago on anthroscape.
http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/2850152/1/?x=0#post464061
I don't know if they are the same people as the South European troll though. I also think Sir Infamous might just be a fake Racial Reality sock account.
"Anonymous said...
I don't know if they are the same people as the South European troll though."
They are, usually people say one thing once or maybe at most twice, but this guy repeats the same over and over like mantras either that be on racehist or anthroscape.
There are some particular points which are quite distinct to him, things that are not quite so typical to hear or read.
1. He says that Southern Europeans are closer to Northern Africans, jews, turks and so on.
2. He says that Southern Europeans White Nationalists are clowns or bouffons to him.
3. He says that jews are smarter and "dominate" Northern Europeans even at 40 to 1.
And so on...
Like I said, he has a bad habit of repeating himself like a broken record and uses the same wording each time either that be on racehist or at anthroscape. Which should be plenty of distinctive traits that identifies the Southern European "Anonymous" and Sir Infamous as being one and the same.
____________________________________
"Anonymous said...
I also think Sir Infamous might just be a fake Racial Reality sock account."
Don't know, could be.
> I am Southern European, and I have great respect and admiration for much of Northern Europe and her People.
The feeling is mutual. And I think most people feel as we do.
Some kind of huge North-South conflict is almost all imaginary, as Tanstaafl said on that thread. A few mega-chauvinists go back and forth on some thread, and then a somewhat larger number of people get mad. But it ain't no thing. Our North and South aren't enemies. Northerners did some shameful things in the South in the world wars, but there's good reason to think it won't happen again. At least the Northerners partly made up for it by helping save the South from post-war Bolshie rule, which, while it didn't end the world or destroy subject nations, was certainly a drag.
While I hope to avoid Rob S's saccharine sentimentalism, his observation is in general quite true. I've never witnessed in person or heard by report from acquaintances any insults or threats from Southern Europeans to Northern Europeans or the reverse other than in reading comments on biological determinism as here. An exception, very singular, being from a Greek man who married an Aboriginal woman, whose judgment and sanity I would gravely doubt.
An important fact to ponder is also that Southern Europeans are not a danger to the preponderance of Northerners in any country the latter have historically populated in Europe or the colonies (USA, Australia, Canada). Their birth rate is no higher than Northerners, their absolute numbers everywhere less than ten per cent and immigration is nil. Settling in our countries of non-European Mediterraneans, from North Africa and the Levant is, however, more perilous.
Their birth rate is no higher than Northerners, their absolute numbers everywhere less than ten per cent and immigration is nil.
You have to consider interbreeding as well. Genes can diffuse through the Nordish population. A low birth rate is good but it's important that it be as endogamous as possible.
As far as average intelligence
Ashkenazi Jews >> Northern Europeans > Southern Europeans.
When you look at Semites as a whole Jews go way down.
The only relevance intelligence has is what is done with it. Northern Europeans/Germanics have created the modern world we live in and made the most achievements. Southern Europeans are noted for their accomplishments in the ancient world. Nords and Meds were necessary in the evolution of our world, Jews are just along for the ride and to make a shekel.
I suppose what "Nordic preservationists" worry about is that Mediterraneans in the U.S.A or Australia are like Jews, in that they will try and undermine Nordics. Not that the 5 or 10 percent of the European American population of Mediterranean origin will harm the Nordish majority if they assimilate (which i must say already happened for the most part.
What surprised me with that Southern European "Greek" nutcase was basically that he was identifying himself not with the Northern European majority, but rather the Jewish elite. And took in some sort of quasi pride that Jews are his racial kin, and it is they who have undermined old American (Nordish) society.
He was basically looking at it from a pure biological perspective. "Jews are biologically closer to me, Jews are undermining Northern Europeans, I should unite with them for this reason".
Needless to say, I don't think most Southern European think this way. And most of them have no clue about genetics in the first place.
.
In response, I think cognizance of Jewish machinations is lower among Southern Europeans than Northerners for the reason of a vaguely similar appearance, but resistance perhaps higher as their societies are less liberal with stronger, more vigorous Churches which still preach Christ's "generation of vipers" warning.
The problem in using Southerners as allies is that no one likes to be told they're inferior. However, that Southerners are generally inferior in point of moral, physical and intellectual properties is both true and manifest.
The physical inferiority justifies my belief that Euro-med/Euro-nord exogamy is unthreatening as Southerners simply aren't tall, fair and pretty enough to attract Northerners. Lower class Euro-nords (so called White Trash), who are often in reach of Southerners in terms of status, similarly aren't attractive to Southern Europeans. Besides, Southern Europeans have social, religious and familial pressures driving them towards endogamy either amongst the same nationality or a Spanish/Italian type marriage.
What surprised me with that Southern European "Greek" nutcase was basically that he was identifying himself not with the Northern European majority, but rather the Jewish elite.
He is not Greek, nor European. Or at least not full blooded European. I do not care what he says.
What is funny is how some Nords trip all over themselves to believe such tripe.
I understand our host, and many debaters here, are Americans so this prepares you all for an Aussie's lecture on Liberalism and America's pernicious influence and example in exporting it to the White world.
"All men are created equal..." that's patently bullshit. It's not true, never been true nor is it possible in any place other than a dream. I don't care that Jefferson meant all white men, or all Anglo-Saxon men, he wrote it, it's crap and Jefferson was a Jacobin-sympathising liberal maniac.
Don't blame New England Puritan Federalists for the US War between the States, whilst entirely sympathetic to the Confederacy's cause and undoubting of its justice, remember it was Southern Democratic Party demagogues like Jefferson and Andrew Jackson who created the ugly beast we have today of liberal democracy with universal suffrage. If races aren't equal (and they're not), then people of the same race are not equal. Euro-nord democracy is perhaps more stable and less unequal than Negro democracy which always ends in a military dictatorship, but it's still dangerous and ends in mongrelisation and a military dictatorship too, just at a later time, e.g. ancient Rome and FDR's American Empire.
That's what I most dislike about "Nordicists". You believe everything is dependent upon race, and political abominations like democracy, female suffrage, homosexuality are just dandy so long as every one is Northern European. The one, i.e. democracy or republicanism, leads to the other, i.e. miscegenation. If the perfections of the Euro-nord were nourished over 10,000 years of icy solitude in the North, then the excellences of our feudal constitution, of King, Church (or other intermediate institutions), Barons, Trade guilds and municipal corporations, Village elders, families, etc were born out of a millenium (500-1500AD) of gradual development. Any race-realist who hasn't come to regret the Crown's loss in the Rebellion of '76 is an idiot. Do you think Tories, who wouldn't have deigned to intermarry or converse with a white pleb, would have ever countenanced Negro Rule? Do you blame the nouveau riche capitalists for desiring cheap non-Nordic labour from abroad? Were those capitalists aristocrats from the old hierarchy or restless, short-sighted misers lifted up by the 'liberty' of all-levelling republicanism?
A theme of the above rant was the purpose of morality in regulating our affairs, even racial preservation.
I approve of the theory that morality isn't so much what God may say is right (although, religion is an indispensable aid for teaching morality), but the accumulated knowledge of a people that certain acts or practices never fail to redound in great evil for those involved.
Some chest-thumpers are proud that Europeans controlled the entire world through their empires. I'm not. Imperialism has destroyed Europe, both Mediterranean and Nordic. Injustice, avarice and unprovoked war are immoral because they are detrimental to the author as much as the victim of them.
England cheated, threatened and robbed the world, she grew fat and corrupt on riches, and now her empire's ugle gremlin children from India or Zimbabwe are gathered unto England's bosom as reward. George Washington wanted cheap land in the Ohio Valley, Thomas Jefferson was an ambitious upstart, the Boston merchants desired higher profits, so they made up some lies about their lawful king and now their progeny can't even muster an all-white, all Anglo-Saxon High School let alone a state or army. The continental system favoured by the French and Prussians would have better served us than Anglo-American liberalism/capitalism.
That's what I most dislike about "Nordicists". You believe everything is dependent upon race
Straw man.
Race comes before culture. If you care more about homosexual marriage than interracial marriage or tax policy more than racial survival, your priorities are way out of place. Social and cultural changes can be made when racial survival is secured. However, if our race is replaced and mongrelized out of existence, that cannot be reversed. Extinction is forever. The racial crisis is the crisis of the ages.
Sir Infamous wants to rape anything he can get his hands on:
"I'll steal whatever woman i want, she can be Chinese, Hawaiian, Arab, Mediterranean, or Northern European for all I care (talking about just for sex)"
My dissertation was already far too long for such a forum. I meant that whilst I concur with every single premise of the Nordicist school, I decry their opinion that everything is only dependent on race as if other conditions could prevail which however vicious or imprudent are harmless if we keep racial purity. America's citizenry was racially pure in 1776, in 1876 pretty much too. But policies of the Republic in the intervening time, by virtue of their excess or injustice, had enabled the later disasters he suffer. Slavery was wrong, why? It enslaved black Africans and introduced them into the heart of a white society across the ocean in America where they are now wreaking havoc.
Is that the only defect you penetrate in my theory, Anonymous? It's right isn't it? (Thanks to Giambattista Vico, Edmund Burke, Josepg de Maistre, etc for inspiration).
"Race comes before culture."
My point is that bad culture corrupts and enervates the race, Anon, thereby prohibiting preservation.
The problem in using Southerners as allies is that no one likes to be told they're inferior. However, that Southerners are generally inferior in point of moral, physical and intellectual properties is both true and manifest. - Anon 12:41am
What spiteful nonsense. For one thing, 'Southerners', at least in Europe, are not uniformly the genetic same, and their are differences throughout the region, just like with Northerners.
Or do you subscribe to the fantasy that all Nordish or Northern European nations and people are equal?
Sorry, but it ain't true, and its an egalitarian fantasy, just as it is to say all 'Whites' are the same or equal.
...If races aren't equal (and they're not), then people of the same race are not equal. Euro-nord democracy is perhaps more stable and less unequal than Negro democracy which always ends in a military dictatorship, but it's still dangerous and ends in mongrelisation and a military dictatorship too, just at a later time, e.g. ancient Rome and FDR's American Empire. - Anon 1:00am
This sounds just right.
