← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · jamestown
Thread ID: 10223 | Posts: 70 | Started: 2003-10-03
2003-10-03 20:33 | User Profile
Well, it seems to me that there is an imbalance in the ethnic distribution on this board. Overall some nationalities seem to dominate while others are missing. This is particularly striking when one considers that this is primarily an American message board. My impression is that there seems to be an overrepresentation of people of Eastern European extraction (particularly Russian). Next might come people of German background. Other nationalities are largely absent, like Scandinavians (except of Triskelion), Frenchmen (Jesuisfier seems to be the only one), Flemings (there are not so many of them of course). Brits are rare (Dan Dare the only one?), the same goes for Irishmen. Anglosaxons in general seem to be underrepresented, although their nations are the prime target of the multiculturalists. I thought that Celts are highly ethnically aware so I would expect a strong presence of them. And I guess I am just aware of one Francocanadian on this board.
Well just out of curiosity I would like to conduct an ethnic poll.
The poll does not cover all ethnicities as there are dozens if not more ethnicities and micronations in Europe like the Basques, Corsicans, Welch, Sardinians etc.
Just to cover the major groups the categories listed in the poll should be considered in the following way:
Eastern Slavonic: Russian people and the Russian Orthodox people traditionally linked to the Russians like Ukranians, Belorussians, Serbs, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Amenians etc.
Western Slavonic: The Slavic people of Catholic or Protestant faith like Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Croats, Slovenians etc.
Anglosaxon: People of English descent no matter where they live or what nation they consider themselves to be part of. Might include people who consider England their spiritual homeland.
Celtic: Brettons, Canal Islanders, Cornish, Galician from Spain, Scots, Welch, Irish or the Raeto-Romans in the Wallis and Tyrol areas in the Alps
Germanic: Teutonic people save the Brits: Dutch, Fleming, Scandinavian, German speaking
Iberian: Portugese, Spanish or Latin American
Italian: Italians or people of the Mediteranian Sea who do not fit in any other category
Francophone: Whites of the French tongue
Baltic: Lithuanian, Latlivian, Estonian, Finns?
Other whites: Not fitting in either of these categories or of being of multiple ancestry that categorization is impossible.
2003-10-03 20:50 | User Profile
Southron White Anglo-Saxon Protestant checking in. We should be first in line after all.
:cowboy:
2003-10-03 21:09 | User Profile
Some combination of Scottish, Irish, English, possibly some French. I was always disappointed as a kid to learn that I wasn't 100 percent Irish like T.H., P.M. and the other guys who claimed it, and thus could not, as they asserted, be in the St. Pat's parade (isn't racial discrimination terrible?)
When told of my English heritage, I was still more disappointed because there didn't seem to be anything cool about that. No special foods, languages, costumes or anything.
For convenience I call myself Anglo-Saxon... and I guess Protestent holds because one side of the family was, historically (the other side was Catholic, but who says "WASC?")
Really, fellas, I think the point of all this is that many of us have mixed backgrounds. Therefore, all of humanity is one.
2003-10-03 21:20 | User Profile
Three parts redneck, one part kraut.
2003-10-03 21:34 | User Profile
Father's family from Ayrshire, Scotland. Mother's family from Yorkshire, England. Other branches, mostly Lowland Scot. Some other English and Irish.
So, in order, but not completely sure, Celt, Norman, Saxon. Maybe Celt, Saxon, Norman.
My best grandfather was from Czechoslovakia, but he was my Grandmother's second husband, and not blood. Good man. I loved him a lot.
MacEnkidu
2003-10-03 21:37 | User Profile
I'm of Russian, Ukrainian, and Polish decent.
2003-10-03 22:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]. Therefore, all of humanity is one.[/QUOTE]
Ain't that just sweet!
Did you learn that official peecee party line in a NWO American High School? :blink:
2003-10-03 22:51 | User Profile
Teuton through and through.
One branch East Prussian and another Silesian German.
2003-10-03 23:01 | User Profile
Austrian on my mother's side of the family, perhaps some Bohemian in there. Scot-Irish on my father's side. Southron in essence, with an authoritarian Germanic streak.
2003-10-03 23:15 | User Profile
German, Allemanic and Swabian.
2003-10-03 23:24 | User Profile
You forgot to include hindus and jews.
2003-10-04 01:38 | User Profile
I'm a lowly "Other White" : German-Celtic (Irish/Welsh) [size=1]and no, I don't care whether or not the Welsh are true Celts.[/size]
[QUOTE=jamestown] Iberian: Portugese, Spanish or Latin American [/QUOTE] Latin-American? You mean Mestizos are equal to Spaniards and Portugese? :ohmy:
2003-10-04 03:34 | User Profile
Well Im an American, which is to say, hopelessly mixed White racial heritage, but of the four grandparent there is an Irish, English, German, and French (Huguenot) name. My last name is German.
2003-10-04 06:17 | User Profile
Western Slavonic, Croatian, few drops of Hungarian blood.
2003-10-04 06:56 | User Profile
Go on - [I]guess.[/I]
But Greek as well on my mother's side. Family crest is a woodcut of Billy Gilbert about to sneeze.
I find it interesting that I'm not hearing what I usually hear from many a Southron, to wit, a certain percentage of American Indian ancestry. If I had a nickel for every chick I met down South who claimed to be "one-fifth Cherokee" or some such nonsense....I'd need a change-maker on my belt loop.
2003-10-04 07:06 | User Profile
3/8 Russian, 1/4 Ukrainian, 1/8 Polish, 1/8 Lithuanian, 1/8 German. I speak Russian, have a Russian surname, and identify with my Russian heritage.
2003-10-04 07:06 | User Profile
[QUOTE=FadeTheButcher]Austrian on my mother's side of the family, perhaps some Bohemian in there. Scot-Irish on my father's side. Southron in essence, with an authoritarian Germanic streak.[/QUOTE]
I like Southerners very much. Many of my countrymen was guerrilla fighters for Confederacy. Here is what one Yankee aggressor wrote about this:
[QUOTE] The Missouri Bushwhacker
...It was this "White Trash" which added so much to the horrors of the war, especially in Missouri, and so little to its real prosecution. Wolf-like in ferocity, when the advantages were on their side, they were wolf-like in cowardice when the terms were at all equal. They were the Croats, Cossacks, Tolpatches, Pandours of the Confederacy—of little value in battle, but terrible as guerrillas and bushwhackers. From this "White Trash" came the gangs of murderers and robbers, like those led by the Youngers, Jameses, Quantrills, and scores of other names of criminal memory. As has been the case in all times and countries, these dregs of society became the willing tools of the Slaveholding aristocrats. With dog-like fidelity they followed and served the class which despised and overrode them. Somehow, by inherited habits likely, they seemed to avoid the more fertile parts of the State...[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.civilwarstlouis.com/History/EdwardsVSMcElroy.htm[/url]
This Yankee John McElroy from Illinois cavalry sound bitter, and I'm glad they gave him the reasons for it.
2003-10-04 07:11 | User Profile
[QUOTE=jamestown] My impression is that there seems to be an overrepresentation of people of Eastern European extraction (particularly Russian).
There is only one "pure-blood" Russian here that I know of, and two mixed Northern Slavic mutts (me and Perun). :)
Eastern Slavonic: Russian people and the Russian Orthodox people traditionally linked to the Russians like Ukranians, Belorussians, Serbs, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Amenians etc.
Russians, Belarussians and Ukrainians are the only Eastern Slavs on the list. Serbs, Bulgarian and Macedonians are Southern Slavs. Armenians are not Slavic, not even European. Phenotypically they are indistinguishable from Jews.
2003-10-04 07:20 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Go on - [I]guess.[/I]
But Greek as well on my mother's side. Family crest is a woodcut of Billy Gilbert about to sneeze.