I am not "kulaks"
Sure you aren't
LOL
Any race-realist who hasn't come to regret the Crown's loss in the Rebellion of '76 is an idiot. Do you think Tories, who wouldn't have deigned to intermarry or converse with a white pleb, would have ever countenanced Negro Rule? Do you blame the nouveau riche capitalists for desiring cheap non-Nordic labour from abroad? Were those capitalists aristocrats from the old hierarchy or restless, short-sighted misers lifted up by the 'liberty' of all-levelling republicanism?
The monarchy and "hierarchy" worshiping fags are pathetic.
What part of "ourselves and our Posterity" do you not understand?
Democracy, republicanism, individualism, etc., are expressions, phenotypes of our heritage. The fact that they have been subverted and exploited by non-Northern Euros to our great detriment is not a sign that they are bad in and of themselves, but that they are for "ourselves and our Posterity" and that we must be ever vigilant against predation and exploitation.
You can have all the monarchy and "hierarchy" you want in some village in Africa.
My point is that bad culture corrupts and enervates the race, Anon, thereby prohibiting preservation.
The great majority of bad culture comes from outside the race. We have assimilated a lot of Semitic thinking, both from the Bible and modern Jewry.
If you desire racial preservation, as you would having a healthy and functional family, good culture will flourish naturally.
----> Why is it you seek to join them so much? "case on paper"? You must absolutely believe in Mediterranean (intellectual) inferiority then.
How can you misconstrue a desire to part ways (preferably amicably, though the reality may differ) as a desire to join with them?
As for intellectual inferiority, it's an empirical matter, isn't it? So what's the harm in admitting it? The important point it doesn't change anything: an individual or a group still is what it is regardless of what the numbers say. By that I mean you still have a life to live and objectives to set and, hopefully, accomplish. Some things may be beyond you but just where that border lies isn't clear, and if you're proceeding incrementally it doesn't even matter because you'll still have accomplished a lot anyway. It's like journeying from Paris to Moscow. Even if you only make it to Warsaw you've still gone a lot further than someone who never set off. I believe similar gradations apply to most pursuits (be they individual or national); I can think of very few that don't reward even attempts that end in "dismal failure" (provided one can frame them properly). (War is probably one. So best to avoid it!)
You realize if we merge with Northern Europoids, A. we would be sacrificing our own identity as well as biological uniqueness.
Firstly, that depends on the numbers. Usually, though, we "win" from such mergings -- they turn more medish than we do nordish.
More importantly, the reasons why one prefers one's own kind should be borne in mind: one enjoys the interactions that take place between group members better more than those that take place with outsiders. Group infeeling. I may be exceptional, but I find it very, very hard to experience that feeling when it comes to associating with them, even though I would unhesitatingly describe them as "good people." So I seldom seek them out for company, even though they're "everywhere" where I live. With that in mind, yes, merging with them creates types that are more like them and consequently reduces group infeeling somewhat. I've experienced this in my own family: nephews and nieces that, as a consequence of mixing, look much more like them than us. (Which way will those confused kids go?)
B. The ideal would be a Northern one and they would put Northerners above Southerners.
This isn't a concern. It's really only racialist/nationalist 'early-adopters' who obsess over things like "ideals." Most people aren't going to be won over on that basis and if racialism does prevail it's doubtful that it would repeat patterns of the past (despite what the howling nutzi set would have you think). In fact, a key reason I'm supportive is I believe the best aspects of the present order can easily be retained.
Lastly, you're very combative and excited. I recommend you calm down a bit.
He is not Greek, nor European. Or at least not full blooded European.
Maybe not. But no Greek would think for a second to challenge if he said he was so what is your point?
I do not care what he says.
Fair enough. But then don't be surprised why others adopt the same attitude towards anything you have to say.
Usually, though, we "win" from such mergings -- they turn more medish than we do nordish.
Exactly. Northern Europeans are more recessive. This is why Northern European preservationism is so important.
Exactly. Northern Europeans are more recessive. This is why Northern European preservationism is so important.
How do you package it, though, so that it both makes sense and lessens resistance?
As you can see, the typical approach is to go on a tear and attack everyone and everything before you. Fine. But as you can also see most of your people are utterly oblivious. There's a storm brewing yet they're busy putting the finishing touches on their progressive 21st century version of "to each according to his needs." Attacking everyone doesn't seem like much of a formula for success.
How many of you are there anyway? How many familially unalloyed? Kinda hard to 'war' on your brother-in-law or grandson for most people. Not for nothing was the cause being written off even 30 years ago.
This is why I believe the approach I am proposing is superior: give the maximal number of people possible a reason to "want race" -- to reorganize society along racial lines in order to provide people with the living space they need to be themselves; to reduce conflict etc. This can work even if they're not into it for strictly racial reasons (which most won't be, although "culture" will usually get them the race anyway).
Even just as a start I think that's superior to attacking people, particularly the sort of people who would have excellent reasons of their own for being supportive.
Of course, the radical types aren't going to shut up just 'cos I asked them to, but why join them? I can see street marches demanding a "White right to life!" (with a subsequent explication of how that can be achieved without transgressing the rights of others) garnering more sympathy than the typical NSM fare any day.
Mind you, I can see a lot of "indirect" policies ("race realism") working before anything like the above ever being pulled off.
'The monarchy and "hierarchy" worshiping fags are pathetic.
What part of "ourselves and our Posterity" do you not understand?
Democracy, republicanism, individualism, etc., are expressions, phenotypes of our heritage.'
Despite being a foreigner, I can pity and admire your generous devotion to your country and its original people. As you're an American, one who would enjoy a compatriot's humourous views, I suggest you read H.L. Mencken's Notes on Democracy. Affirmative, Europeans have eternally been individualistic, but today's liberty is licentiousness. The greatness of our societies in the recent past, was erected wholly on the medieval foundations and pre-'76 (or '89) radical experiments which have failed and dragged down your 'founding stock' Americans into the depths. Otherwise, your opinion is simply that of a Liberal who acknowledges racial differences, whilst my view of humanity is more realistic.
This talk about "recessive" traits is pathetic. As if the entire essence of Northern Europeanness boils down to blonde hair and blue eyes.
This is an elementary school-level notion of Mendelian inheritance, not a basis for a political movement.
'Usually, though, we "win" from such mergings -- they turn more medish than we do nordish.'
'Exactly. Northern Europeans are more recessive. This is why Northern European preservationism is so important.'
Generally very much so. However, I know a set of twins, Englishwoman mother and Greek father which consist of a blonde, green-eyed son and a brunette, greyish-green eyed daughter. Almost always as a principle of conduct I would deplore such a Euro-nord, Euro-med union but as Barry proves they can be worse.
Almost always as a principle of conduct I would deplore such a Euro-nord, Euro-med union but as Barry proves they can be worse.
Not necessarily. With Obama, he identifies with being black, married black, etc. Whereas meds and med-mixes will try to sneak and disperse into the wider Nord population. Mulattoes become part of the black population. I think this is what Rassenhygieniker was trying to get at with the term "sub-nigger."
Michael Lind, The New American Nation
"The real Thomas Jefferson, as I have shown elsewhere in this and other chapters, was a fervent believer in white supremacy and the superiority of the Anglo-Saxon branch of the white race. His Anglo-Saxonism and racism were not tangential to his thought and career; neither his views on the colonization of black Americans nor his elaborate political and economic theories can be understood except as elements of a single project of preserving the purity of the Anglo-American race. Jefferson was obsessed, in particular, by the fear that his precious Anglo-Saxon nation would be corrupted by intermarriage with nonwhites. Fear of miscegenation was perhaps the most consistent aspect of his thought, from his youth to his old age. During the American Revolution, Jefferson, as a member of a Virginia legislative committee charged with revising state law, helped to tighten the slave codes and forbid free blacks from becoming citizens - even as rules governing the immigration of whites were liberalized. The Virginia legislature rejected, as too harsh, another proposal of Jefferson’s, which would have banished from the state any white woman bearing "a child by a negro or mulatto," on pain of the enslavement of the child."
As to our retrospectives on history, I recollect this comment from another site:
"What a disgusting mess of a pseudo-country the U.S. is. My family on both sides were here in the 1600s and played a modest part in everything since. And I am lectured about my own evil history by someone named Ramesh Ponurru The U.S. is not a country, it is a dead carcass being picked over by international con artists."
Even a jaundiced Aussie frightened at losing his country before is eyes, can condole the wistful pains of an American whose country was lost some time ago. But the people survive, and if intact any thing can be rebuilt by their efforts.
Or do you subscribe to the fantasy that all Nordish or Northern European nations and people are equal?
Sorry, but it ain't true, and its an egalitarian fantasy, just as it is to say all 'Whites' are the same or equal.
...If races aren't equal (and they're not), then people of the same race are not equal. Euro-nord democracy is perhaps more stable and less unequal than Negro democracy which always ends in a military dictatorship, but it's still dangerous and ends in mongrelisation and a military dictatorship too, just at a later time, e.g. ancient Rome and FDR's American Empire. - Anon 1:00am
--
The monarchy and "hierarchy" worshiping fags are pathetic.
What part of "ourselves and our Posterity" do you not understand?
Democracy, republicanism, individualism, etc., are expressions, phenotypes of our heritage. The fact that they have been subverted and exploited by non-Northern Euros to our great detriment is not a sign that they are bad in and of themselves, but that they are for "ourselves and our Posterity" and that we must be ever vigilant against predation and exploitation.
You can have all the monarchy and "hierarchy" you want in some village in Africa. - Anon, October 19, 2010 4:05 AM
____
So then I take it you really believe that all or most all 'Nords' or North Euros are "equal", particularly Northern European nation-states?
IQ differs among the different countries of Northern Europe, as it does, in certain countries, among certain classes and ethnic groups.
N. Europe, like most other great civilizations, developed much of their greatness under their aristocracies, nobilities and monarchies, not in some anachronistic, modern-day distortion of some mythical 'classless society'.
I think you have been imbibing a little too much of the modern-day liberal egalitarian kool-aid if you think otherwise.
So then I take it you really believe that all or most all 'Nords' or North Euros are "equal", particularly Northern European nation-states?
Jefferson's pronouncement indicates that he was influenced by Locke's epistemological thesis tabula rasa. Locke undoubtedly was influenced by Aquinas who put forth the Aristotelian position of the "unscribed tablet". There has long been a school of philosophy that believed men were born equal and subsequently acquired their differences. The battle between the Platonic and Aristotelian belief. in the Roman church, of the mind's origin long predated Jefferson's position.
An example of Locke's reasoning against the universality of innate ideas: "Not innate, because they appear least where what is innate shows itself clearest. That the general maxims we are discoursing of are not known to children, idiots, and a great part of mankind, we have already sufficiently proved: whereby it is evident they have not an universal assent, nor are general impressions. But there is this further argument in it against their being innate: that these characters, if they were native and original impressions, should appear fairest and clearest in those persons in whom yet we find no footsteps of them; and it is, in my opinion, a strong presumption that they are not innate, since they are least known to those in whom, if they were innate, they must needs exert themselves with most force and vigour. For children, idiots, savages, and illiterate people, being of all others the least corrupted by custom, or borrowed opinions; learning and education having not cast their native thoughts into new moulds; nor by super-inducing foreign and studied doctrines, confounded those fair characters nature had written there; one might reasonably imagine that in their minds these innate notions should lie open fairly to every one's view, as it is certain the thoughts of children do. It might very well be expected that these principles should be perfectly known to naturals; which being stamped immediately on the soul, (as these men suppose,) can have no dependence on the constitution or organs of the body, the only confessed difference between them and others. One would think, according to these men's principles, that all these native beams of light (were there any such) should, in those who have no reserves, no arts of concealment, shine out in their full lustre, and leave us in no more doubt of their being there, than we are of their love of pleasure and abhorrence of pain. But alas, amongst children, idiots, savages, and the grossly illiterate, what general maxims are to be found? What universal principles of knowledge? Their notions are few and narrow, borrowed only from those objects they have had most to do with, and which have made upon their senses the frequentest and strongest impressions. A child knows his nurse and his cradle, and by degrees the playthings of a little more advanced age; and a young savage has, perhaps, his head filled with love and hunting, according to the fashion of his tribe. But he that from a child untaught, or a wild inhabitant of the woods, will expect these abstract maxims and reputed principles of science, will, I fear, find himself mistaken. Such kind of general propositions are seldom mentioned in the huts of Indians: much less are they to be found in the thoughts of children, or any impressions of them on the minds of naturals. They are the language and business of the schools and academies of learned nations, accustomed to that sort of conversation or learning, where disputes are frequent; these maxims being suited to artificial argumentation and useful for conviction, but not much conducing to the discovery of truth or advancement of knowledge."
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/locke/locke1/Book1a.html#Chapter%20II
It is evident that Jefferson did not find a contradiction between men of learned nations and savages, any more than he would between said men and "children or idiots".
An example of Locke's reasoning against the universality of innate ideas: "Not innate, because they appear least where what is innate shows itself clearest. That the general maxims we are discoursing of are not known to children, idiots, and a great part of mankind, we have already sufficiently proved: whereby it is evident they have not an universal assent, nor are general impressions. But there is this further argument in it against their being innate: that these characters, if they were native and original impressions, should appear fairest and clearest in those persons in whom yet we find no footsteps of them; and it is, in my opinion, a strong presumption that they are not innate, since they are least known to those in whom, if they were innate, they must needs exert themselves with most force and vigour. For children, idiots, savages, and illiterate people, being of all others the least corrupted by custom, or borrowed opinions; learning and education having not cast their native thoughts into new moulds; nor by super-inducing foreign and studied doctrines, confounded those fair characters nature had written there; one might reasonably imagine that in their minds these innate notions should lie open fairly to every one's view, as it is certain the thoughts of children do. It might very well be expected that these principles should be perfectly known to naturals; which being stamped immediately on the soul, (as these men suppose,) can have no dependence on the constitution or organs of the body, the only confessed difference between them and others. One would think, according to these men's principles, that all these native beams of light (were there any such) should, in those who have no reserves, no arts of concealment, shine out in their full lustre, and leave us in no more doubt of their being there, than we are of their love of pleasure and abhorrence of pain. But alas, amongst children, idiots, savages, and the grossly illiterate, what general maxims are to be found? What universal principles of knowledge? Their notions are few and narrow, borrowed only from those objects they have had most to do with, and which have made upon their senses the frequentest and strongest impressions. A child knows his nurse and his cradle, and by degrees the playthings of a little more advanced age; and a young savage has, perhaps, his head filled with love and hunting, according to the fashion of his tribe. But he that from a child untaught, or a wild inhabitant of the woods, will expect these abstract maxims and reputed principles of science, will, I fear, find himself mistaken. Such kind of general propositions are seldom mentioned in the huts of Indians: much less are they to be found in the thoughts of children, or any impressions of them on the minds of naturals. They are the language and business of the schools and academies of learned nations, accustomed to that sort of conversation or learning, where disputes are frequent; these maxims being suited to artificial argumentation and useful for conviction, but not much conducing to the discovery of truth or advancement of knowledge."
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/locke/locke1/Book1a.html#Chapter%20II
An example of Locke's reasoning against the universality of innate ideas: "Not innate, because they appear least where what is innate shows itself clearest. That the general maxims we are discoursing of are not known to children, idiots, and a great part of mankind, we have already sufficiently proved: whereby it is evident they have not an universal assent, nor are general impressions. But there is this further argument in it against their being innate: that these characters, if they were native and original impressions, should appear fairest and clearest in those persons in whom yet we find no footsteps of them; and it is, in my opinion, a strong presumption that they are not innate, since they are least known to those in whom, if they were innate, they must needs exert themselves with most force and vigour. For children, idiots, savages, and illiterate people, being of all others the least corrupted by custom, or borrowed opinions; learning and education having not cast their native thoughts into new moulds; nor by super-inducing foreign and studied doctrines, confounded those fair characters nature had written there; one might reasonably imagine that in their minds these innate notions should lie open fairly to every one's view, as it is certain the thoughts of children do. It might very well be expected that these principles should be perfectly known to naturals; which being stamped immediately on the soul, (as these men suppose,) can have no dependence on the constitution or organs of the body, the only confessed difference between them and others. One would think, according to these men's principles, that all these native beams of light (were there any such) should, in those who have no reserves, no arts of concealment, shine out in their full lustre, and leave us in no more doubt of their being there, than we are of their love of pleasure and abhorrence of pain. But alas, amongst children, idiots, savages, and the grossly illiterate, what general maxims are to be found? What universal principles of knowledge? Their notions are few and narrow, borrowed only from those objects they have had most to do with, and which have made upon their senses the frequentest and strongest impressions. A child knows his nurse and his cradle, and by degrees the playthings of a little more advanced age; and a young savage has, perhaps, his head filled with love and hunting, according to the fashion of his tribe.
cont'd...
An example of Locke's reasoning against the universality of innate ideas: "Not innate, because they appear least where what is innate shows itself clearest. That the general maxims we are discoursing of are not known to children, idiots, and a great part of mankind, we have already sufficiently proved: whereby it is evident they have not an universal assent, nor are general impressions. But there is this further argument in it against their being innate: that these characters, if they were native and original impressions, should appear fairest and clearest in those persons in whom yet we find no footsteps of them; and it is, in my opinion, a strong presumption that they are not innate, since they are least known to those in whom, if they were innate, they must needs exert themselves with most force and vigour. For children, idiots, savages, and illiterate people, being of all others the least corrupted by custom, or borrowed opinions; learning and education having not cast their native thoughts into new moulds; nor by super-inducing foreign and studied doctrines, confounded those fair characters nature had written there; one might reasonably imagine that in their minds these innate notions should lie open fairly to every one's view, as it is certain the thoughts of children do. It might very well be expected that these principles should be perfectly known to naturals; which being stamped immediately on the soul, (as these men suppose,) can have no dependence on the constitution or organs of the body, the only confessed difference between them and others. cont'd...
One would think, according to these men's principles, that all these native beams of light (were there any such) should, in those who have no reserves, no arts of concealment, shine out in their full lustre, and leave us in no more doubt of their being there, than we are of their love of pleasure and abhorrence of pain. But alas, amongst children, idiots, savages, and the grossly illiterate, what general maxims are to be found? What universal principles of knowledge? Their notions are few and narrow, borrowed only from those objects they have had most to do with, and which have made upon their senses the frequentest and strongest impressions. A child knows his nurse and his cradle, and by degrees the playthings of a little more advanced age; and a young savage has, perhaps, his head filled with love and hunting, according to the fashion of his tribe. But he that from a child untaught, or a wild inhabitant of the woods, will expect these abstract maxims and reputed principles of science, will, I fear, find himself mistaken. Such kind of general propositions are seldom mentioned in the huts of Indians: much less are they to be found in the thoughts of children, or any impressions of them on the minds of naturals. They are the language and business of the schools and academies of learned nations, accustomed to that sort of conversation or learning, where disputes are frequent; these maxims being suited to artificial argumentation and useful for conviction, but not much conducing to the discovery of truth or advancement of knowledge."
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/locke/locke1/Book1a.html#Chapter%20II
Clearly Jefferson did not see the contradiction in his words that modern interpreters do.
"Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them. It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation and deportation peaceably and in such slow degree as that the evil will wear off insensibly, and their place be pari passu filled up by free white laborers. If on the contrary it is left to force itself on, human nature must shudder at the prospect held up."
Thomas Jefferson
"Will not a lover of natural history then, one who views the gradations in all the races of animals with the eye of philosophy, excuse an effort to keep those in the department of man as distinct as nature has formed them? . . . Among the Romans emancipation required but one effort. The slave, when made free, might mix with, without staining the blood of his master. But with us a second is necessary, unknown to history. When freed, he is to be removed beyond the reach of mixture."
Thomas Jefferson
Jefferson proposed deporting blacks to Haiti.
So then I take it you really believe that all or most all 'Nords' or North Euros are "equal", particularly Northern European nation-states?
Yes. Every single individual of Northern European descent, now, in the past, and in the future, is exactly the same in every single characteristic and measure.
IQ differs among the different countries of Northern Europe, as it does, in certain countries, among certain classes and ethnic groups.
No way.
N. Europe, like most other great civilizations, developed much of their greatness under their aristocracies, nobilities and monarchies, not in some anachronistic, modern-day distortion of some mythical 'classless society'.
I think you have been imbibing a little too much of the modern-day liberal egalitarian kool-aid if you think otherwise.
Who said or suggested anything about a "mythical classless society" or "modern-day liberal egalitarianism"?