I find it interesting that I'm not hearing what I usually hear from many a Southron, to wit, a certain percentage of American Indian ancestry. If I had a nickel for every chick I met down South who claimed to be "one-fifth Cherokee" or some such nonsense....I'd need a change-maker on my belt loop.[/QUOTE]
Didn't even the sleezy rapist Clinton ("the first Black President") claim to be part-Cherokee?
2003-10-04 07:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Henry Ford]There is only one "pure-blood" Russian here that I know of, and two mixed Northern Slavic mutts (me and Perun). :)
Ok if you included the French and Spainish blood in my ancestry, I guess you could consider me a Northern Slavic mutt. :)
2003-10-04 11:48 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]You forgot to include hindus and jews.[/QUOTE]
Hindus shall be designated as "The brown, illiterate, cowdung worshipping species of Aryan." Jews should be listed as "The Special Shiny People(tm)" "The Holocaustniks(tm)", or "The Persecuted Ones(tm)"
2003-10-04 12:37 | User Profile
Just testing(TM).
2003-10-04 17:17 | User Profile
Or they can be lumped under :dung:
2003-10-04 18:41 | User Profile
Paternal- came to the US before it was. Early 1600's, from England. Settled in eastern North Carolina, made it to western Tennessee by the mid 1800's. Maternal, Grandmother from Sweden, Grandfather from Kirkov, Russia. Both in the 1800's. That makes me what?
2003-10-04 20:22 | User Profile
So what is the Il Ragno take on the whole debate about whether the historic Greeks were Nordic or more like modern Greeks? I've met a variety of Greek types, from very White-looking to brown-skinned, brown-eyed and black-haired. One female of the latter variety was damn hot.
I'd call these kinds of Greeks, along with Whitish Lebanese and some other strains, just inside the White Gate.
2003-10-04 21:10 | User Profile
The poll is misleading. Very few Americans more than two generations from landing can trace a single European heritage for their blood.
I'm Irish/German:
Sligo, Bavaria, Alsace, Catholic Anglo-Saxon with a few drops of Scot, Welsh, and allegedly Czech (though German)
Choosing a label forces me to discredit a part of my heritage. I value them all.
2003-10-04 21:18 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]So what is the Il Ragno take on the whole debate about whether the historic Greeks were Nordic or more like modern Greeks? I've met a variety of Greek types, from very White-looking to brown-skinned, brown-eyed and black-haired. One female of the latter variety was damn hot.
I'd call these kinds of Greeks, along with Whitish Lebanese and some other strains, just inside the White Gate.[/QUOTE]
These type of pseudo-"Whitology" is pointless. Particularly the 19th Century style classification according to skull shape/cranial measurement. It strikes the vast majority of people as vapid, egocentric quackery.
White is white. Have you ever known a brotha or Hyman who get confused at recognizing Whitey? The same with this idiotic Aryan/Slav distinction. I defy anyone who has looked at Russ from St. Petersburg to be able to consistently say whether they're Aryan or Slav.
Treasure your ethnic and your heritage. But know that this time we're all in this together. Hang together or hang separately. At least that's my mongrelized American attitude. Trust me- the "non-whites" don't distinguish between Anglo, Slav, or Teutonic when they look at you.
2003-10-04 21:31 | User Profile
The poll is misleading. Very few Americans more than two generations from landing can trace a single European heritage for their blood.
I'm Irish/German:
Sligo, Bavaria, Alsace, Catholic Anglo-Saxon with a few drops of Scot, Welsh, and allegedly Czech (though German)
Choosing a label forces me to discredit a part of my heritage. I value them all.
When I made the poll I was asking myself whether it is reasonable to allow multiple choices. But I refrained from that because it would benefit Americans and lead to an imbalance in the national distribution of the posters. Although I tried to limit the choices to the major groups it seems that even generalized categories can't cover the true situation. Most people nonetheless have one side they identify with the most. I am nonetheless surprised how successful the American melting pot worked. Most Americans I met were usually one part old stock and one part immigrant. Kind of Mayflower meets Ellis Island.
2003-10-04 21:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE] Most Americans I met were usually one part old stock and one part immigrant. Kind of Mayflower meets Ellis Island.[/QUOTE]
:lol: Bingo.
A Catholic SAR who can trace some lines here before the brothas arrived. Connecticut, NE, they founded cities in Idaho and others out west. Cobined with Germans mercenaries who served with Napoleon and emigrated here, with blood who fought in Afrika under the Fox. The Irish got here at the turn of the Century.
Perhaps given the extensive bloodlines, my family has at least one member who fought in every American war. Sometimes on more than one side. :ohmy:
2003-10-04 22:06 | User Profile
I was hoping one could click on more than one group (I am Germanic/Celt/Norman), but since I have more Germanic (German/Dutch) in me than the Celt/Norman (Irish), I clicked on "Germanic".
2003-10-04 22:56 | User Profile
Slavs are Aryan. Period.
"Particularly the 19th Century style classification according to skull shape/cranial measurement. It strikes the vast majority of people as vapid, egocentric quackery."
Not so.
Skull measurements are useful in determining, inter alia, cranial capacity, i.e., brain size, and, by extension, IQ. (They can also serve to racially classify individuals.)
See for e.g. the work of Prof. J. Philippe Rushton [url]http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol2no1/jpr-taxonomic.html[/url]
2003-10-05 01:21 | User Profile
And hopefully checking out -- for good.
When you're not insulting your host (TD) or bragging about all the White women you've had -- you're slandering Slavs. What a ludicrous :dung: coloured turd... :lol:
Your posts are like a broken record, the same schtick over and over... :yawn:
[QUOTE=rban]100% pure Hindu Aryan checking in.
And I know I am more Caucasian than any dirty Slav. We are the superior Master Race.[/QUOTE]
2003-10-05 01:26 | User Profile
[I]White is white. Have you ever known a brotha or Hyman who get confused at recognizing Whitey? The same with this idiotic Aryan/Slav distinction. I defy anyone who has looked at Russ from St. Petersburg to be able to consistently say whether they're Aryan or Slav.
Treasure your ethnic and your heritage. But know that this time we're all in this together. Hang together or hang separately. At least that's my mongrelized American attitude. Trust me- the "non-whites" don't distinguish between Anglo, Slav, or Teutonic when they look at you.[/I]
I could not agree more with your last point. Getting obsessively intra-White ethnic is a sure way to ensure the death of our entire race. But I disagree that it can't be discussed. I mean, here we all are, talking openly and honestly about race, and all of a sudden we turn into school-marmish martinets when the ethnic difference issue turns on us. Truth be told, it [I]is[/I] an issue for White nationalism, and a considerable one. Of course I see that nobody needs skull-calipers do determine who is and who isn't elgible for affirmative action... our enemies know who "White people" are. But no serious White nationalist would agree that the issue of who is and isn't White is obvious and settled. I have always relied on Yggdrasil's wisdom on this question --- "White" is largely, for political purposes, self-identified. That is, if you think you're White, you probably are. But think of this. What if we do get to the point where we are in a position to exercise White racial sovereignty. It's mostly agreed who is and who isn't White. But then O.J. Simpson steps up to the gate of White America. He announces he's White, and he'd like admission. Well, who's going to make the determination? Presumably, a White America immigration official. But what standards will he use? It's a genuine question. And, for better or for worse, it puts us where Nazis were: how much Jewish heritage makes you a Jew? Anyone can be made to look like a fool for hair-splitting on the racial issue. I realize how foolish Jews are for denying the issue altogether, believe me. But the vulnerability of the opposite end of the spectrum remains.
2003-10-05 01:35 | User Profile
HL,
"Rienzi" has a good and reasonable answer for you (and us); I'd go along with the his determination:
The "Who are We?" Dilemma
MX Rienzi
The issue ââ¬â "Who are We?" - has come up in many discussions, generated many a virtual slugfest, and has never been resolved. So far, there are no winners, only losers. The matter will not be resolved now. It is clear to me that the "movement" is very heterogenous about "who are we", and in many cases quite contradictory. In point of fact there is no agreement on what the criteria should be in determining this, never mind agreement on the results of this determination.
We can argue and counter-argue this until there are only two "white" (however defined) folks left on Earth, debating this issue between themselves as they are standing in front of the colored firing squad.
My general answer is for activists (and here I mean people who are, in the broadest sense, 'politically involved', and not just folks ranting on discussion lists) to determine for themselves what their ingroup is and seek out others who have the same determination, and work for the interests of that ingroup. Sadly, even something as simple and self-evident as that is probably too much to ask, else we would not constantly be at one anothers' throats.
I have, in many places, put forth what my ingroup is, and there are others who agree, and this is found at: [url]http://www.legioneuropa.org[/url] . Those who agree are welcome to participate in our projects. Those who disagree are welcome to pursue their own ingroup interests, and as long as that does not harm our endeavors, we say godspeed, and good luck.
It is my opinion that humans are 'biocultural' organisms, and that the totality of what humans are - both genes and extended phenotypes (which includes behavior and culture, not just physical appearance) - should help determine "who are we?" I would consider all (gentile) peoples of European descent as potential members of my ingroup (whether they are so in fact depends on their behaviors, choices, etc.). Despite my embrace of autosomal DNA testing as a methodology of resolving individual conflicts over which activist is or is not a "mulatto" (or "mestizo" or "Eurasian") I do not believe that specific genetic alleles at particular loci determine "who are we", just as I do not believe that specific and subjective (e.g., Leo Felton: young Felton here, as a "movement" member here) evaluations of "direct phenotype" can alone determine this - after all, if a mulatto or a Jew "looks like" a member of your ingroup, would you accept them? Culture alone fails for the obvious reason that most people are not culture creators, and some groups (e.g.,East Asians) are very clever at mimicking western cultural artifacts (although the ability to create such artifacts can be one factor in determining - for a group - "who we are").
I would put forth that the (gentile) peoples of Europe - despite obvious differences that do exist in phenotypes, gene frequencies, and particular cultural forms - can be viewed as an ingroup, and is the only such largest ingroup that shares the particular features:
a) [Western] Caucasian racial background (ABD's "Indo-European"); b) ethnic formation within Europe before the age of discovery, that is, "European ancestry"; c) predominant ancestry deriving from Paleolithic and/or Neolithic 'Euro' ancestral pools (even those groups who do not speak Indo-Euro languages are primarily derived from such ancestries) ; d) a modern cultural structure that features the components mentioned by Kevin MacDonald in his TOQ article. He lists them as follows:
"In the following I will argue that Western cultures have a unique cultural profile compared to other traditional civilizations:
We believe the above to be an accurate representation of the basic set of unique cultural aspects that set Western cultures apart from all others. However, we also believe it desirable, given the current world-historical situation in which we find ourselves, to attempt to deviate rather drastically from the items in #'s 5 and 6. These particular aspects of our ââ¬Ëcharacter' are the very ones which have enabled ââ¬Ëoutgroups' to undermine our position in the world to the point that our very existence is threatened. Therefore, we propose to re-emphasize extended kinship relationships, increase ethnocentrism, build a heightened sense of collectivism, and eschew moral universalism in all its forms. It is our opinion that failure to do so will inevitably result in our final, permanent downfall.
e) Cultural derivation from Celto-Germanic, proto-Slavic and/or Greco- Roman antecedents, followed by 'modern Faustian' culture.
These are shared amongst 'western peoples' - regardless of differences in gene frequencies, relative genetic distances of various groups, cephalic indices, hair/eye color, specific cultural forms, etc.
This does not imply or endorse Euro-panmixia - far from it.
It does imply exactly who are the groups that share a common thread of western biocultural ancestry, modern common peril, and a shared future.
That's my opinion. There are of course those who disagree strongly. So be it.
Better though to work to preserve one's ingroup than to spend several more decades hair- splitting comparisons between ingroups.
The biocultural concept is not really all that elusive. It is easily understood and readily accepted by anyone who is not a bigot. The histories of all our peoples are a testament to it - the divisiveness of antiquated, demonstrably false doctrines notwithstanding.
Euro-gentile ethnic ingroups are numerous. They are as the cells of the greater body which encompasses them all ââ¬â Western bioculture. Nourish the cells, and the body will be healthy. Choose your ingroup, and nourish it -- but it is not nourished by attacking other cells of the body, or else it is cancerous.
[url]http://www.legioneuropa.org/IOE/wwa2.htm[/url]
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln][I]White is white. Have you ever known a brotha or Hyman who get confused at recognizing Whitey? The same with this idiotic Aryan/Slav distinction. I defy anyone who has looked at Russ from St. Petersburg to be able to consistently say whether they're Aryan or Slav.
Treasure your ethnic and your heritage. But know that this time we're all in this together. Hang together or hang separately. At least that's my mongrelized American attitude. Trust me- the "non-whites" don't distinguish between Anglo, Slav, or Teutonic when they look at you.[/I]
I could not agree more with your last point. Getting obsessively intra-White ethnic is a sure way to ensure the death of our entire race. But I disagree that it can't be discussed. I mean, here we all are, talking openly and honestly about race, and all of a sudden we turn into school-marmish martinets when the ethnic difference issue turns on us. Truth be told, it [I]is[/I] an issue for White nationalism, and a considerable one. Of course I see that nobody needs skull-calipers do determine who is and who isn't elgible for affirmative action... our enemies know who "White people" are. But no serious White nationalist would agree that the issue of who is and isn't White is obvious and settled. I have always relied on Yggdrasil's wisdom on this question --- "White" is largely, for political purposes, self-identified. That is, if you think you're White, you probably are. But think of this. What if we do get to the point where we are in a position to exercise White racial sovereignty. It's mostly agreed who is and who isn't White. But then O.J. Simpson steps up to the gate of White America. He announces he's White, and he'd like admission. Well, who's going to make the determination? Presumably, a White America immigration official. But what standards will he use? It's a genuine question. And, for better or for worse, it puts us where Nazis were: how much Jewish heritage makes you a Jew? Anyone can be made to look like a fool for hair-splitting on the racial issue. I realize how foolish Jews are for denying the issue altogether, believe me. But the vulnerability of the opposite end of the spectrum remains.[/QUOTE]
2003-10-05 01:38 | User Profile
[QUOTE=rban]100% pure Hindu Aryan checking in.
And I know I am more Caucasian than any dirty Slav. We are the superior Master Race.[/QUOTE]
So you are European which coverted to Hindu? No pure caucasians in India.
2003-10-05 06:55 | User Profile
Croatian with some German ancestry.
2003-10-05 07:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Rudel]Croatian with some German ancestry.[/QUOTE]
Govorià ¡ li hrvatski jezik?
2003-10-05 07:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ritter]Govorià ¡ li hrvatski jezik?[/QUOTE]
Da, naravno.
2003-10-05 13:17 | User Profile
Mother: Irish, French, Germanââ¬âa Pennsylvania potpourri
Father: blue-blood Polish from Lithuania (Family names: Jankiewicz and Jetkiewicz)
Though American born, I live in Poland (Upper Silesia) and consider myself a Pole.
2003-10-05 15:05 | User Profile
FB -
MX's thoughts are, as usual, well-taken. Thoughtful and developed as they are, though, they aren't all that handy. We're going to be asking people if they're "modern Faustian?" That's not going to mean much to most folks. We might need something a little more portable than that. I think he's right to assert that at the edges, there is no resolution and there probably won't be. A White person is a person of predominately gentile, Western and European ancestry. That's it.
As for the rest, I think we should just ignore it. Valid as it may be as an issue, it is also a very soft Achilles heel for our enemies: a clever Jewish journalist can just keep whacking at it until he gets his audience to laugh. So, my advice is to ignore it. For dealing with the inquiry, "who's White?", I think the equally short answer is best: "Someone with mostly European ancestry." "Someone who thinks he's White." "Someone who looks and acts White." Who decides who's White, Mr. Nazi? "Individuals decide it they're White, initially. Beyond that, it's the community that decides."