And what part of "ourselves and our Posterity" do you not understand?
Democracy, republicanism, individualism, etc., are expressions, phenotypes of our heritage. The fact that they have been subverted and exploited by non-Northern Euros to our great detriment is not a sign that they are bad in and of themselves, but that they are for "ourselves and our Posterity" and that we must be ever vigilant against predation and exploitation.
You can have all the "aristocracies, nobilities, and monarchies" you want in some village in Africa or in some swarthoid "civilization."
If we had freedom, independence, autonomy, sovereignty, and didn't have the pollution of non-Northern Euros, then we will have a tendency towards democracy, republicanism, individualism, etc. for ourselves and our posterity.
That said, if some Northern Euro societies naturally develop aristocracies, nobilities and monarchies or wish to develop such things, for themselves and their posterity, that's fine.
IQ differs among the different countries of Northern Europe, as it does, in certain countries, among certain classes and ethnic groups.
No way.
Wow, you didn't just imbibe the kool-aid, you got plastered on it. You must be a N. Euro prole to think, and wish to believe, this patent nonsense.
Really, Ireland and much of the UK has the same mean IQ as other Northern European countries, particularly the Germanic ones??
Really, "aristocracies, nobilities, and monarchies" are a product of some village in Africa or in some "swarthoid" civilizations... with your corrolary assumption that it is only these types of societies that have hierarchy??
Gee, must be news to the British monarchy, which to this day has a rather rigid class-based system, where even to this day White English with their 'cockney' accents still predominate in the lower classes. Gonna blame Africans or "swarthoids" for the British class system?
Try to be a little more objective rather than polemical when you project your wishful beliefs, otherwise you embarrass not only yourself, but your Cause as well.
Democracy is a Northern European invention ?
Idealism is fine and good, but the poorly-disguised pseudo-racialist libertarian cult-worship appearing here is not. It's affectation, delusion and empty words.
The great mass of people crave food and security no matter how loudly they mouth Jefferson's phrases. On the eve of the War between the States the free population was Euro-nordic above 90%, yet they still acquiesced in assisting the overtly unlawful, bloody and fratricidal usurpation of Lincoln's.
We wouldn't be in this hell now if your vaunted average man, godlike creature that you say he is, was capable of free thought and courage. Is it any wonder Europe's Right-wing hates you lot? Even American Nordicists (some) are apparently deluded into crediting fairy-tales about everyone craving liberty and an equal, open society without class or injustice. To the barricades brothers, hurrah!
America's 'freedom' and 'prosperity' are wholly explicable by physical circumstances not voodoo incantations. A large, abundantly fertile and mineral rich continent settled by an adventurous, free moving and armed white populace.
Wow, you didn't just imbibe the kool-aid, you got plastered on it. You must be a N. Euro prole to think, and wish to believe, this patent nonsense.
Wow, you're an idiotic dipshit who doesn't get sarcasm.
You must be a kike or some IQ worshiping swarthoid. Those types love calling Northern Euros "proles."
Really, "aristocracies, nobilities, and monarchies" are a product of some village in Africa or in some "swarthoid" civilizations... with your corrolary assumption that it is only these types of societies that have hierarchy??
I never said that they were necessarily "products" of those people.
Gee, must be news to the British monarchy, which to this day has a rather rigid class-based system, where even to this day White English with their 'cockney' accents still predominate in the lower classes. Gonna blame Africans or "swarthoids" for the British class system?
It's hard to tease out all the pollution and see what exactly the influences and causes are. Centralization was and still is alien to Northern Euros and is offensive to our nature and folkways. Invasive Roman and Christian expansion and pollution into Northern Europe was likely influential. The invasive Jewish pollution beginning with Cromwell that was quite substantial during the British Empire likely was influential as well as far as the British case goes.
Democracy is a Northern European invention ?
This isn't about "democracy" as some "invented" construct written about in some book somewhere, but about our nature for individual sovereignty and self-rule.
Idealism is fine and good, but the poorly-disguised pseudo-racialist libertarian cult-worship appearing here is not. It's affectation, delusion and empty words.
This has nothing to do with "idealism" or "libertarian cult-worship."
We wouldn't be in this hell now if your vaunted average man, godlike creature that you say he is, was capable of free thought and courage.
Nobody is "vaunting" the "average man" here. The present predicament has nothing to do with the "average man" failing to be "capable of free thought and courage" and everything to do with invasive Jewish pollution/niche invasion that exploited and undermined the native elite and then displaced it.
Even American Nordicists (some) are apparently deluded into crediting fairy-tales about everyone craving liberty and an equal, open society without class or injustice.
Nobody is talking about "fairy-tales" or about "everyone craving liberty" or "an equal, open society without class or injustice."
America's 'freedom' and 'prosperity' are wholly explicable by physical circumstances not voodoo incantations.
America's freedom and prosperity are wholly explicable by the nature and character of the Northern Euro pioneers who settled it and their creativity and invention.
A large, abundantly fertile and mineral rich continent settled by an adventurous, free moving and armed white populace.
Latin America was also settled by such a "white" populace. Of course they'd still be digging for gold using shovels and engaged in feudal farming without Northern Euro invention and creativity.
There's no arguing with you any more as you're essentially a liberal who recognises racial differences. I respectfully disagree and ask you to keep your national ideals within your nation as other white countries are happy without them.
I'm as devoted to the hereditarian school as you profess to be, but even heredity can be modified by circumstances. Northern Europeans can't make the Antarctic continent as it's presently constituted, a paradise of commerce and agriculture.
"but even heredity can be modified by circumstances."
I mean even the virtues or strengths of a certain heredity can be limited by the harshness of circumstances.
"...individual sovereignty and self-rule."
I'm not an advocate for serfdom or Oriental despotism; Northern Euros have always held to a mode of living more individualistic than others, but the individual is not sovereign - that's an a priori boastful speculation that Americans love practising to see fail time and time again. Democracy in local communities united by kindred and interest is admirable and in some form has always existed. Mass democracy is an accursed peril.
"..nature and character of the Northern Euro pioneers."
Undisputedly true - but those people are dead and their descendants either mixed or corrupted by the times. The relative supremacy of Northern Euros shouldn't be misconstrued as absolute perfection. No one is perfect or infallible, to insist otherwise is in keeping with your liberal views however. I'm a race-realist and a conservative, I know man has his faults, even blonde giants.
"Latin America was also settled by such a "white" populace."
Don't be so dishonest. Latin America no where has open prairie fields of the fertiltiy and extent in North America, and the tropical diseases render the climate unwholesome as was felt by the unhappy Scottish colonists in Panama's Darien Peninsula who died swiftly. California fell first, though it was settled by multitudes of Nords, because their qualities weren't evolved to suit it so they hired mestizo serfs to toil for them.
Obviously America will struggle to resist liberal universalism because her defenders are using liberal universalism for their ideology. That's what the United States was built upon, annihilating distinctions which act as barriers between races, sexes, classes and religions.
This isn't about "democracy" as some "invented" construct written about in some book somewhere, but about our nature for individual sovereignty and self-rule.
That's not Nordicism, it's Americanism. Know the difference.
There is no necessary conflict between liberalism and racialism.
Wow, you didn't just imbibe the kool-aid, you got plastered on it. You must be a N. Euro prole to think, and wish to believe, this patent nonsense.
Wow, you're an idiotic dipshit who doesn't get sarcasm.
You must be a kike or some IQ worshiping swarthoid. Those types love calling Northern Euros "proles."
Nope, neither, just pointing out to you that Northern Europeans are not one, unified racial or ethnic group, as much as some may wish for them to be.
And stop acting like a hysterically-emotional 'swarthoid' yourself.
By the way, I knew you would hide behind the 'I was just being sarcastic' defense, since you did not answer my original question(s): Do you think that all Northern European national and ethnic groups have essentially the same average IQ level ... and furthermore, are they all equally altruistic?
I would appreciate a sensible response, without you throwing a temper-tantrum or a hissy-fit, or resort to silly name calling (i.e. 'swarthoids').
You can have all the "aristocracies, nobilities, and monarchies" you want in some village in Africa or in some swarthoid "civilization."
This is surely news to the Germanic peoples, you know, the ones that essentially created monarchy as we know it in post-Roman Europe, both historically and up to the present day - with virtually all the noble families of Europe descended from German/ic royalty.
We wouldn't be in this hell now if your vaunted average man, godlike creature that you say he is, was capable of free thought and courage. Is it any wonder Europe's Right-wing hates you lot? Even American Nordicists (some) are apparently deluded into crediting fairy-tales about everyone craving liberty and an equal, open society without class or injustice. To the barricades brothers, hurrah!
LOL - this hits it all squarely on the head!
Nordicist fantasies know no bounds.
Pure comedy gold.
What is the point of inveighing against a straw man version of racialism that says race is sufficient? The racialist holds that race is necessary.
Who argues that all whites, or all Northern Europeans, are identical? Who says environment is of zero importance? Not even the most hard-core racialists hold such positions.
Conservatism has failed miserably. If the survival of our race hinges on the ascension of popery, divine right monarchy, and faileoconism, you might as well write our requiem today.
Who argues that all whites, or all Northern Europeans, are identical? Who says environment is of zero importance? Not even the most hard-core racialists hold such positions.
Awe please, that is what most here propagate - genes! genes! genes! - so let's not kid ourselves.
And yes, most of these egalitarian pan-Northern Europeanists act as if "Northern Europe" was a single country.
Awe please, that is what most here propagate - genes! genes! genes! - so let's not kid ourselves.
No. Stop arguing against straw men.
"...just pointing out to you that Northern Europeans are not one, unified racial or ethnic group, as much as some may wish for them to be."
Ok but the concept of Nordicism, at least for Americans, was never founding upon racial unity.
Henry Cabot lodge: "In other words, the races most affected by the illiteracy test are those whose emigration to this country has begun within the last twenty years and swelled rapidly to enormous proportions, races with which the English speaking people have never hitherto assimilated, and who are most alien to the great body of the people of the United States."
In other words Lodge suggested that the English people were an amalgam of various Germanic tribes and that those tribes set a precedent in England that the US could rely upon to follow. It did not rely upon genetic distance or varying IQs. There will always be variation of IQ and altruism even within a family, however, that was not the issue. The issue was that a precedent had been set. Although overwhelmingly British, except in NY, NJ and PA, these groups formed an amalgam that was to be America's founding stock.