Which, I think, is what we will see in the future. To some extent, Who Is White will be answered by our success in what I can assure you will be THE poltical realignment of the 21st Century: the reawakened White identity. In other words, it will be forged as it moves along.
2003-10-05 18:52 | User Profile
Here's a post I wrote some time ago.
And you'll also find bellow an exchange between a Nordicist and Southern Europeans that illustrates the disagreement.
Thereââ¬â¢s disagreement amongst some WNs as to whoââ¬â¢s a member of our ingroup and who isnââ¬â¢t.
Firstly, you have the so-called ââ¬ÅNordishââ¬Â (not to be confused with proponents of ââ¬ÅNordicismââ¬Â which are even more exclusionist in their outlook) folks who seem to favour limiting the membership to Nordish elements; a typical exponent of this view is Richard McCulloch at the ââ¬ÅRacial Compactââ¬Â [url]http://www.racialcompact.com/nordishrace.html[/url] (see also [url]http://www.fikas.no/~sprocket/snpa/[/url]). They strongly disapprove of intermarriage with Southern Europeans, and are very much preoccupied with the eventual disappearance of the tall, blond, and blue-eyed racial type. Secondly, there are activists such as Michael Rienzi at ââ¬ÅLegion Europaââ¬Â [url]http://www.legioneuropa.org/[/url], who take a broader approach: The "Who are We?" Dilemma
(See above.)
This position has been adopted at ââ¬ÅStormfrontââ¬Â ([url]http://www.stormfront.org[/url]) Thirdly, you have ââ¬ÅWhite Nationalistsââ¬Â exemplified by Jared Taylor at American Renaissance (see [url]http://www.amren.ca[/url]) who are very careful not to engage in a discourse that could be defined as anti-Semitic (ââ¬Åthey look white to meââ¬Â crowd). Fourthly, there are ââ¬ÅWhite Nationalistsââ¬Â who are committed Christians, such as Lawrence Auster at [url]http://www.counterrevolution.net;[/url] they also eschew any form anti-Semitism. (Laurence Auster is a Jewish convert).
I found this exchange (on a different forum) between a Nordicist and Southern Europeans fascinating.
Razib [one of the South Asian bloggers at "Gene Expression"]:... 2003-06-18
the reason i said that "white" brown guys was stupid is that he's almost surely a mongrel and that crap about "my ancestors in the 8th century" is a load of bullshit. i don't doubt he has white skin and could pass for european, though probably not nordic or anything, my own grandmother has the nickname "pink grandma." does that mean she's white? phenotypically she could have passed, but her family is brown, many of her antecedants are brown, and most of her descendents are brown. just as in a northern european population you have blondes, redheads and brunettes in any given population most indian populations have a wide range. that doesn't mean the white looking ones are really any whiter by ancestry than the non-white ones, because the genes could have reassorted in a whole host of ways.
like rienzi and the legion europa crowd most white indians, persians, etc. to me seem to be suffused by an inferiority complex. after all, it is the nordics who toy with the idea of excluding them, never vice versa, there is never a question that blonde europeans are part of their "in-group." the genetic evidence about the delineatino of the "in-group" of "Europeans" is a lot more confused than rienzi et al. like to admit, but then if they appeal to culture they start going down a slippery slope away from racialism.
as for mucculough and the nordicists, let me be frank, they really overestimate the % of nordics by phenotype. german race scientists estimated that 10% of germans were pure nordics, most of the rest being non-nordics or bastardized. mcculough basically seems to assert that all northwest europeans are nordics, which i don't buy. i speak as a lover of nordic women and my standards on this point are high, higher it seems than the "nordicists." the problem with nordicists is that most "nordics" have immediate "non-nordic" family members. this is just like the situation with the white brown guy, he might be white, his family might be mostly white, but he has close brown-skinned kin for sure. ancestrly arnold schwarzanager & dolph lundgren might come from common stock, but physically they are very different. mccuollough's position is also going to be undermined by cosmetic advances which will make the nordic look available to non-nordics....
as for the "big-tent" folks, they have a good strategy, because there are a lot of whitish looking non-European losers who want to be associated with the master race. by losers i don't mean that most whitish looking non-Europeans are losers, but if they are winners I suspect that have more interesting things to spend their time pondering than the fact that they have a relationship physically or ancestrally to the European race and they should be members of a clan.
...
1) 10% germans being "pure aryan" comes from a old paper on nordicism linked to on dienekes' blog. this jives with the fact that i've see that ONLY in southern sweden do more than 50% of the people have the combination of blonde hair AND blue eyes.
2) rienzi is a "biological scientist" working under a psuedonym. legion europa and his cohort seem disproportionately southron. so he would know that two recent reports indicate via the y-chromosomal lineage that 20% to 50% of "europeans" are the descendents of "middle eastern farmers." 20% "neolithic" is the low end-but this is not equally scattered, the 20% is concentrated in SE europe and along the coast and some valleys on the mediterranean. this would substract a non-trival fraction of southern europeans, especially greeks, from the "european" in-group, and but them biologically with middle easterners. of course, culture matters, but bioculture is BOTH. the 50% value elimates even more europeans from the bioculture, especially southerners of course. so rienzi's genetic evidence is pretty contentious, and if he's a biological scientist, i'm sure he knows it and it bugs him.
3) while the nordicists exclude the southrons, none of them wish to exclude the nordicists, showing to me who is really top-dog here. rienzi et al. would never deny that northern europeans are true europeans and would probably dispute the figures for neolithic farmers. that's because being european to them is being based on a nordic standard. they don't want to come out as a mongrel race. the irony being that "the mongrel race" of southern europe CREATED THE CONCEPT OF EUROPE!
4) again, as i said, i think mccollough's classification of the "nordish" % is crock. "nordic beauty" is not present in much of the population he asserts is nordic. additionally, though i'm not a coon hater, i don't buy his specific races, they're all a bunch of theory based on bones & stones using arbitrary metrics.
5) the paleolithic population of europe itself is cleaved into clades-one in the west and another in the north/east.
btw, many brown people are pretty loserish, asserting that "we are just white people who have been darkened by the sun over the ages...." this is probably mostly crap, but the statement itself is reflective of the legion europa crowd, the standard is europeans (while for legion europa it is northern europeans). europeans are the most accomplished race on the planet now and everyone wants to associate with them. this isn't new. the romans wanted to be associated with the House of Priam, the Windsors made up a Davidic lineage for their line, etc. etc.
Doric Greek ... 2003-06-25 razib states so he [Rienzi] would know that two recent reports indicate via the y-chromosomal lineage that 20% to 50% of "europeans" are the descendents of "middle eastern farmers." 20% "neolithic" is the low end-but this is not equally scattered, the 20% is concentrated in SE europe and along the coast and some valleys on the mediterranean. this would substract a non-trival fraction of southern europeans, especially greeks, from the "european" in-group, and but them biologically with middle easterners. Problem with this statement --Your associating neolithic with non european.Since neolithic blood lines in europe go back 8000-10,000 yrs one can pretty much state that neolithic elements from the middle east are native to europe. Lets examine your logic more carefully .Basques are the most paleolithic (incidendently they to originially came from the middle east but at an earlier period-Read Brain Skykes) and they speak a NON indoeuropean language.So are you saying they are the most European?Germans have more neolithic ancestry then Basques so therefore according to your logic they are less european.Also Skykes had Greeks in the Mediteranean East Europid categoery with Albanians.This makes sense since both groups are native to the Balkans. If 20 to 50% of europe is neolithic then how can you say neolithic equals non european? Y chromosomes represent only a small portion of the genetic code.Cavalli-Sforza's table of total genetic distance shows that Brits are closer to north africans then Greeks so that suggest Brits are less European since they cluster closer to Berbers? Greeks cluster closest in study to Italians austrians and Hungarians and outside of Europe -Iranians.Iranians cluster to closer to europe the other middle eastern groups and of course they speak a INDOEUROPEAN tounge. Also the term Middle Easterners is not appropriate since the middle east includes a variety of peoples not just semites.The genetic distence between Assyrian Christians and Yemites is 1000 2 x that of the most outlying group in europe from mean -THE LAPPS Since Europeans are composed of both Paleolithic and Neolithic ancestors one group having more neolithic genes does not make them less european.
white racialist ... 2003-06-25 razib: 'as for mucculough and the nordicists, let me be frank, they really overestimate the % of nordics by phenotype. german race scientists estimated that 10% of germans were pure nordics, most of the rest being non-nordics or bastardized. mcculough basically seems to assert that all northwest europeans are nordics, which i don't buy. i speak as a lover of nordic women and my standards on this point are high, higher it seems than the "nordicists."'
Leaving aside your creepy obsession with "Nordic women" (or rather, blonde women; most of the women you think are "Nordic" probably aren't, starting with your "ex-g/f of 87.25% prussian ancestry"), you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Incidentally, Richard McCulloch estimates that Nordics make up 10% of the German population. Nordish is not synonymous with Nordic. The indigenous people of northern Europe are by definition Nordish. '1) 10% germans being "pure aryan" comes from a old paper on nordicism linked to on dienekes' blog. this jives with the fact that i've see that ONLY in southern sweden do more than 50% of the people have the combination of blonde hair AND blue eyes.' Again, you show that you are ignorant. Having blond hair and blue eyes does not automatically make one Nordic. Likewise, not having blond hair and blue eyes does not exclude one from being of Nordic racial type. The N-S cline in hair and eye pigmentation in Europe probably dates to the Paleolithic. Classical Nordics didn't enter Scandinavia until much later. The original central European Nordics probably had light eyes and medium hair (ranging from blond to dark brown). 'like rienzi and the legion europa crowd most white indians, persians, etc. to me seem to be suffused by an inferiority complex. after all, it is the nordics who toy with the idea of excluding them, never vice versa, there is never a question that blonde europeans are part of their "in-group."' This is one of the few good points you make in this thread. While Rienzi's stuff is generally well-written and superfically reasonable, if you examine it at all, it's full of contradictions. Rienzi clearly wants to be a part of "Nordish America". One particularly bizarre example can be seen here: [url]http://www.legioneuropa.org/Comment/euroamat.htm[/url] 'One complaint made by Nordicists concerning the possibilities of pan-European cooperation is their perception of a mating imbalance between Northern European Americans (NEAs) and Southern European Americans (SEAs), with more SEA men marrying NEA women than vice versa. This would cause a shortage of available women for NEA men, with resultant inter-ethnic problems, and of course a decreased birth rate among unmixed NEA types (1).' First, the entire premise of this article is odd. ANY intermixing between "NEA" and "SEA" will cause 'a decreased birth rate among unmixed NEA types'. The fact that he brings up a "mating imbalance" (which no doubt exists, due to the fact that "NEA" men do not tend to seek out "SEA" women, while "SEA" men, like blacks and Pakis, do seek out white women) that is supposedly a major concern among "Nordicists". He does not cite any work by "Nordicists" that raises this issue, and the entire exercise strikes one as a bizarre attempt by an insecure "SEA man" to reinforce his masculinity. But, to get to my main point, Rienzi says: 'The imbalance decreased the number of NEA females available to NEA males, and obviously decreased NEA-NEA fertility during the important "baby boomer period." To the "purists" among the Nordicists, this mating (and the reverse as well of course) decreased the numbers of unmixed NEAs and introduced other genes and gene frequencies into the NEA population (5). But it must be noted that, from an IA perspective, this has caused serious problems as well. Note the author's quote above: the creation of unmixed IA children in America has been "virtually eliminated." What passes for "IA-America" today is a minority of "purebred" IAs and a larger mass of part-IA "Euro-mix hybrids." This decrease in Italian genes, gene frequencies, and gene combinations has been a large diminution of the "ethnic genetic interests" of IAs.' However, in the next paragraph, he goes on to say 'I - and Legion Europa as a whole - have nothing against intra-EuroAmerican mating whatsoever - within reason.' So, the 'diminution of the "ethnic genetic interests" of IAs' through interbreeding with "NEAs" is clearly not a problem for Rienzi. There is also a telling quote from this article: [url]http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol3no1/...xr-genetic.html[/url] 'In a hypothetical multiethnic European state (e.g., a Euro-American state), one may need to balance issues of genetic similarity and eugenic quality in maximizing genetic fitness in mating choice.' So, basically, Rienzi, like all too many self-hating swarthy men, dreams of marrying a "Nordic" woman. Or at least he wants to leave the possibility open for himself.
Cicero ... 2003-06-25White Racialist whines, "So, basically, Rienzi, like all too many self-hating swarthy men, dreams of marrying a 'Nordic' woman. Or at least he wants to leave the possibility open for himself." Or more likely, you are unable to refute the arguments of those you disagree with, so you have to resort to psychoanalytic speculations. I imagine that in some cases, Nordic women are interested in Mediterranean men (who are relatively swarthy, in some cases not at all) because of a distaste for men who are too light and freckly (no offense is intended to such persons). Some women I have encountered have told me of their preference for dark-haired men. In any case, Rienzi is not here to defend himself so there is little point to taking childish potshots at him on this forum. While I respect Germans, Scandinavians and other Nordics who want to preserve their heritage, it seems "White Racialist" comes across as a bit whiney and puerile.
Cicero ... 2003-06-25A funny quote (footnote) from Rienzi: "10. Like the preference it seems that NEA (Northern European-American) men have for (North)EastAsian women, their 'targeting' of such women, and the pronounced mating imbalance produced...and the hostility produced as well. And of course Negro males prefer White women, compared to the reverse." He notes the disproportionate number of Anglo-American men hounding Asian-American females. Maybe Italian-American men wouldn't be offered so much Anglo female "goods" if their men would just stick to their own women rather than exercizing an Asian sexual fetish. Some White (read: NEA) men have a perception of Asian females as more feminine and passive than White females. Perhaps the NEA men hounding these females have an inferiority complex, and can't deal with "strong" (i.e. NEA) females. :D
white racialist ... 2003-06-25 Or more likely, you are unable to refute the arguments of those you disagree with, so you have to resort to psychoanalytic speculations. The contradictions are plain for all to see, chimpero. I may, in the future, create a site pointing out the many problems in Rienzi's writings; that will be at my leisure, not at the behest of a mongrel southern european with a massive inferiority complex.
white racialist ... 2003-06-25"10. Like the preference it seems that NEA (Northern European-American) men have for (North)EastAsian women, their 'targeting' of such women, and the pronounced mating imbalance produced...and the hostility produced as well. And of course Negro males prefer White women, compared to the reverse." This is simply an attack against Nordish Americans by one of their racial enemies. The vast majority of "NEA" men, of course, have no preference for Asian females. Incidentally, in my (admittedly anectdotal experience), southern European "Americans" of both sexes are more likely to date/mate outside their race than real (i.e., Nordish) Americans.