"The common belief is that America has always been a mosaic of many nations with none of them predominating. The truth is exactly the opposite. This country began with a unified population. It was almost nine-tenths English, Scotch, ScotchIrish and Welsh, that is, British, at the time the nation was formed.
The English and Scotch comprised, therefore, 89.1% of the population. In some states the EnglishScotch percentages were greater. In Maine the English and Scotch were 97.4%; in New Hampshire, 98.8%; in Vermont, 98.4%; Massachusetts, 98.6%; Rhode Island, 99.1%; Connecticut, 99%; Virginia, 92.1%; North Carolina, 94.3%; South Carolina, 94,1%; Maryland, 90.5%; Georgia, 94.3%; Kentucky, 94.3%, and Tennessee, 94.3%. In New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey the other nationalities were more heavily represented and that fact has led us to believe that because there were Germans, Swedes and Dutch in the Middle Colonies, that the colonies as a whole were mixed."
America, Nation or Confusion: A Study of Our Immigration Problems
EDWARD R. LEWIS
HUBBARD WOODS, ILLINOIS January, 1928
Most Nordicists are very mindful of variation within and among ethnic groups. The pan-Aryanists are the ones who wish to downplay such variation.
"In New York State in 1920, the percentage of the white population which was native-born of native parentage was but 36; in Massachusetts, 32.4; in New Jersey, 41.3; in Connecticut, 33; in North Dakota, 32.4; in Rhode Island, 29.2, and even in New Hampshire, but 51. In the cities, of course, the percentages were worse. In Boston it was 24.9; in Buffalo, 32.9; Chicago, 24; Cleveland, 27.9; Fall River, 16; Hartford, 30.2; Jersey City, 30; Lowell, 21.9; Milwaukee, 28.8; New Bedford, 17.3; New Haven, 28.1; Philadelphia, 41.4; Pittsburgh, 39; Providence, 27.5; Rochester, 38; St. Paul, 33.5; San Francisco, 34.1; Worcester, 28.4; Youngstown, 37, and St. Louis, 51.
In the New England cities the descendants of the colonial stock must be a mere fringe.
Decade Total White 1790 Stock Percentage
1820 7,862,166 7,590,000 96.5
1830 10,537,378 10,010,000 94.9
1840 14,195,805 12,880,000 90.7
1850 19,553,068 16,120,000 82.4
1860 26,922,537 19,790,000 73.5
1870 33,589,377 23,420,000 61.7
1880 43,402,970 27,820,000 64.09
1890 55,101,258 32,410,000 58.8
1900 66,809,196 37,290,000 55.8
1910 81,731,957 42,420,000 51.9
1920 94,820,915 47,330,000 49.9
America, Nation or Confusion: A Study of Our Immigration Problems
EDWARD R. LEWIS
HUBBARD WOODS, ILLINOIS January, 1928
I respectfully disagree and ask you to keep your national ideals within your nation as other white countries are happy without them.
I'm not talking about "national ideals." Nothing I'm talking about applies to all "white" countries nor do I wish to extend anything to all "white" countries.
I'm as devoted to the hereditarian school as you profess to be, but even heredity can be modified by circumstances.
Northern Europeans can't make the Antarctic continent as it's presently constituted, a paradise of commerce and agriculture.
Good for you. I'm not "devoted" to this that or the other "school." I'm devoted to the truth. Pioneering, conquering, settling hostile territories has always been our strength and we have been the best in the world at this. Settling hostile frontiers has never been our main problem. Our main problem has always been what happens after we settle and build a new frontier - invasive groups such as Jews and other swarthoids that lack our competence and ability in this area start swarming and flooding in and dispossess us.
That's what the United States was built upon, annihilating distinctions which act as barriers between races, sexes, classes and religions.
Not true. What part of "ourselves and our Posterity" do you not understand?
That's not Nordicism, it's Americanism. Know the difference.
It's not "Americanism." I'm pretty sure we have very different ideas about terms like "individual sovereignty" and "self-rule." You're probably thinking of the Jewy versions of these terms - I'm not. By those terms I mean Northern Euro folkways that don't apply to others.
Nope, neither, just pointing out to you that Northern Europeans are not one, unified racial or ethnic group, as much as some may wish for them to be.
Nobody said that they're "one, unified" group or that they wished them to be so.
It's hard to tease out all the pollution and see what exactly the influences and causes are. Centralization was and still is alien to Northern Euros and is offensive to our nature and folkways. Invasive Roman and Christian expansion and pollution into Northern Europe was likely influential. ...
What polemics. Why didn't other N. Euro nations other than Britain have these similar problems with a rigid class structure? After all, they all had monarchies and Christianity, since, after all, monarchy was a German rather than a Roman design:
The kings of England from the 1730s on have been Germans themselves (or of German blood) from the House of Hanover (named after the capital of Lower Saxony). Though no longer speaking German after the time of King George III (who lost America in the Revolution), the House of “Windsor” (so-called since World War I) is nearly 100 percent Protestant German. The motto on the coat of arms of the princes of Wales, the heirs to the throne, is “Ich dien,” i.e., “I serve.”)
http://www.barnesreview.org/html/_1_german_blood.htm
So you want to blame 'fellow' N.European Germans now instead of everyone else for your existential woes?
....The pan-Aryanists are the ones who wish to downplay such variation.
As do many pan-Nordicists, who wish to play down and diminish the very real variations among the different ethnic and sub-racial groups living in the geographic area of North-West/Northern Europe.
This is surely news to the Germanic peoples, you know, the ones that essentially created monarchy as we know it in post-Roman Europe, both historically and up to the present day - with virtually all the noble families of Europe descended from German/ic royalty.
This is a very complex issue and it's difficult to unravel all the causes and influences here. There was a change from traditional Germanic folkways. Romans, Jews, the Church, etc. likely played a role in the development of these centralized rulers with "authority" probably because they knew they'd get their asses kicked by the Germanics so they needed to build up "king" figures with "authority" they could hide behind and control/manipulate.
So you want to blame 'fellow' N.European Germans now instead of everyone else for your existential woes?
We don't want to "blame" everyone else. In fact, we don't even want to think about everyone else. We simply want our own sovereign communities, free of invasive groups and influence.
'Not true. What part of "ourselves and our Posterity" do you not understand?'
Of course, the overthrow of the established authorities and erection of a new, untried republican government as a leap in the dark; those endless, sermonising platitudes about an experiment in liberty, an empire of liberty, even a law-abiding Mohammedan, Pagan or Jew could be a good citizen (Jefferson); citizenship open to any free white of good moral character, no ambiguity in the least, very concrete and cautious.
The clause relating to "ourselves and our posterity" would have been an impregnable bulwark against invasion - if it wasn't merely propaganda. As soon as it was expedient to bring in cheap workers from abroad the national leadership did so.
This is a very complex issue and it's difficult to unravel all the causes and influences here. There was a change from traditional Germanic folkways. Romans, Jews, the Church, etc. likely played a role in the development of these centralized rulers with "authority" probably because they knew they'd get their asses kicked by the Germanics so they needed to build up "king" figures with "authority" they could hide behind and control/manipulate.
That's right - keep blaming everyone but yourselves.
Again, why didn't other North Euro countries other than Britain have the problems with rigid class division and hierarchy, since they as well were Christian and had as their monarchies the ones that were often the first cousins to the German nobility of England?
Maybe it has something to to with the sub-racial differences, on average, of much of the British Isles, particularly the Irish and the Scots-Irish? Especially IQ differences?
The best hope for America is to revive the federalist doctrine so as to empower the individual states. Then within the states, devolve responsibility to local communities which shall have a greater likelihood of racial, ethnic and even familial homogeneity, and it's there that the excellent aptitude of Euro-nords for co-operation and charity flourish. I don't foresee much ultimate benefit from coalescing with inferior or obnoxious Euro-med and white ethnics.
As do many pan-Nordicists, who wish to play down and diminish the very real variations among the different ethnic and sub-racial groups living in the geographic area of North-West/Northern Europe.
How obtuse. The extent to which Nordicists play down variation among Northern European groups pales in comparison to pan-Aryanists downplaying variation among "whites." As Svigor might say, if you're really concerned about people downplaying variation among European groups, you should direct your attention to the worst offenders.
If anyone needs to be enlightened by your wisdom about variation among and within European groups, it is the pan-Aryanist contingent.
Instead, you intently focus on attacking a straw man version of racialism in which nobody believes.
Your true intentions are becoming increasingly clear.
"the reality is that an explicitly race-based republic crystallized in the first half the 19th century in North America with the rise of democratic populism. As states removed property qualifications for voting, they enacted racial bars which had not existed prior. It is an interesting comment on the complexity of changing norms in this period that Martin van Buren’s vice president, Richard Mentor Johnson, was known to have had a common-in-law wife who was mixed-race (and two daughters by her whom he acknowledged). Van Buren’s Democratic party was the primary driver of “white male suffrage,” which expanded voting rights to those males who were without means, but barred voting rights in many states from non-whites. It helped transform the self-conception of the American republic to that of the American democracy. These two dynamics, the broadening of suffrage to most American males, combined with a more explicit and legally sanctioned commitment to white supremacy, causes interpretive tensions for 20th century American liberal historians. This seems clear in works such as Arthur Schlesinger Jr.’s The Age of Jackson, which attempted to trace American liberalism back to this period. So it is somewhat uncomfortable for him that it was among some of the older aristocratic conservative Federalists that one could find objection to a binary republic where color was one’s passport to equality. This is not because the conservatives favored racial equality as such, but rather preferred a more complex hierarchy and a set of values which included race, class, education and breeding, as the judge of a man. Such old republic conservatives may not have accepted a black man as an equal on the grounds of race, but they may not have acceded to the contention that all white men were superior in nature to all black men."
Why didn't other N. Euro nations other than Britain have these similar problems with a rigid class structure?
Jews. Limpieza de sangre, for instance, allowed 'Old Christian' commoners to claim nobility because of purity of blood. The Spanish nobility, who had intermarried with conversos, feared retribution.
KMac:"no one of the upper or middle class, except in the remote mountainous districts of the North and East, could feel secure that investigation might not reveal some unfortunate mesalliance of a distant ancestor" ( Lea 1906- 1907, II, 299).
Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism p.124
The English expelled the Jews, unlike other N. Euro countries, where, like Germany, who was not united, as England was, Jews moved from city state to city state and were the primary competition for Christian merchants. Thus the 'Other' was the main competitor in Europe, however, class competition arose in England.
The best hope for America is to revive the federalist doctrine so as to empower the individual states. Then within the states, devolve responsibility to local communities which shall have a greater likelihood of racial, ethnic and even familial homogeneity, and it's there that the excellent aptitude of Euro-nords for co-operation and charity flourish. I don't foresee much ultimate benefit from coalescing with inferior or obnoxious Euro-med and white ethnics.
What planet are you living on...? since the large majority of Euro-Meds have fairly extensively intermarried and assimilated into the dominant Anglo-European majority in this country.
Remember, nearly all "Euro-Med" immigration was abruptly cut off in 1924... and, hold on to your hat... nearly half of 'em went back to Europe anyways. So of course the ones who stayed had to assimilate.
You really should get your history from something other than old (Jewish-produced) gangster movies.
Meds and med-mixes are concentrated in certain parts of the country.
Large segments of the country are Nordish. There's no reason meds and their genes should be dispersed into these segments.
Meds and med-mixes are concentrated in certain parts of the country.
Large segments of the country are Nordish. There's no reason meds and their genes should be dispersed into these segments.
Who said they were going, or even looking to be 'dispersed'.
Just like with hicks and rednecks being concentrated in certain parts of the country. They are not, nor is anybody looking forward to, them being dispersed and moving to other parts of the country.
"Hick" is a general term that applies to rural people, not necessarily racial.
Redneck historically was a derogatory term against poor White Southerners but has expanded to be against all Whites that are not progressive similar to racist.
Do you really want to perpetuate anti-White stereotypes?
Do you really want to perpetuate anti-White stereotypes?
Invariably those who apply the foul insults of 'hick' or 'redneck' are deranged anti-Nord/anti-European Euro-meds, Chosenites or one of their anthropological curiosities from the multi-racial zoo. It's one of the vilest terms of abuse as it is so utterly without foundation. Euro-nord 'plebs' in their humble capacity built and populated the richest, grandest and safest nations since the creation of the world, they're not fit subjects for disdain.
It should be obvious to anyone with objectivity and an interest in race and Europe.
'Hillbillies' are nearly entirely of British Isles extraction. True Germanic people are not hillbillies.
The hillbilly in America is a biological cousin to the Chav, they are of 'native' British stock, they are not Germanic.
Rassenhygieniker said... October 15, 2010 11:34 PM
Reginald is another mediterranean who said Northern Europeans "deserve execution," "deserve the gas chamber," and "will not be missed" after their "annihilation from the face of the earth."
Heh.
By the nature of their allegories ye shall know them
I live in Spain and there are lots of Germans and Brits around here, and guess what? The Germans started moving out when the Brits started moving in.
So much für die Mediterranian frage...
The skadi forums (and maybe the whole nordicist movement) is an obvious Jew wedge-driving operation.
'Hillbillies' are nearly entirely of British Isles extraction. True Germanic people are not hillbillies.
The hillbilly in America is a biological cousin to the Chav, they are of 'native' British stock, they are not Germanic.
Absolutely.
And it is usually these people who are the most anti-'Med', and tend to be the biggest, and most belligerant, (wanna-be) 'Nordicists'.
Well, they have been looked down upon so much I guess they want to start doing the 'looking down'.
DerEwigeSwarthoid said...
LMFAO! :-)
> The skadi forums (and maybe the whole nordicist movement) is an obvious Jew wedge-driving operation.
That forum is indeed a little strange. I like the idea of it. I don't really mind that they are only into Germanic nations. However the number of people there who are NS or 'platonic NS' is very strange to me. The idea that neo-NS is a banner that can accomplish our goals is truly weird. Not that it is so strange to come across a few NS - but dozens of them, hanging out with dozens of people of other persuasions, was to me a bit unusual.
I strongly agree that we need to cooperate. I like Nordicism, but it's certainly not supposed to mean having no allies in your next-door fellow Euros. The well-allied triumph and the unallied lose, that's the way of the world.
As Bismarck said, when there were five great powers: you had better be a trois, not a deux or however you say it. Belong to a strong alliance, that's how it works.
The skadi forums (and maybe the whole nordicist movement) is an obvious Jew wedge-driving operation.
Is white nationalism a Jewish construct?
http://www.toqonline.com/archives/v7n2/v7no2_Rosit.pdf
"Spiro comments that some Jewish leaders resorted to the "if you can't lick 'em, join 'em" strategy during the racially conscious 1920s. Jews would oppose immigration from Asia in the hope that "the old-stock Americans would permit them to join the Nordics in a coalition known as 'the white race.'"26"
Kulaks Never Learn has a vicious and unquenchable hatred for the British and people of British descent.
Well, they have been looked down upon so much I guess they want to start doing the 'looking down'.
Isn't this the same argument the "white privilege" and "whiteness studies" crowd makes?
None of us has ever been opposed to an alliance or alliances.
In fact, we are the ones who are most supportive of an alliance or alliances: different groups coming together to fight our common enemies and reach strategic and tactical goals.
The swarthoids who wish to deny Nordish community and believe they must be allowed to disperse into any and all of them at all costs, are the ones who are opposed to an alliance or alliances by definition.
Don't get upset that the entire continent of Europe realizes where hillbilly blood comes from. It comes from Britain.
Hillbillies have a distinct look in them that is non Germanic. Is it Northern European? Sure, but it's not Teutonic.
Hillbilly blood does not come from Germany, or Iceland, or Sweden.
Teutonic ancestry is what separated England from the rest of Isles. Do you think Newton was a native British type? LOL
The 'native' types unfortunately have been breeding at an incredible rate in America as well as Britain, probably a crucial reason for decline.
The 'native' types unfortunately have been breeding at an incredible rate in America as well as Britain, probably a crucial reason for decline.
Source?
Don't get upset that the entire continent of Europe realizes where hillbilly blood comes from. It comes from Britain.
Hillbillies have a distinct look in them that is non Germanic. Is it Northern European? Sure, but it's not Teutonic.
This is probably the socio-biological basis as to why there was such a fairly rigid social-class system in Britain relative to that of continental Northern Europe.
Interesting that pan-Nordicists will often posit an enviornmental cause for this, whilst attributing (wholly or at least primarily) genetic ones when critiquing non-Nord societies, especially Southern European ones, their favorite whipping-boy.
This is probably the socio-biological basis as to why there was such a fairly rigid social-class system in Britain relative to that of continental Northern Europe.
Meant to add 'relative to that of continental Europe' and Scandinavia.
The hillbilly in America is a biological cousin to the Chav, they are of 'native' British stock, they are not Germanic.
Absolutely.
And it is usually these people who are the most anti-'Med', and tend to be the biggest, and most belligerant, (wanna-be) 'Nordicists'.
Arthur de Gobineau, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Hans Gunther, Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard, Wilmot Robertson, Richard McCulloch: Hillbillies and chavs?
Arthur de Gobineau, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Hans Gunther, Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard, Wilmot Robertson, Richard McCulloch: Hillbillies and chavs?
All of these men are various nationalities of Teutonic stock. Many of them, especially the European figures, as well have made the distinction between the upper-crust Teutonic strata and the indigenous ones of their respective societies - which was the *whole point* of the last few comments on this thread - that the indigenous British stock is/was the basis for the hillbilly/Chav/Yob phenomenon.
All of these men are various nationalities of Teutonic stock. Many of them, especially the European figures, as well have made the distinction between the upper-crust Teutonic strata and the indigenous ones of their respective societies - which was the *whole point* of the last few comments on this thread - that the indigenous British stock is/was the basis for the hillbilly/Chav/Yob phenomenon.
You completely missed the point. Kulaks Never Learn claimed Nordicists are hillbillies and chavs.
You completely missed the point. Kulaks Never Learn claimed Nordicists are hillbillies and chavs.
Ah, no one is claiming all Nordicists are hillbillies and chavs, just that many of the most hateful and belligerant ones seem to tend to be of this (least Teuto-Nordic) stock.
Where is your evidence that "many of the most hateful and belligerant ones seem to tend to be of this (least Teuto-Nordic) stock"?
Where is your evidence that "many of the most hateful and belligerant ones seem to tend to be of this (least Teuto-Nordic) stock"?
Good question, and while I do admit it is subjective on my part, it just seems as if the most outspoken Nord types (at least online) of late come from America, and particularly the South (where of course much racial nationalism comes from). Likewise, the obsession with Meds seems to come most disproportionately from here.
I ahve been all over Europe and have met and conversed with many Euro-Nationalists, especially those from the north of Europe, and rarely, if ever, does the racial obsession with Southern Europeans ever crop up into the conversation, even obliquely.
And believe me, all of these guys are more than familiar with Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard, and virtually all have read Robertson's the Dispossessed Majority.
Classic anti-racist argument: "White racists are dumb rednecks. They're compensating for their own inferiority or non-white ancestry."
Classic anti-racist argument: "White racists are dumb rednecks. They're compensating for their own inferiority
Typically coming from a hypocritical non-White as well, while they're shouting racist at Whites they're simultaneously promoting their own race/ethnicity. This obvious contradiction and profound dishonesty never occurs to them. Why? Because they don't value truth or justice at all, just what benefits them.
Racial hybrids tend to be the worst. The combination of White and non-White races creates not only an ugly physical product but a psychologically disturbed one as well. Malcolm X and Tim Wise come to mind.
Jews (including mischlings) and Latinos I've found to be the most dishonest and obnoxious people I've ever met. Combined with the fact that they often present themselves as White, they're by far the worst opposition.
Arthur de Gobineau, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Hans Gunther, Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard, Wilmot Robertson, Richard McCulloch: Hillbillies and chavs?
Exactly the whole argument is absurd. One thing that Nordicism proves and is a way to test so-called "White nationalists" of their honesty and allegiance to racialism is bring up sub-racial differences and Nordicism. These types seem to think that group biological differences end at their arbitrary definition of white. Soon enough their inner Jew will come out and they start calling people derogatory names like redneck and hillbilly, and claim it's "pseudoscience."
How can anyone say Nordicism is from hillbillies, it's the most ridiculous thing ever. Germans advanced Nordicism farther than anyone, but I doubt the detractors will disparage all Germans as rednecks.