Cicero ... 2003-06-25 White Racialist writes: "The contradictions are plain for all to see, chimpero. I may, in the future, create a site pointing out the many problems in Rienzi's writings; that will be at my leisure, not at the behest of a mongrel southern european with a massive inferiority complex." You are obviously ignorant of modern genetics. Every group has a level of admixture with other groups -- some, of course, more than others. Thus your use of "mongrel" would look stupid to academics who study genetics. But I sorta see where you are coming from: "we are tainted, but they more than us." Did you know that 100 writers of 54 countries voted Cervantes' "Don Quixote" as the best work of fiction of all time? Hey, why hasn't Norway, Sweden, or Finland produced an artist comparable to Velazquez? Why is Michelangelo, and not a Scandinavian, considered the greatest artist of all time by many? Why did it take an ITALIAN mathematician (Fermi) to do many of the most complex calculations for the Manhattan Project? Why do Jewish scientists take up all of the Nobel Prizes? Why did America recruit so many Jews for the Project and few or no Anglos? Is there a "conspiracy" to put the Anglo down? :( Why does Richard Flynn report Italians have a higher IQ than Brits? (102 vs. 100) My guess is, like other "Nordic nationalists," you perceive Mediterranean men to be more masculine and thus you feel threatened by them in some way. And it must eat you up that many Meds earn more money than your fellow Anglos in the U.S., as statistics show. By the way, anecdotal stories are useless, as you should know.
Cicero ... 2003-06-25 White Racialist gave a funny reaction to the Rienzi quote on the tendency of Northern European-American men to seek/mate with Asian females. According to his logic, Med men who marry Nordic women have an inferiority complex, but Nordic men who marry Asian females (often due to a sexual fetish) are an exaggeration or a subject to brush aside. However, this is a phenomenon reported by Steve Sailer. While most White men (usually NEA) do not seek out Asian females, it is notable that a very large number do, especially where Whites and Asians interact. This is how White Racialist reacted to the quote: "This is simply an attack against Nordish Americans by one of their racial enemies. The vast majority of 'NEA' men, of course, have no preference for Asian females." While your last statement may be true, the phenomenon of NEA men chasing Asian women is a very large one that DOES have an impact on NEA demographics, as Sailer has noted in his essays on ethnic intermarriage. So if you are concerned about Southern European men dating/marrying Nordic women, perhaps you should deal with Nordic men leaving their women to chase Asian skirts FIRST.
friedrich braun ... 2003-06-26 "Why does Richard Flynn report Italians have a higher IQ than Brits? (102 vs. 100)" I'm curious to know if by "Brit" you mean people of mostly Anglo-Saxon and Celtic stock, or just anyone holding a British passport? "My guess is, like other "Nordic nationalists," you perceive Mediterranean men to be more masculine and thus you feel threatened by them in some way." Really? This sounds like patent psychobabble. The little, stocky, and swarthy Meds, more masculine than Brits, for example, hmmm....In that case Arabs must be even more masculine than Meds. What's your criteria for evaluating a people's degree of "masculinity"?
Cicero ... 2003-06-26 Cicero wrote: "Why does Richard Flynn report Italians have a higher IQ than Brits? (102 vs. 100)" Mr. Braun asked: "I'm curious to know if by 'Brit' you mean people of mostly Anglo-Saxon and Celtic stock, or just anyone holding a British passport?" I believe Mr. Flynn used just Whites for that sample. They could have been from various "stock," but it is noteworthy that, according to him (in "Wealth of Nations"), Italy has a higher IQ than the vast majority of northern European countries.
Cicero wrote: "My guess is, like other 'Nordic nationalists,' you perceive Mediterranean men to be more masculine and thus you feel threatened by them in some way." Mr. Braun wrote: "Really? This sounds like patent psychobabble. The little, stocky, and swarthy Meds, more masculine than Brits, for example, hmmm....In that case Arabs must be even more masculine than Meds. What's your criteria for evaluating a people's degree of 'masculinity?'" You might be right that this is a hasty generalization. It is just my experience from my past associations with persons like White Racialist. I do introduce some tongue-in-cheek responses now and then, however. One bad apple doesn't always represent the whole barrel. :D
Cicero ... 2003-06-26Here is an article by Steve Sailer on Richard Lynn's book "IQ and the Wealth of Nations." Professor Lynn teaches at the University of Ulster and the book was co-authored with Tatu Vanhanen. [url]http://www.vdare.com/sailer/wealth_of_nations.htm[/url] Here Italy is compared to the UK -- Country - IQ - GDP (Purchasing power parity) UK - 100 - 50% - $20,336 Italy - 102 - 55% - $20,585
white racialist ... 2003-06-26 "You are obviously ignorant of modern genetics. Every group has a level of admixture with other groups -- some, of course, more than others." Southern Italians are mongrels. Period. I do not consider someone who is genetically half Middle Eastern to be of the same race as myself. "Did you know that 100 writers of 54 countries voted Cervantes' "Don Quixote" as the best work of fiction of all time? Hey, why hasn't Norway, Sweden, or Finland produced an artist comparable to Velazquez? Why is Michelangelo, and not a Scandinavian, considered the greatest artist of all time by many? Why did it take an ITALIAN mathematician (Fermi) to do many of the most complex calculations for the Manhattan Project?" Do not try to associate yourself with those southern Europeans who are genetically European, mongrel. Genetically, northern Italians and Spaniards are basically Central European, while southern Italians are half Middle Eastern. "Why do Jewish scientists take up all of the Nobel Prizes?" You're getting closer to your real heritage. Unfortunately for you, however, Ashkenazi Jews are a small, heavily selected group. Though you may share some neutral genes with them from thousands of years back, via your Arab ancestry, sicilians have none of the Jews' heightened intelligence. "Why does Richard Flynn report Italians have a higher IQ than Brits? (102 vs. 100)" "Italian" is not a valid racial grouping. If you want to impress me, let's see some IQ scores for Sicilians. "the tendency of Northern European-American men to seek/mate with Asian females" You're quite stupid, aren't you? Cite evidence or shut your chimp mouth. The overwhelming majority of white Americans (~95%) marry other whites. Of the small minority who do not, I've seen no data on the ethnic origin of the white partner. "While your last statement may be true, the phenomenon of NEA men chasing Asian women is a very large" One more time, monkey. If you want to talk to me in the future, you will back up your assertions with facts. There is, of course, no statistical data on marriages between "NEA" men and Asian women vs. "SEA" men and Asian women. When you or Rienzi make statements like this, you simply prove yourselves stupid and hostile to Americans. You are, of course, an irrelevant sicilian teenager. Rienzi, on the other hand, ridiculously claims to be concerned with the interests of "NEAs". This is simply one example of why that claim is false. "So if you are concerned about Southern European men dating/marrying Nordic women, perhaps you should deal with Nordic men leaving their women to chase Asian skirts FIRST." The "FIRST" thing we should do is deport all non-Americans, whether of southern European or Asian origin, to their native countries. "Here Italy is compared to the UK -- Country - IQ - GDP (Purchasing power parity) UK - 100 - 50% - $20,336 Italy - 102 - 55% - $20,585" You do realize that southern Italy is the poorest region in the EU?
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]FB -
MX's thoughts are, as usual, well-taken. Thoughtful and developed as they are, though, they aren't all that handy. We're going to be asking people if they're "modern Faustian?" That's not going to mean much to most folks. We might need something a little more portable than that. I think he's right to assert that at the edges, there is no resolution and there probably won't be. A White person is a person of predominately gentile, Western and European ancestry. That's it.
As for the rest, I think we should just ignore it. Valid as it may be as an issue, it is also a very soft Achilles heel for our enemies: a clever Jewish journalist can just keep whacking at it until he gets his audience to laugh. So, my advice is to ignore it. For dealing with the inquiry, "who's White?", I think the equally short answer is best: "Someone with mostly European ancestry." "Someone who thinks he's White." "Someone who looks and acts White." Who decides who's White, Mr. Nazi? "Individuals decide it they're White, initially. Beyond that, it's the community that decides."
Which, I think, is what we will see in the future. To some extent, Who Is White will be answered by our success in what I can assure you will be THE poltical realignment of the 21st Century: the reawakened White identity. In other words, it will be forged as it moves along.[/QUOTE]
2003-10-06 00:45 | User Profile
100% Irish, and I kept it that way. My wife is an Irish citizen.
2003-10-06 01:18 | User Profile
friedrich braun,
You guys really go for the throat!
Im sure that you have heard this 100 times, but the whole topic of who is White is so divisive and counter-productive that I don't see the point of making it a recurring theme on any website dedicated to the general survival of White people.
As far as I am concerned if you look White you are White (unless you are Jewish).
You know the old saying, either we stick together or surely we shall hang together.
2003-10-06 01:38 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]friedrich braun,
You guys really go for the throat!
Im sure that you have heard this 100 times, but the whole topic of who is White is so divisive and counter-productive that I don't see the point of making it a recurring theme on any website dedicated to the general survival of White people.
As far as I am concerned if you look White you are White (unless you are Jewish).
You know the old saying, either we stick together or surely we shall hang together.[/QUOTE]
Bardamu,
The "White racialist" in the thread isn't me; I only posted the info as a case study.
2003-10-06 01:43 | User Profile
My ancestry is Slovak and Polish.
Concerning intra-white conflicts, I can only echo these sentiments:
[QUOTE=Campion Moore Boru]
Treasure your ethnic and your heritage. But know that this time we're all in this together. Hang together or hang separately. At least that's my mongrelized American attitude. Trust me- the "non-whites" don't distinguish between Anglo, Slav, or Teutonic when they look at you.[/QUOTE]
2003-10-06 02:06 | User Profile
[QUOTE=friedrich braun]Bardamu,
You can sweep the disagreements under the rug (a la SF), but it won't make them go away.[/QUOTE]
I don't think there has to be an argument concerning who is White amongst people who have been in Europe generations. All of the varying ethnicities of Europe should seek their own continuance and bind together in a pan-White federation against invasion from outside Europe.
So far as American Whites are concerned, we hardly ever mention this stuff since we have mainly lost our sub-European ethnic identities.
2003-10-06 02:09 | User Profile
But enough of the who is White topic for this fine thread.
2003-10-09 08:49 | User Profile
Well since I can't choose more than one poll option... my mother's heritage is Polish and English, while my father's in German and Norwegian.
2003-10-11 18:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]I don't think there has to be an argument concerning who is White amongst people who have been in Europe generations. All of the varying ethnicities of Europe should seek their own continuance and bind together in a pan-White federation against invasion from outside Europe.
So far as American Whites are concerned, we hardly ever mention this stuff since we have mainly lost our sub-European ethnic identities.[/QUOTE] Yep, to all but that very last sentence. I have Dutch, English, Scotch-Irish(Ulster) blood, as documented. I have family in Daughters of American Revolution, and Daughters of the Confederacy, and you have to document to get in there. I reject any thought that any one of these cultures is incompatible with the other, or that any has destroyed the other, therefore any "loss" of ethnicity. You can tell anyone in my family that we have no distinct Euro characteristics and we'll laugh in your face, because nothing could be more obvious. My Ulster ancestors were on the run for defying their tyrannical nobles, and I am still a dissident almost 300 years later. I reject this notion that all Americans are mutts that nobody wants.
2003-10-11 23:04 | User Profile
I'm Scots-English.
NeoNietzsche is Anglo-Saxon and Norman (Germanic.... could you guess?!)
2003-10-12 00:01 | User Profile
Actually, the Saxons were Germanic people, correct?
2003-10-12 00:23 | User Profile
I'm 3/4 German, 1/4 Irish and 1/4 English, with less than one percent injun squirted somewhere between the cracks.
I don't see how we can go one way or the other on the Nordic purity vs big tent issue. Ignoring one or the other will place us in a weak position strategically against the Jews.
For that reason I take both sides of the issue to the extreme. I advocate working with Arabs, Blacks, Asians, etc in the Jew vs Gentile war. They have much to lose from our surrender to the Jews, they just don't all know it yet. We must make them aware whenever we can. I also realize that if we intermarry with Southern Italians and such we place ourselves at risk of infiltration. We have to get over our insecurities about purity and realize that we can't afford to have leaders/spokesmen who don't posess Aryan enough features to make certain they aren't Jews.
Big tent does not have to mean intermarriage. From a strategic standpoint, we have to realize this and avoid a "whiter than thou" attitude while also avoiding big tent breeding.
2003-10-12 00:36 | User Profile
I'm a one-eyed, one-legged, one-armed, bald Negro transsexual from Haiti. My hobbies are yogurt, liverwurst, enemas, knitting, and Liberace. My favorite color is......pink, silly boy!
Age: noneofyerdamnedbusiness...
Occupation: noneofyerdamnedbusiness...
Location: noneofyerdamnedbusiness...
:) :)
2003-10-12 11:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE]I also realize that if we intermarry with Southern Italians and such we place ourselves at risk of infiltration. [/QUOTE]
Ouch.
2003-10-12 13:24 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Ouch.[/QUOTE] Heh heh. I think this shows, sooner or later, we'll alienate a potential ally if not careful. There will certainly be issues or history we do not agree on. But, we can let lesser issues divide us against a greater danger. The blacks, Jews, Latinos, etc are all untied against White. We better stop debating pretty quick and start organizing locally and standing united, or we're dead in the water.
A little mixing is not what the opposition has in mind. There won't be a person who evern resembles Whites as we know, if we don't get our act together on this question about who we want on our side.
2003-10-12 22:47 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Ouch.[/QUOTE] Il Ragno,
No offense intended, I'm not trying to act Whiter than thou, I have brown hair, brown eyes and tan well, too.
But on the matter of infiltration we have to put our feelings aside and think strategically. One cannot deny the ease with which Jews can infiltrate the Mediteranean belt. We can't ignore this, the Jewish problem will be with us forever and ethnic purity is a tool we can use to deal with it long term. They know this and are trying to eliminate blond haired men because of it. Do you have a better idea for dealing with the problem?
2003-10-13 18:36 | User Profile
Me: Swiss/German... don't ask me the breakdown, because I don't know. Wife: German 100%. Son: Born in Ruit Krankenhaus, Stuttgart, GE.. obvious.
Ausonius
2003-10-13 18:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ritter]German, Allemanic and Swabian.[/QUOTE]
War Sie da' geborren?
Zum beispiel, meine ganze familie ist Deutsch/Chweitze (Karlsruhe, Stuttgart, Dillendorf-- aber die letzte ist Chweitze, u. vorher die 17 jahrhuntert.)
Ausonius
Don't bash my German.. I didn't speak a word of it prior to 1996. I think I'm doing fairly well for a big dumb Ami.
2003-10-14 04:26 | User Profile
Well said!
[QUOTE=travis]...I don't see how we can go one way or the other on the Nordic purity vs big tent issue. Ignoring one or the other will place us in a weak position strategically against the Jews.
For that reason I take both sides of the issue to the extreme. I advocate working with Arabs, Blacks, Asians, etc in the Jew vs Gentile war. They have much to lose from our surrender to the Jews, they just don't all know it yet. We must make them aware whenever we can. I also realize that if we intermarry with Southern Italians and such we place ourselves at risk of infiltration. We have to get over our insecurities about purity and realize that we can't afford to have leaders/spokesmen who don't posess Aryan enough features to make certain they aren't Jews.
Big tent does not have to mean intermarriage. From a strategic standpoint, we have to realize this and avoid a "whiter than thou" attitude while also avoiding big tent breeding.[/QUOTE]
2003-10-14 08:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE]No offense intended, I'm not trying to act Whiter than thou, I have brown hair, brown eyes and tan well, too. [/QUOTE]
None taken...and I have blue eyes and tan terribly. (Obviously, you are unaware of the long antipathy between Northern Italians and our Sicilian cousins.) But the fact of the matter is that in real-world terms of Jewish infiltration, the relatively small handful of Mediterranean Jews are dwarfed by their Russian/Polish/German fellows in the diaspora. Moreover, it's hard to imagine a region more riddled with Jews than the UK, which has the longest and broadest tradition of philosemitism in Europe. Good rule of thumb: follow the media-money and you will find your Jews.... even unto blonde and freckled Scandinavia.