Without Celtics and Germanics racialism wouldn't exist.
Latins have always advocated a policy of assimilation and a miscegenated caste system. Latin America is the grotesque result of their misguided ways.
The skadi forums (and maybe the whole nordicist movement) is an obvious Jew wedge-driving operation.
Skadi was created by a German nationalist and was mostly European, don't know about now. So the whole argument of it being Jewish or hillbilly just shows how stupid you people are.
Ah, no one is claiming all Nordicists are hillbillies and chavs, just that many of the most hateful and belligerant ones seem to tend to be of this (least Teuto-Nordic) stock.
Name one? It's utter nonsense.
The association of hillbilly with chav doesn't make any sense either. Chavs are consumers of pop culture and rap, they're wiggers, they're like the British version of guido Italians that you see on the TV show Jersey Shore.
"Hillbillies" are typically much more traditional, rural and isolated from urban culture.
"Hillbillies" are typically much more traditional, rural and isolated from urban culture.
And they are of predominately indigenous British origin.
The association of hillbilly with chav doesn't make any sense either. Chavs are consumers of pop culture and rap, they're wiggers, they're like the British version of guido Italians that you see on the TV show Jersey Shore.
They are of a similar stock, which is of predominately native British origin. It can also be seen in Australia as well. It doesn't matter which culture or counter culture they go into, it's low quality culture they produce and they are far inferior to the Teutonic types. They are simple minded and have very little to do with the genius that has come out of Britain and NorthWestern Europe the past 1,000 years. The average 'wigger' in America is also of predominately native British ancestry as well, not German or real English.
World War I saw a very significant decline in actual Englishmen of predominately Teutonic stock and it's started a dysgenic trend which has continued today in Britain and America, the native types are breeding higher.
http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/3883429/1/
Hahahahahahaha!
http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2010/06/low-southern-italian-iq.html
German Americans don't seem to perform very well in terms of IQ of course. They may not have much to do with "trash" culture though, this is possible.
Northwest/North European Americans:
England/Wales 103.8*
Denmark 103.7*
Russia 103.4
Scotland 103.3*
Norway 102.7
Sweden 102.2
Finland 101.1
Ireland 100.9
Poland 100.4
Germany 99.8
The average 'wigger' in America is also of predominately native British ancestry as well
Do you enjoy pulling "facts" out of thin air? Would you care to point us to these studies on the ethnic ancestry of wiggers? Your "subjective impressions" (read: guesses or preconceived notions) aren't evidence, much less definitive fact.
The average 'wigger' in America is also of predominately native British ancestry as well
Even if this were correct, it would tell us nothing about whether people of British descent are disproportionately represented among wiggers, as White Americans are predominantly of British descent. One must compare the percentage of wiggers who are of British descent to the percentage of White Americans who are of British descent.
Anonymous 10:07, what is your ethnic ancestry?
Do you enjoy pulling "facts" out of thin air? Would you care to point us to these studies on the ethnic ancestry of wiggers?
Right, just some stupid troll. You'll see the exact same behavior with mulattoes and mestizos. It's just one spiteful lie after another with these sub-humans.
For Americans that would be difficult to assess considering so many have multiple European ancestries. For instance Eminem is of Scottish, English, German, Swiss, Polish, and possibly Luxembourg ancestry.
It would seem that families that keep ethnic traditions alive are more resistant to pop cultural influences than whether someone is a specific ancestry.
A fantastic post by Vanishing American
Some excerpts:
But during this past week, it seems that every other blog or forum of a right-wing nature that I've visited has had nasty comments directed at Anglo-Saxon Americans. To cap it all off, in my inbox at Intense Debate yesterday was an ugly comment on an old blog entry of mine. The diatribe from someone with a Hispanic or Italian name, culminated in the statement, in all caps, that Anglo-Saxons needed to be completely removed from the face of this earth.
But watch: my reaction here will be the one called "divisive".
...
And it's a rare day when anyone says anything in response to the railing Anglophobes. Once in a while I have seen 'Svigor', who posts at a number of ethnopatriot blogs, give a good comeback to the slurs and insults over at Steve Sailer's blog. But that is something of a rarity.
...
I cannot count the number of times I have read slurs against WASPs because they are 'rich elites' who are either do-gooder liberals or self-hating Whites. Then I read that the WASPs are fat, gluttonous White trash. Can both be true? Sure, there are extremes at one end or the other in every group, but to caricature only Anglo-Saxons in this fashion is bizarre.
Most people on the racial right seem to stereotype WASP Americans as 'elites' like the Boston Brahmin types -- but do they even exist anymore? Who are they? Where? What are their names? The only New England elite I hear about are the likes of the Kennedys or John Kerry.
...
Every time someone brings up the 'WASP elites sold this country out' mantra, I have to ask them: who are they? Name me some names. Specifically. I never get an answer.
...
There is not a WASP cabal running this country, in complicity with Jews or otherwise. In fact, the old WASP gentry were accused of being anti-Semitic, as well as xenophobic in general.
So again, which is it? Cosmopolitan? Or xenophobic and exclusive?
May I just throw out a few names here? Madison Grant. Wilmot Robertson. Henry Cabot Lodge (who was as "Brahmin" as you can get). Carleton Putnam, who was a kinsman of mine. Most of you are familiar with those names, if not, you might wish to google them.
They were not men who were self-hating, or liberal, or 'selfish elite rich WASPs'.
...
The "WASP" is now the favorite whipping boy for people on the racial right, oddly. Some complain of anti-Jewish sentiments on the right, but Jews get better press than the WASP.
There is one thing that unites the far left and the far right: they often seem to blame every woe of the world on Anglo-Saxons. Not just on Whitey, mind you, although there is a lot of Whitey-bashing, but Anglo-Saxons. Few other groups can be criticized so viciously with so little response.
And here's one other thing to chew on: the nature of the attacks on Anglo-Saxons is pretty much the same as the accusations against White men in general. The Anglo-Saxon, whether you like him or not, is sort of the arch-White man, in the popular imagination. Those who hate Whites are guaranteed to hate Anglo-Saxons intensely.
...
I hope I may be forgiven for asking if the Ellis Island immigration wave helped or hindered this country, or if the divisions that were introduced were in fact just the beginnings of the multicultural regime.
...
The divisiveness that comes from those who have a need to slander the founding group of this country is something that has to be addressed, or it will be our downfall.
A fantastic post by Vanishing American
Right, just some stupid troll. You'll see the exact same behavior with mulattoes and mestizos. It's just one spiteful lie after another with these sub-humans.
Mulattoes and Mestizos recognize the inferiority of native British types over true Germanic types? Really? If so then they actually deserve some credit, lol
And who are you calling a sub-human? Me? You're probably of predominately paleolithic British ancestry by the way you are reacting to my comments. Which means you're of low strata within the white race and Northern Europe.
You see all these people in the Americas worshiping their dead Kike on a cross and speaking in tongues? British hillbillies, nothing more.
Even British hillbilly 'racism' is inferior to the Germanic one. Germans never wore sheets and created worthless and embarrassing groups like the KKK. The Germans created the Third Reich while American and British idiots controlled by Jews conspired to destroy it.
Obviously British blood is inferior as your nations are crumbling and within a century will no longer even be white. Yeah, enjoy your Mestizos and Mulattoes British imbeciles. Enjoy Sharia Law and La Raza British and American idiots, that's what allied victory got you.
Anonymous said... October 24, 2010 8:06 AM
Arthur de Gobineau, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Hans Gunther, Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard, Wilmot Robertson, Richard McCulloch: Hillbillies and chavs?
Exactly the whole argument is absurd. One thing that Nordicism proves and is a way to test so-called "White nationalists" of their honesty and allegiance to racialism is bring up sub-racial differences and Nordicism. These types seem to think that group biological differences end at their arbitrary definition of white. Soon enough their inner Jew will come out and they start calling people derogatory names like redneck and hillbilly, and claim it's "pseudoscience."
How can anyone say Nordicism is from hillbillies, it's the most ridiculous thing ever. Germans advanced Nordicism farther than anyone, but I doubt the detractors will disparage all Germans as rednecks.
===
You came a bit late to the conversation, since no one here was specifically saying that Nordicists were hillbilly's or chavs, just that much of the hill-bill's and chavs/yobs predominantly come from the native,
indigenous pre-Germanic, pre-Teutonic stock of Britain, and that this was the stock that went most to the Southern colonies in British North America.
Some were perhaps noting the irony that some of the more strident Nordicists of late (not Madison Grant or Lothrop Stoddard, for example) seem to come from these regions or British ethnic stock.
Additionally, this is something that pan-Nordicists seem to tend to gloss over or minimalize, the sub-racial differences amongst the British and British Americans, and their differences as well from the mean averages of more Nordic continental Northern Europe/Scandinavia. (Or do most of you really wish to believe there are no appreciable differences?)
German Americans don't seem to perform very well in terms of IQ of course. They may not have much to do with "trash" culture though, this is possible.
Really? Germany at least usually has some of the highest IQ scores in Europe.
A new European league of IQ scores has ranked the British in eighth place, well above the French, who were 19th. According to Richard Lynn of the University of Ulster, Britons have an average IQ of 100. The French scored 94. But it is not all good news. Top of the table were the Germans, with an IQ of 107. The British were also beaten by the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, Italy, Austria and Switzerland.
Professor Lynn, who caused controversy last year by claiming that men were more intelligent than women by about five IQ points on average, said that populations in the colder, more challenging environments of Northern Europe had developed larger brains than those in warmer climates further south. The average brain size in Northern and Central Europe is 1,320cc and in southeast Europe it is 1,312cc. “The early human beings in northerly areas had to survive during cold winters when there were no plant foods and they were forced to hunt big game,” he said. “The main environmental influence on IQ is diet, and people in southeast Europe would have had less of the proteins, minerals and vitamins provided by meat which are essential for brain development.”
He added that differences in intelligence across Britain could be attributed to bright people moving to London over hundreds of years. Adults in England and Wales have an IQ of 100.5, higher than Ireland and Scotland, both with 97. People living in London and the South East average 102. “Once in the capital they have settled and reared children, and these children have inherited their high intelligence and transmitted it to further generations.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article697134.ece
These types seem to think that group biological differences end at their arbitrary definition of white.
Just like some other types think that group biological differences end at their arbitrary definition of Nordic.
Would you care to answer the questions you were asked and provide evidence to support the "facts" you pull out of thin air, or are you just going to keep arguing against straw men?
The modus operandi of the swarthoid trolls has changed, but their goal remains the same.
Ummm, don't the great Nordic stalwarts found on this site actually READ this site? I do understand that petty gossip and witty parlance such as "swarthoid" is more entertaining however...
Proof:
The Old Virginians of the mountain section of the state, the western part, including the Valley of Virginia and the Piedmont section, are taller than those from the Tidewater section on the east. This may be partly the result of environment, but is also partly the pioneer British, and especially the Scots, who make up the larger part of the population in the western portion of the state.
Now from Wiki:
An estimated 90% of Appalachia's earliest European settlers originated from the Anglo-Scottish border country— namely the English counties of Cumberland, Westmoreland, Northumberland, Durham, Lancashire, and Yorkshire, and the Lowland Scottish counties of Ayrshire, Dumfriesshire, Roxburghshire, Berwickshire, and Wigtownshire. Most of these were from families who had been resettled in the Ulster Plantation in northern Ireland in the 17th century, but some came directly from the Anglo-Scottish border region. In America, these people are often grouped under the single name "Scotch-Irish" or "Scots-Irish". While various 20th-century writers tried to associate Appalachia with Scottish highlanders, Highland Scots were a relatively insignificant percentage of the region's early European immigrants.
What are you "proving," Cyd? That there are differences among Europeans? No shit.
What is the point of inveighing against a straw man version of Nordicism in which nobody believes?
The modus operandi of the swarthoid trolls has changed, but their goal remains the same.
All they prove over and over again is how mentally deranged they are. I wouldn't be surprised if they're mischlings or mestizos, I encounter the same type of irrational hostility, vulgarity and lying among them as with Cyd and a few of these other trolls. Again, you're not welcome here and this site doesn't pertain to you so piss off.
Just like some other types think that group biological differences end at their arbitrary definition of Nordic.
Childlike repetition that I often encounter with niggers and Latinos.
Nordicism is the recognition of sub-racial and group differences, moron.
What are you "proving," Cyd?
That he's an imbecile. He posts common knowledge and pretends pompously like he's discovered something.
Would you care to answer the questions you were asked and provide evidence to support the "facts" you pull out of thin air, or are you just going to keep arguing against straw men?
Sure, some of us would love to answer questions and meaningfully engage in dialogue about this topic, instead of intellectually-insipid name-calling.
Here is one of your earlier questions:
Where is your evidence that "many of the most hateful and belligerant ones seem to tend to be of this (least Teuto-Nordic) stock"?
The point being made there is that Nordicists of late in America tend to be people that least (or minimally) match the tall, long-headed, dociophilic and blond/fair Nordic ideal of asthetics and physiogomy.
Since like you said, and most of us agree, that the majority of White America is of British extraction, then most of them must be of the more pre-(actual)Nordic stock of their British and Northern European ancestral homelands.
Is this really so controversial, or 'insulting' to your sensibilities?
I will let VDare founder Peter Brimelow perhaps better explain the division between Nordicism as an ideology verses the real-life Nordic reality of America's White population -
Peter Brimelow writes: This is an entirely reasonable comment. But I seriously doubt that Madison Grant was widely read in small town Indiana in 1918, or even that he had been heard of. My guess is that the locals just didn’t like strangers much. I would also guess that the strangers didn’t like natives either. I clearly remember an Italian-Canadian girlfriend telling me about her first day in Canada - her mother looking out the window and commenting: “The barbarians are hanging out their washing” (no mean feat in an Ottawa winter). It took a couple of generations for these quite natural tensions to abate, as Roy Beck chronicled in his brilliant account of Storm Lake, Iowa – at which point the 1965 Immigration Act introduced a whole new set of tensions.
Nordicism as a popular ideology has the obvious limitation that many of its putative supporters, even in Indiana, don’t match the physical ideal – including, as has often been pointed out, Adolf Hitler. It haunts the immigration debate because some immigration enthusiasts are projecting their own ethnic preoccupations onto the host American nation.
Here is Kevin MacDonald's take on Nordicism -
I stand by my contention that Nordicism was not a major factor in the Congressional debates of the period. I noted this on p. 251 of Culture of Critique:
“Although playing virtually no role in the restrictionist position in the congressional debates on immigration (which focused mainly on the fairness of maintaining the ethnic status quo; see below), a component of the intellectual zeitgeist of the 1920s was the prevalence of evolutionary theories of race and ethnicity (Singerman 1986), particularly the theories of Madison Grant…Grant's ideas were popularized in the media at the time of the immigration debates (see Divine 1957, 12ff) and often provoked negative comments in Jewish publications such as The American Hebrew (e.g., March 21, 1924, 554, 625)."
And I concluded that
"As indicated below, arguments related to Nordic superiority, including supposed Nordic intellectual superiority, played remarkably little role in Congressional debates over immigration in the 1920s, the common argument of the restrictionists being that immigration policy should reflect equally the interests of all ethnic groups currently in the country. There is even evidence that the Nordic superiority argument had little favor with the public: A member of the Immigration Restriction League stated in 1924 that "the country is somewhat fed up on high brow Nordic superiority stuff " (in Samelson 1979, 136)."
Having read the Congressional debates, I see no reason to change my assessment. Grant was part of the zeitgeist but, even at that time. it started to become unrespectable to assert Nordic superiority in Congress.
http://www.vdare.com/letters/tl_021302.htm
Would you care to answer the questions you were asked and provide evidence to support the "facts" you pull out of thin air, or are you just going to keep arguing against straw men?
Sure, some of us would love to answer questions and meaningfully engage in dialogue about this topic, instead of intellectually-insipid name-calling.
Here is one of your earlier questions:
Where is your evidence that "many of the most hateful and belligerant ones seem to tend to be of this (least Teuto-Nordic) stock"?
The point being made there is that Nordicists of late in America tend to be people that least (or minimally) match the tall, long-headed, dociophilic and blond/fair Nordic ideal of asthetics and physiogomy.
Since like you said, and most of us agree, that the majority of White America is of British extraction, then most of them must be of the more pre-(actual)Nordic stock of their British and Northern European ancestral homelands.
Is this really so controversial, or 'insulting' to your sensibilities?
I will let VDare founder Peter Brimelow perhaps better explain the division between Nordicism as an ideology verses the real-life Nordic reality of America's White population -
Peter Brimelow writes: This is an entirely reasonable comment. But I seriously doubt that Madison Grant was widely read in small town Indiana in 1918, or even that he had been heard of. My guess is that the locals just didn’t like strangers much. I would also guess that the strangers didn’t like natives either. I clearly remember an Italian-Canadian girlfriend telling me about her first day in Canada - her mother looking out the window and commenting: “The barbarians are hanging out their washing” (no mean feat in an Ottawa winter). It took a couple of generations for these quite natural tensions to abate, as Roy Beck chronicled in his brilliant account of Storm Lake, Iowa – at which point the 1965 Immigration Act introduced a whole new set of tensions.
Nordicism as a popular ideology has the obvious limitation that many of its putative supporters, even in Indiana, don’t match the physical ideal – including, as has often been pointed out, Adolf Hitler. It haunts the immigration debate because some immigration enthusiasts are projecting their own ethnic preoccupations onto the host American nation.
Without Celtics and Germanics racialism wouldn't exist.
True about Germanics, not so sure about 'Celtics' though, especially since the Keltoi did not have as unified a kultur as the ancient Germans. As well, they were distinct peoples from one another, with the Teutons soundly defeating much of the Celts in battle (for that matter, so did the Romans in Gaul).
The Native British types are the hillbilly blood of Europe. These are the people you see shouting in tongues for their Kike on a cross. These are usually the evangelicals or Mormons, and they breed like rats. The more Germanic types are concentrated highly in the Northern Mid-West and are far superior. The Mediterraneans are mostly in the North-East where also Kikes are in strongest number, unsurprisingly.
The Native British types are far inferior to the Germanic types, which unforntunelty since the first world war have declined not only in Britain, but in America as well.
Even their 'racism' is inferior. Native British types create embarrassing movements like the KKK, who were nothing but a bunch of xenophobic rednecks wearing clown sheets, while the Germanic types created real racialist movements like the Third Reich. Hell, even the Northern/Central Italians managed to create Fascism, can't say the same for British hillbilly stock.
Nearly all genius from Britain is because of the Germanic blood.
Nordicism is the recognition of sub-racial and group differences, moron.
Now it's your turn to answer a question and back up your assertions:
Do you pan-Nordicists believe and recognize that sub-racial and genetic group differences exist among Northern Europeans...,
or
...do you believe that they are essentially a unified People and homogeneous sub-race?
Please do back up your assertions with evidence, nor use strawmen to argue against. And do try your best to control yourselves with the hysterical and emotional name-calling (geesh, I thought this is what only emotionally-erratic 'swarthoids' engage in).
What are you "proving," Cyd?
This, as "Anonymous" states...
The Native British types are the hillbilly blood of Europe.
Why? Because nothing else seemed to be in contention. Only that. That is if you people read what this particular "Anonymous" was trying to state. If that was not what you wanted "proven", then either learn to read thoroughly what others write, and digest it accordingly and in this particular case, the point of contention was stated and re-stated twice if not three times. Or be specific on what you want proven instead of the lot of you hysterically jumping up and down like the pack of niggers the day OJ was set free.
Please do back up your assertions with evidence, nor use strawmen to argue against. And do try your best to control yourselves with the hysterical and emotional name-calling (geesh, I thought this is what only emotionally-erratic 'swarthoids' engage in).
Indeed. They haven't grasped the concept of hypocrisy just yet.
Cyd, you threw a tantrum and said you weren't going to be commenting here any more. You were obviously lying as always.
Do you pan-Nordicists believe and recognize that sub-racial and genetic group differences exist among Northern Europeans...,
or
...do you believe that they are essentially a unified People and homogeneous sub-race?
You're presenting a false dichotomy. They're not mutually exclusive. There are obviously differences among Northern Europeans. However, the differences between Swedes and Norwegians or the English and Dutch are quite a bit smaller than differences between Swedes and Sicilians, Dutch and Greeks, Norwegians and Jews, or English and Arabs.
Post a Comment