While I don't share my kinsmen's hatred of Sicilians (see the Real World Activism thread "Death to the Jews"), I will go even further and doff my cap to Sicilians in America, without whom ALL of our major Northeastern cities would have devolved into Zimbabwe by now. The oft-lampooned 'ignorant/hateful racism' of the Sicilians and the old-school shanty Irish has stood like a bulwark against the relentless Jew-loosed brown tide of savagery in one formerly-great Eastern Seaboard city after another.
2003-10-14 10:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ausonius]War Sie da' geborren?
Zum beispiel, meine ganze familie ist Deutsch/Chweitze (Karlsruhe, Stuttgart, Dillendorf-- aber die letzte ist Chweitze, u. vorher die 17 jahrhuntert.)
Ausonius[/QUOTE]
Ja. Ich wurde in Freiburg geboren, doch meine Familie stammen aus Württemberg/Oberschwaben. Ich habe in Amerika aufgezogen und meine Eltern leb'n da noch.
2003-10-14 10:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno] But the fact of the matter is that in real-world terms of Jewish infiltration, the relatively small handful of Mediterranean Jews are dwarfed by their Russian/Polish/German fellows in the diaspora. [/QUOTE] By infiltration I mean ability to penetrate incognito, not mass immigration.
There are basically two kinds of Jews that penerate the West. One kind are the Semitic descendents of Abraham, the other are the Khazars, or Ashkenazi Jews that originally came from the Volga river valley Northeast of Turkey.
The Semitic ones look like Arabs for the most part, and going back far enough, might even have the same blood as some Sicilians. The Khazars appear to be somewhere between Arab, European and Asian.
Nordics have certain features which are almost never found in either kind of Jew; narrow, elongated skulls, square jaws, narrow bite, small mouth, a straight facial profile, small diameter deep set eyes close together and a distinct, straight brow line.
Both kinds of Jews have a broader skull, broader bite, slant of bite going downward to the front, larger diameter eyes, Broader, usually longer and more "Roman" nose and coarser hair. There are variations of course, but the generalizations are fairly consistent.
Based on these distinctions, I find it harder for Jews to infiltrate incognito amongst the Nordics than Eastern or Southern Europeans.
Although I only have about half of the Nordic features mentioned, I respect the right of Nordics to exclude from intermarraige those of us whose ancestors made more mistakes than they did, and believe this attitude is neccessary for the survival of Whte people in general. Not only that, but I think we should put more faith in leaders having Nordic traits because if we don't, how will we know whether or not our leaders are part-Jew?
2003-10-14 15:23 | User Profile
3/4 anglo-saxon, 1/4 swarthy Greek Orthodox-Lebanese... in all immodesty, quite an appealing melange. My parental units produced a large brood of attractive children.
2003-10-14 17:22 | User Profile
[QUOTE] The oft-lampooned 'ignorant/hateful racism' of the Sicilians and the old-school shanty Irish has stood like a bulwark against the relentless Jew-loosed brown tide of savagery in one formerly-great Eastern Seaboard city after another.[/QUOTE]
You are not kidding IR. The decimation of the Italian and Irish mafias at the request and benefit of the jews and carried out by shabbos goyim like Rudolph Guiliani has sent this country even more quickly down the slippery slope to oblivion.
But back on topic. I'm 1/2 French Catholic, 4th generation and 1/2 Italian Catholic, 2nd generation. Now I'm Protestant. Parents met in NY, both born in US. I learned French language in school. Forgot about it and then took it back up years ago and stick with it even today. I realised the necessity to keep our European roots alive. Know very limited Italian. Neither parent speaks much but English. Go figure.
2003-10-15 04:06 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ritter]Ja. Ich wurde in Freiburg geboren, doch meine Familie stammen aus Württemberg/Oberschwaben. Ich habe in Amerika aufgezogen und meine Eltern leb'n da noch.[/QUOTE]
Heh. Meine Frau war im Stuttgart geborren. Auch sohn (Ruit Krankenhaus.. er ist drei jahren alt). Ich zuruck gehen jede' zwei jahren oder so.. Meine Ur-opa war im Karlsruhe geborren, seine vater war Chweitze (Dillendorf). Opa war die letzte auf unsere familie in Deutschland geborren.
Letzte mal Ich war da, meine Frau ein umfall gehabt. Ein auto im schnee, Weinachtsabend, hat Sie übergefahrt. Sie war warten an die laufweg, u. das autofahrerin hat etwas falsche gemacht, hat gerutched im dem schnee u. meine Frau war eine monat im Krankenhaus. Schlusselbein kaput, auch lungen, seine Becken... war schlimm. Gott sai dank sie nicht unsere sohn gehabt.
Tut mir leid, aber Ich muß jetzt schlaff. Ich hoffe wir können mehr später sprechen. Macht güt. Tschuß.
Ausonius
2003-10-16 06:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=travis] Although I only have about half of the Nordic features mentioned, I respect the right of Nordics to exclude from intermarraige those of us whose ancestors made more mistakes than they didQUOTE]
Well said, since becoming more race conscious I only date women who have my phenotype, i.e., blond, blue-eyed.
I've noticed a long time ago the Jews' special antipathy towards that racial type.
Hatred mixed with admiration.
2003-10-16 07:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=friedrich braun] Well said, since become more race conscious I only date women who have my phenotype, i.e., blond, blue-eyed.
I've noticed a long time ago the Jews' special antipathy towards that racial type.
Hatred mixed with admiration.[/QUOTE]
So what do you think of blond hair blue eyed women going out with Brown-haired eyed whites like me? :)
2003-10-17 10:54 | User Profile
The only Spaniard here
2003-10-17 17:51 | User Profile
First I wish to say I am glad to see Madrid Burns back again! I will searching for your recent threads and posting some replies. Hopefully, we will see some more good material from this perceptive fellow.
With respect to the poll I am not sure how to reply. I am 100% pure Nordic in sub-racial terms and Faroese in terms of nationality so none of the headings seem to apply to me.
Looking quickly over some of the posts here I lots of talk about blond hair and blue eyes with the implication that they somehow define the Nordic typology. This is simply not true as plenty of Occidentals with predominately non Nordic ancestry have those features as well. I should also point out that plenty of pure Nordics have brown or even black hair (my father for example has seen his hair go from pure blond to brown as he aged). Here in the isles, we have had no significant immigration since the 1300 which was from Danmark while earlier migrations where from Western Norway and Danmark (which at the time was not an independent nation). While blond hair and blue eyes are very common so are brown and, to a lesser extent, black hair within a 100% pure Nordic nation with zero foreigners of any description save a few tourists (most from Scandinavian nations) and the occasional stop over at Vágar Airport. My lansmen with darker hair or eyes then mine are less Nordic and fixating on these matters seems more fetish then anything else.
With respect to the all important question of building a family I feel quite strongly that one should seek perpetuate one's own sub-racial/ethnic identity which is why I object to not only miscegenation but blending the various sub-categories of Occidental humanity. I married a pure blond and blue eyed jem from Skálafjørður and our four children will perpetuate our heritages in all ways.
While I find Occidentals of non Nordic backgrounds aesthetically pleasing and even sexually attractive I never have and never will consider, let alone act, upon such impulses because to do is anathema to my entire being. I feel that those that value their existence and those that gave them life do likewise no matter what one's racial back round may be.
Of course, things are much harder for Occidental Americans and those that have a diverse legacy. For such people they clearly are obligated to mate only with Occidentals and rear children with little or no non European ancestry that are steeped in positive Eurocentric values.
2003-10-17 18:10 | User Profile
Anglo-Saxon!
Well maye I am an Anglo-Saxon-Irish-Scot-German-Slav type person. I am about 60% British, but I have a Slavic Surname.
But I would call my nationality Anglo-Saxon.
Occidentals :cheers: