PDA

View Full Version : How Germanic Is the US/Are Americans?



Pages : [1] 2

Richard
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 07:07 PM
USA certainly has Germanic roots, but as the hordes of non-Germanics moved in and are continuing to do so, I think the question is debatable. I myself certainly wish that USA retained it's Germanic roots and not allowed immigration from non-Germanics such as the Polish and Italians. One of my major gripes with White Nationalism (I know this is not a White Nationalist forum) is it's encouragement of simply being white in America versus being Germanic. I personally do not like it's endorsement of breeding with non-Germanics, simply because they are European.

Frigg
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 07:26 PM
I agree with you Richard! We should have retained our Germanic roots instead of allowing people of just about every color to come into our country. :mad: However, I think our country IS Germanic. :) The non-Germanics will never be true Americans, they are foreign to us even if they have our citizenship.
By the way, I have nothing against the word white. We Americans use it very much, but to us it means Anglo-Germanic people, not Italians or the like.

Flash Voyager
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 07:27 PM
Won't happen, that contradicts what modern America stands for. In the USA and rest of the western world europid is just viewed as white. Most think of Germanic in the linguistic sense when they hear the word. But you can probably convince your fellow Americans if you say "That's what Jesus would want"

Allenson
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 08:39 PM
Is the US Germanic? That is the question posed in the thread's title anyway....

Mighty big question about a mighty big land. In what ways are we asking and seeking? Its populace? Its language, culture, art? Settlement patterns? Land use and land ethics? Agricultural practices? Morals and values of the greater society?

Gee-wiz! Where the hell to start? ;)

I've actually been working on, at least in scratched-out note form and in my head, a treatise of sorts about the Germanic nature of old New England. I just need to get my hands on an old piece entitled The Germanic Origin of New England Towns (http://libcat.dartmouth.edu/record=b2862565) by Herbert Baxter Adams (http://www.historicum.net/themen/klassiker-der-geschichtswissenschaft/a-z/) as read before the Harvard Historical Society back the politically correct days of 1881. ;)

Anyway--sure, parts and facets of the US are at the very least, Germanic in origin, an off-shoot, a derivative of the Germanic cradle of northcentral and northwestern Europe. Much of the populace traces its lineage back to England, The Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland & Austria. So, genetically and phenotypically, there is a strong Germanic element (alas, on the wane, however).

Linguistically? Again, yes, largely so. It's well-known the English is a Germanic language (yes, yes, heavily Latinized, I know. ;) ). Check.

Culture & art? Not really my stronger fields so perhaps others who know more of these entities can weigh in. I would hazard though that it gets a little murkier here. Besides the strong Germanic element in the founding of the US, clearly there were several other ethnic influences at work as well--creating sort of a melange (French word!)--some of which has survived to the day and passes as artifacts of American culture. I'm thinking of music in particular--Blues, Jazz, Bluegrass, Country, Rock and Roll.... So musically, not so much in my opinion. We're pretty unique in that regard.

Settlement patterns and land use? Well, I'm working on that one in my mind and it is one that I'm interested in pursuing. I need to read up and learn a little more before I comment--largely because I want to comment with some credibility and authority.... But, my hunch is that yes, certainly parts of the US are quite Germanic (historically) in settlement patterns and land use; particularly those places that are climatologically similar to the Germanic homeland. Specifically, New England, New York State, Pennsylvania, northern and central Appalachia, the northern Great Lakes area (northern Michigan, northern Wisconsin, Minnesota) and the Pacific Northwest--west of the Cascades where there is ample precipitation to support a lush, green landscape with (naturally speaking) solid forest cover. East of the Cascades it is too dry and not a Germanic "home climate".

Obviously, agricultural practices follow suit with overall climate (and soil type!)....

Sorry for the ramble--just a stream of words and thought, really.

Back later with more.

Æmeric
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 08:54 PM
Thanks to the policies of are political elites, the US has become a multicultural/racial country. Germanics - including Protestant Scots & Irish - probably make up just over 1/2 of the 300 million population. The total Euro population is around 190 million. "Hispanics" make up 45 to 50 million, so Germanics are by far the largest group in the US.

Most of the racial diversity in the US was restricted to the larger urban areas. There were exception like the "Black Belt" in the old plantation area of the South & the remote Indian reservations, but the rural heartland was Germanic territory. Thanks to the open borders policies, many communities that have not had an influx of newcomers since the original Anglo-Saxon, German & Scandinavian settlers of the 19th century, are starting to recieve Mestizos/Amerindians, Asians, even Africans immigrants. If this could be stopped, there would still be a good chance the US could remain & become more of a Germanic nation. A complete cessation of non-Europid immigration would leave Germanics as the largest group - probably permanently - and if we (Germanics) united politically, we would run this country regardless of what ever any other group, including the Jews, thought about it. I think the time is approaching when the sh*t will hit the fan, and the silent majority will finally strike back & take charge.

Loyalist
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 09:36 PM
The United States has solid Germanic roots, and it's establishments and administrators still largely reflect this heritage. The population is, sadly, another story. For the time being, it remains a fragile Germanic majority, but this insane scope of not just non-Germanic, but mostly non-Europid immigration is slowly overtaking the number of proper Germanic/Celtogermanic Americans. I would still say, though, that the United States is a Germanic nation, for now.

Huzar
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 09:59 PM
We Americans use it very much, but to us it means Anglo-Germanic people, not Italians or the like.


...............Irish, welsh and French neither then.

Frigg
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 10:08 PM
...............Irish, welsh and French neither then.
The Irish and Welsh are white English speakers so they could integrate. But not too many!

Huzar
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 10:31 PM
The Irish and Welsh are white English speakers so they could integrate. But not too many!


99% of whites in America are english speakers.

........and, Like it or not, dear Laura, IRISH and WELSH, they're "Celtic", and not "Germanic". :)

So, if non-germanics like them are integrable, so other ethnicities too are integrable (logic and empiric reasonment, not personal opinion)

Frigg
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 10:41 PM
99% of whites in America are english speakers.

........and, Like it or not, dear Laura, IRISH and WELSH, they're "Celtic", and not "Germanic". :)

So, if non-germanics like them are integrable, so other ethnicities too are integrable (logic and empiric reasonment, not personal opinion)
They are part of the UK and they have more in common with the English than other ethnicities! Any Anglo will tell you they prefer the Irish and Welsh to other ethnicities!

Huzar
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 10:55 PM
They are part of the UK and they have more in common with the English than other ethnicities! Any Anglo will tell you they prefer the Irish and Welsh to other ethnicities!


"Preference" isn't an empirical argument, Laura :) They still are non germanic

The Althing objective is "Germanic preservation", NOT "Germanic preservation + any group Germanics like..." ;).

Or you're Germanic or you aren't. End of Story. Free to be intransigent if you want, but in that case can't say phrases like " i'm a Germanic preservationst and i don't want non-germanics (but i do some exceptions for the peoples i like, and personal friends)..."

Frigg
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 11:02 PM
"Preference" isn't an empirical argument, Laura :) They still are non germanic

The Althing objective is "Germanic preservation", NOT "Germanic preservation + any group Germanics like..." ;).

Or you're Germanic or you aren't. End of Story. Free to be intransigent if you want, but in that case can't say phrases like " i'm a Germanic preservationst and i don't want non-germanics (but i do some exceptions for the peoples i like, and personal friends)..."
The Irish and Welsh are Germanic, I've already said this! Not as Germanic as the Anglos, but still Germanic. I can say I am a Germanic preservationist, I am married to an Anglo and have Anglo kids! I'm not in favor of non-Germanic immigration!

Rassenpapst
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 11:19 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f8/Liberators-Kultur-Terror-Anti-Americanism-1944-Nazi-Propaganda-Poster.jpg

Huzar
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 11:24 PM
The Irish and Welsh are Germanic


Sure. As much as French and Italians. :)

Note that ALTHING administration doesn't consider Irish people to be germanic (and the old Skadi neither)





I've already said this! Not as Germanic as the Anglos, but still Germanic.
You instead defend the presence of alien people like Italians and Poles in my country so don't you go round telling me what this forum's objective is mister.


Italians and Poles are non-germanic as much as Irish are.

Frigg
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 11:34 PM
Sure. As much as French and Italians. :)

Note that ALTHING administration doesn't consider Irish people to be germanic (and the old Skadi neither)




I don't base my opinions on what the administration says.

Italians and Poles are non-germanic as much as Irish are.That isn't true, they come from non-Germanic countries and they speak non-Germanic languages.

Æmeric
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 11:49 PM
The Althing objective is "Germanic preservation", NOT "Germanic preservation + any group Germanics like..." ;).

Or you're Germanic or you aren't. End of Story.
It's not quite that simple. The Irish & Welsh for example are of similar racial background as the English. Racially I have no objection to either (btw my direct paternal ancestors were from Wales ;)). Linguistically & culturally they were not Germanic, but because they are of the right racial stock they are "assimilable." Even Romance peoples like the Italians & French can be assimilated into a Germanic society. There were French Protestants (Huguenots) who settled in England, Holland, Germany & America, and they assimilated into their host populations. They didn't make England or Prussia less Germanic. There are different factors to consider; How many immigrants (Europeans but non-Germanics) are there in ratio to the native Germanic population? A few Italians or Slavs (depending on their subrace) should not have been a problem. But the millions that were allowed to immigrate to the US in the early 20th century, allowed these groups to retain their foreign non-Germanic identities & to form ethnic blocs, that became politically important, especially in the Democratic controlled areas of the northeast & Great Lakes regions. This was detrimental to the interests of the Anglo-American population (by Anglo-American, I include groups that were assimilated into the majority population, such as the Scots, Ulster Irish, Germans & Scandinavians). Irish-Catholics have been a particular problem; they came to America with a grudge against Anglo-Saxons & they have had no particular interest in preserving America's Protestant British heritage. They along with the Jews have been among the most destructive of the "White ethnics". Many White ethnic have no problem with the idea of a "pluralistic society" because they are not part of the Anglo-American group; They are not the ones who are being displaced, culturally or politically by the rapidly changing demographics of the US. One more thing; I sometimes get the impression that many persons, Europeans & Americans, fee that Colonials, particularly Americans, should not object to immigrants or at least not to "White" immigrants. As a descendent of the original settlers I think I'm just as entitled to object to immigrants from anywhere, just as Germans or Frenchmen have the right to object to immigrants from Poland or Romania.

That being said, thealthing is just a place in cyberspace; it's not a real physical place. It is suppose to be Germanic, but I don't see what the problem is with having non-Germanics participate as long as it doesn't alter the stated mission of the owner. I'm sure if it becomes a problem the staff will take care of it.

(Edit: I got confused about which thread I was on with the second paragraph.:o)

Rassenpapst
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:04 AM
The Founding Fathers did not intend that the US would become a Germanic nation. The Naturalization Act of 1790 allowed any free, white person to become a citizen.

From the beginning there were non-Germanic US citizens like Tadeusz Kościuszko.

Æmeric
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:07 AM
But they were the exception not the rule. The US was primarily a Anglo-Scottish country up to the 1840s (most Irish settlers up to that time being Ulster-Scots). And I doubt that the founding fathers really imagined that there would ever be immigration from all over Europe to the US, let along the world.

cerebro
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:09 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f8/Liberators-Kultur-Terror-Anti-Americanism-1944-Nazi-Propaganda-Poster.jpg

¿What was wrong with the KKK?

:confused:

Huzar
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:19 AM
It's not quite that simple. The Irish & Welsh for example are of similar racial background as the English.



Be carefull, AMERIC..........Ireland isn't Germanic racially (genetic studies confirm it's largely autoctonous). Now, if England is of the same racial stock of Ireland, then the logic conclusion is : both Ireland and England are autoctonous, genetically (Germanic migrations turned british isles in a Germanic linguistical domain, but didn't altered the autoctonous genetic structure, especially in the perypherical areas.)



Even Romance peoples like the Italians & French can be assimilated into a Germanic society. There were French Protestants (Huguenots) who settled in England, Holland, Germany & America, and they assimilated into their host populations. They didn't make England or Prussia less Germanic. There are different factors to consider; How many immigrants (Europeans but non-Germanics) are there in ratio to the native Germanic population? A few Italians or Slavs (depending on their subrace) should not have been a problem. But the millions that were allowed to immigrate to the US in the early 20th century, allowed these groups to retain their foreign non-Germanic identities & to form ethnic blocs,
Read my answers on the other thread (Germanic America)






Irish-Catholics have been a particular problem; they came to America with a grudge against Anglo-Saxons & they have had no particular interest in preserving America's Protestant British heritage. They along with the Jews have been among the most destructive of the "White ethnics".
Interesting problem......but it's better discuss it in the other thread.






As a descendent of the original settlers I think I'm just as entitled to object to immigrants from anywhere, just as Germans or Frenchmen have the right to object to immigrants from Poland or Romania.
Ok.

Rassenpapst
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:22 AM
¿What was wrong with the KKK?

:confused:
In the 1920s and 1930s newspapers in Europe reported that evil American racists are lynching poor Negroes and Europeans generally disliked the KKK. Vigilantism was also an alien concept to the National Socialists. Colored POWs were generally treated well.

SineNomine
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:25 AM
By the way, I have nothing against the word white. We Americans use it very much, but to us it means Anglo-Germanic people, not Italians or the like.
I cannot conceive of anything more silly. On what grounds would an Italian Atlanto-Med, say, not be "white"? Very few Europid subraces are so swarthy as to be non-white. It just demonstrates how idiotic and vague the word is.

Anyway, I think the USA was, in many ways, the exemplar Germanic nation, based on a strong sense of individualism. It would be wonderful if it returned to being a predominantly WASP nation.

Æmeric
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:27 AM
Be carefull, AMERIC..........Ireland isn't Germanic racially (genetic studies confirm it's largely autoctonous). Now, if England is of the same racial stock of Ireland, then the logic conclusion is : both Ireland and England are autoctonous, genetically (Germanic migrations turned british isles in a Germanic linguistical domain, but didn't altered the autoctonous genetic structure, especially in the perypherical areas.)

They are compatible. Not the same, though they share common ancestors. And a shared history, like-it-or-not by some persons (Celtic nationalists). But I am speaking from the viewpoint of someone who lives in a settler society.




Read my answers on the other thread (Germanic America)
I think you mean "Non-Germanics" ;). Now who's confused?

ChaosLord
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:37 AM
If this could be stopped, there would still be a good just the US could remain & become more of a Germanic nation. A complete cessation of non-Europid immigration would leave Germanics as the largest group - probably permanently - and if we (Germanics) united politically, we would run this country regardless of what ever any other group, including the Jews, thought about it. I think the time is approaching when the sh*t will hit the fan, and the silent majority will finally strike back & take charge.


Sounds good to me, but in all honesty, most whites in this country simply are too preoccupied to really care, brainwashed into the multi-cultural beliefs, or just plain out spineless. Those of us who are against this are thinly spread out over the country, unable to really grasp hold without retaliation from the hordes. Slow conditioning has made us soft and too slow or callous to even really do anything about it. Though, I do have hope that one day people will start to awaken from their zombie slumber and see what is going on in this country and across other Western countries.

Frigg
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 01:59 AM
I cannot conceive of anything more silly. On what grounds would an Italian Atlanto-Med, say, not be "white"? Very few Europid subraces are so swarthy as to be non-white. It just demonstrates how idiotic and vague the word is.

Anyway, I think the USA was, in many ways, the exemplar Germanic nation, based on a strong sense of individualism. It would be wonderful if it returned to being a predominantly WASP nation.
Silly? :mad: In America, white meant Anglo for a long time, it's not just a race, it's also a culture! Italians aren't white to many Americans!

Istigkeit
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 02:11 AM
Silly? :mad: In America, white meant Anglo for a long time, it's not just a race, it's also a culture! Italians aren't white to many Americans!

:confused: So what box do Italians check on the census forms for "Race"? "Other"?

SineNomine
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 02:12 AM
Silly? :mad: In America, white meant Anglo for a long time, it's not just a race, it's also a culture! Italians aren't white to many Americans!
I had no idea cultures came in colours too. Look, on most serious racial classification sites the label "white" means little indeed. We deal in racial subtypes here. Pigmentation-wise, any one of many Europid subraces is white (however one may determine it), not just those belonging to Anglo stock. The term means little, even as a social construct, if it does not mean pigmentation. Europid though means quite a lot.

Æmeric
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 02:15 AM
Italians aren't white to many Americans!
That use to very true, but with the browning of the US population, Italians are now "White". But most Italians in the US are from the south of Italy or Sicily. Racially different from the Piedmontese, Lombardians, Venetians etc...

Frigg
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 02:19 AM
:confused: So what box do Italians check on the census forms for "Race"? "Other"?
I don't know, I'm not Italian and I don't care what census forms say. Besides, there are terms like non-Hispanic white which only prove that this word (white) is vastly misused.

Æmeric
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 02:25 AM
there are terms like non-Hispanic white which only prove that this word (white) is vastly misused.

The US Census Bureau defines as White, anyone who's ancestors came from Europe, North Africa, the Middle East. I have also heard that it includes Central Asians & Asian Indians, though I am not certain about the last 2. Fortunately the number of persons with origins from North Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia or India or still relatively low compared to the rest of the population. However many "Hispanics" are counted as White even though the have substantial Amerindian & in some cases African ancestry.

Btw, have I ever memtioned how much I despise the phrase "non-Hispanic White"?

Istigkeit
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 02:41 AM
I don't know, I'm not Italian and I don't care what census forms say. Besides, there are terms like non-Hispanic white which only prove that this word (white) is vastly misused.

Then why define people by it?

mischak
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 02:54 AM
Silly? :mad: In America, white meant Anglo for a long time, it's not just a race, it's also a culture! Italians aren't white to many Americans!


Do you realize that the English Americans didn't consider Germans to be "white" for a long time, too?

Loyalist
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 02:55 AM
99% of whites in America are english speakers.

........and, Like it or not, dear Laura, IRISH and WELSH, they're "Celtic", and not "Germanic". :)

So, if non-germanics like them are integrable, so other ethnicities too are integrable (logic and empiric reasonment, not personal opinion)

So all that Viking settlement was just an illusion? :rolleyes:

SineNomine
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 03:07 AM
Do you realize that the English Americans didn't consider Germans to be "white" for a long time, too?
Or Scandinavians. On the old Skadi I put up a letter in which Benjamin Franklin described them as "swarthy" folk. Perhaps because of their ability to tan well.

Æmeric
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 03:16 AM
Or Scandinavians. On the old Skadi I put up a letter in which Benjamin Franklin described them as "swarthy" folk. Perhaps because of their ability to tan well.

Yes, I've read that letter, but is it authentic? Actually it was the Swedes who were included as "swarthy". Remember, what was once New Sweden was located in the vicinity of northern Delaware, not far from Philadelphia, were Benjamin Franklin spent most of his adult life. Many of the "Swedes" in New Sweden may have seem swarthy to Ben, but in reality most of the Swedish colonists were actually Palatine Germans or Walloons, not real Swedes. Maybe this is why Ben thought the Swedes were swarthy. Ben himself was from Boston, which in the 18th century was populated by blond English people of a predominately East Anglian background. I think what Benjamin Franklin really wanted was to restrict immigration to those who would assimilate easiest into the existing (late 18th century) Anglo-American population without altering the character of the American people. Which he why he favored the Saxons (Niedersachsens) along with the English as immigrants.

SineNomine
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 03:30 AM
Yes, I've read that letter, but is it authentic?
It would seem to be.


Actually it was the Swedes who were included as "swarthy".
Correct. OEN had stated that it is perhaps because of Baltid admixtures that might've meant that Swedish colonists exhibited a "murkier" skin coloration. I thought it might be because of Nordid strains, which tan well. However, your explanation also would make sense IMO.

mischak
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 06:22 AM
We Americans use it very much, but to us it means Anglo-Germanic people, not Italians or the like.Speak for yourself


Any Anglo will tell you they prefer the Irish and Welsh to other ethnicities!No. It's all subjective


Italians aren't white to many Americans!Maybe in 1880


Besides, there are terms like non-Hispanic white which only prove that this word (white) is vastly misused.How does that prove it's 'misused'? There are several hispanic countries with the majority of the population being Caucasian. Places like Argentina and Uruguay are even more European than the US.

brianweg
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 06:50 AM
Places like Argentina and Uruguay are even more European than the US.

I expect Mexico will soon fall into that category as they continue pushing their unwanted Mestizo population north.

Jäger
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 11:59 AM
The Founding Fathers did not intend that the US would become a Germanic nation.


Silly? :mad: In America, white meant Anglo for a long time, it's not just a race, it's also a culture! Italians aren't white to many Americans!


Do you realize that the English Americans didn't consider Germans to be "white" for a long time, too?


Or Scandinavians. On the old Skadi I put up a letter in which Benjamin Franklin described them as "swarthy" folk. Perhaps because of their ability to tan well.
I did so too, and I do it again. :)

"Which leads me to add one Remark: That the Number of purely white People in the World is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth. I could wish their Numbers were increased." (Benjamin Franklin, 'Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, etc.')
http://bc.barnard.columbia.edu/~lgordis/earlyAC/documents/observations.html

Þórir
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 02:08 PM
The Germanic and Celtic peoples did intermarry since ancient times. They were culturally very close and the Romans had a hard time tell them apart. So they were more compatible with each other than with other types. But anyway if you want to increase the Germanic presence in America its not just non-Europids that are excluded but also those from southern and eastern Europe. The 1920's immigration law was designed to favor immigration from Northern and Northwestern Europe. I also think requiring immigrants to be able to read/write and speak in English "before immigrating" would help this.

Frigg
Sunday, September 9th, 2007, 05:29 PM
The Germanic and Celtic peoples did intermarry since ancient times. They were culturally very close and the Romans had a hard time tell them apart. So they were more compatible with each other than with other types. But anyway if you want to increase the Germanic presence in America its not just non-Europids that are excluded but also those from southern and eastern Europe. The 1920's immigration law was designed to favor immigration from Northern and Northwestern Europe. I also think requiring immigrants to be able to read/write and speak in English "before immigrating" would help this.
I agree Thorir! That's what I say, South and East Europeans are just as alien to us as Mexicans! The United States has the right to return to its forefathers' roots just like the rest! :)

Huzar
Thursday, October 4th, 2007, 09:46 PM
The Germanic and Celtic peoples did intermarry since ancient times. They were culturally very close and the Romans had a hard time tell them apart.


If it's for this..........Celtic peoples did intermarry extensively with Romans too in western Europe.

Northern Paladin
Monday, October 8th, 2007, 08:09 PM
If you regard English as Germanic than yes, because it was is the English who have had the most influence on America.

Veratýr
Tuesday, October 9th, 2007, 03:07 PM
One of my major gripes with White Nationalism (I know this is not a White Nationalist forum) is it's encouragement of simply being white in America versus being Germanic.

White Nationalism tries to unite all white-skinned people because of a similar/common ancestral past, not current nationality or language. I've heard of White Nationalist groups in Iran, Armenia, and even Israel (although that one is kind of weird). Although Germanic unity ties people closer together than White Nationalism, the latter contains a much larger group who, although they might not share the same language system or heritage, share many of the same ideas as each other and want to make the world a better place for all white people, Germanic or not.

SwordOfTheVistula
Wednesday, October 10th, 2007, 05:07 AM
Yeah, it intends on how you interpret it. One interpretation is to encourage people to be proud of their ancestry and heritage (meaning whichever countries their ancestry is from), and to have the various European ethnicities work together and cooperate since we face similar challenges, and don't have much reason to be fighting eachother (aside from some ongoing crap in southeastern Europe).

Unfortunately, a number of highly vocal and obnoxious archetypes also end up in the 'white nationalist' camp such as street thug types, people obsessed with Israel, south/east Europeans with an inferiority complex, and other people who don't get out of the house much.

Corin
Monday, October 15th, 2007, 03:01 PM
Or Scandinavians. On the old Skadi I put up a letter in which Benjamin Franklin described them as "swarthy" folk. Perhaps because of their ability to tan well.

I think a lot of Germans and Scandinavians don't look like what I imagine a classical white person to be. They often look very yellow or brown, generally very foreign looking, somewhat like Poles, Lithuanians or Czechs in skin colour I've observed. People from the British Isles look like the True Whites in my opinion.

SineNomine
Monday, October 15th, 2007, 05:10 PM
Well they weren't exactly brown or yellow, but they had a different pigmentation to the English, for sure. CMs and Nordid-CM intermixtures had a more sallow complexion, perhaps due to Baltid admixtures. Nordids tended to be depigmented (and thus more 'white' in the conventional sense), but tan well, close to Meds.

English CMs can be very pinkish. Not what I think of as 'true whites'. If one goes by such definitions, the truest of whites would be the English Atlantids and Nordids.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Tuesday, October 16th, 2007, 07:38 AM
I think a lot of Germans and Scandinavians don't look like what I imagine a classical white person to be. They often look very yellow or brown, generally very foreign looking, somewhat like Poles, Lithuanians or Czechs in skin colour I've observed. People from the British Isles look like the True Whites in my opinion.


What do you mean by this? The darkest Scandinavian I ever saw was Tucker Carlsen (an American of Scandivavian ancestry on TV) and he probably had blond hair when young.

The Horned God
Tuesday, October 16th, 2007, 07:47 AM
What do you mean by this? The darkest Scandinavian I ever saw was Tucker Carlsen (an American of Scandivavian ancestry on TV) and he probably had blond hair when young.

I think he means they (some Scandinavians especially southern swedes) have a sallow complexion when tanned, and they have this "yellow" tan quite often. It almost always goes with blond hair and usually either grey eyes or "beer eye", a slightly yellow-hazel colour in the iris of the eye.

They're still fine looking people though, imo.

Jäger
Tuesday, October 16th, 2007, 09:43 AM
Indeed, the most pale seem to be the English, anyway whoever focuses too much on skin color has no real concept of race anyway.

PeterThaGreat
Tuesday, October 16th, 2007, 10:56 AM
It would seem to be.


Correct. OEN had stated that it is perhaps because of Baltid admixtures that might've meant that Swedish colonists exhibited a "murkier" skin coloration. I thought it might be because of Nordid strains, which tan well. However, your explanation also would make sense IMO.

Before I browse this thread throughoutly I have comment this.....

Sinenomine, sorry but that is just simply utter bullshit. There's simply just no way a Swedish tan could translate into "swarthy", quite opposite! Together with blue eyes and blond hair the tan makes just an uber Aryan impression. Baltids of murkier skin colour is just more utter shit. What Benjamin said is simple false and they best explanation of is what Americ provided. The actual Swedes were Palatine Germans or Walloons. You are an astute fellow but no you are wrong in a magnitude you don't even realize.

Swedish tan......really swarthy.

http://www.jarkkonieminen.net/kuvapankki/zoo2.jpg

Northern European East-Baltic with your murky pigment

http://www.idolphin.fi/mouvinen/images/viivi_avellan.jpg


Well they weren't exactly brown or yellow, but they had a different pigmentation to the English, for sure. CMs and Nordid-CM intermixtures had a more sallow complexion, perhaps due to Baltid admixtures. Nordids tended to be depigmented (and thus more 'white' in the conventional sense), but tan well, close to Meds.

English CMs can be very pinkish. Not what I think of as 'true whites'. If one goes by such definitions, the truest of whites would be the English Atlantids and Nordids.


What do you mean by Baltid? There's never been a Baltid component in Scandinavia in real sense. Most of the clasification that goes here and skadi were just bollocks and stem from the idea that Nordids are only extreme horsefaced Max-von-Sydow types and the rest are just some "unpure" Cro-magno-Nords. Besides in nortern Europe Baltids are the most "whitest", often with dead pale skin.


Anyway to the topic,

America is core Germanic state based on English heritage. A great proportion of its population is of Germanic stock. So what if if there's a considerable minority of non-germanics or even non-whites. America has just been 200 years ahead of Europe. Its every institution is based on Germanic/English tradition and the reference population of US will always be protestant WASP. I doubt we'd never be discussion whether Russia is Slavic or not despite the bulk of its people has always been just slavicized, non-Slavs.

Allenson
Tuesday, October 16th, 2007, 04:07 PM
I think a lot of Germans and Scandinavians don't look like what I imagine a classical white person to be. They often look very yellow or brown, generally very foreign looking, somewhat like Poles, Lithuanians or Czechs in skin colour I've observed. People from the British Isles look like the True Whites in my opinion.


I was tempted to delete this post on the grounds of retardism. But, before I do so, if you'd like the opportunity to further explain yourself and perhaps post examples of what you mean, feel free.

This post has been reported to the staff twice so far...

Boche
Tuesday, October 16th, 2007, 05:26 PM
The United States nowadays as a Germanic Country? My answer is No.

The United States has alot of germanic people, and probably also alot of them have germanic traditions and germanic values.

But the whole United States as itself is nothing i'd call germanic.




Gruß,
Boche

Corin
Tuesday, October 16th, 2007, 06:58 PM
I was tempted to delete this post on the grounds of retardism. But, before I do so, if you'd like the opportunity to further explain yourself and perhaps post examples of what you mean, feel free.

This post has been reported to the staff twice so far...

This is my observation of people from Scandinavia and Germany. They often tend to stand out as not being local. I am from Northampton in England. They are plenty of Scandinavians and Germans who can blend in, having said that I can often spot these foreign people from a particular look they have about them. I base my evidence on skin colour and relief of the face. When I speak of relief of the face, I mean I can decern that they are foreign. It is something subtle because it is difficult to put in words. A lot of these cues are seemingly subtle, body shape, hair texture, hair colour, skin tone, eye colour, height, lenght of limbs. Permutations and combinations of these characteristics allow me to frequently make successful identifications and I don't mean those sporting cameras and rainjackets. I think the presence of the original inhabitants of the British Isles is still strong here, or perhaps mixings from different invasions through the centuries have resulted in phenotypes being unique to England and Britain.

PeterThaGreat
Wednesday, October 17th, 2007, 11:18 AM
The United States nowadays as a Germanic Country? My answer is No.

The United States has alot of germanic people, and probably also alot of them have germanic traditions and germanic values.

But the whole United States as itself is nothing i'd call germanic.




Gruß,
Boche

You'r probably going to say the same about Germany after couple of decades, right?

America is nothing but Germanic state, the current demographic development is unfortunate but nothing really different than is expected to happen in Europe. The fact is that Jewish, African-Americans or Hispanics will never be Americans in the true meaning of the word. America is Germanic because its legal system and every institutions is of Germanic origins, simple as that!

Huzar
Wednesday, October 17th, 2007, 12:50 PM
The fact is that Jewish, African-Americans or Hispanics will never be Americans in the true meaning of the word. America is Germanic because its legal system and every institutions is of Germanic origins, simple as that!

Yes.

African Americans constitute 13% of U.S: population but they're the most excluded group (luckily) and their demographic growth is concluded in the last 20 years (thank God). Now the fertility rate for a black woman is about 2,0 (replacemente rate is 2,1) when 30 years ago was 4,15 (4,15 children per woman). And about "multiracial" society many progressists so hope......well is mainly about White and Asians phenomenon on the West coast.....the black block is still OUT.

So African Americans are doomed to stay in their position of aggressive and excluded minorance. And poor too. In the last position of social scael, since More dynamic Hispanics are stealing all their jobs thanks the SAME "affirmative" politics.


Asians are about 5% of population but don't seem too interested to mix with others........that's not their trend.

The REAL enemy is the HIspanic block imo.............

Dagna
Wednesday, October 17th, 2007, 02:28 PM
You'r probably going to say the same about Germany after couple of decades, right?

America is nothing but Germanic state, the current demographic development is unfortunate but nothing really different than is expected to happen in Europe. The fact is that Jewish, African-Americans or Hispanics will never be Americans in the true meaning of the word. America is Germanic because its legal system and every institutions is of Germanic origins, simple as that!
Indeed. I do not understand the logic behind some Europeans' claim that the United States are not Germanic. I believe some European countries will soon have a white minority. Should we remove England from our banners for Germanic preservation? What about South Africa? It is a clear double standard.

PeterThaGreat
Wednesday, October 17th, 2007, 02:49 PM
Indeed. I do not understand the logic behind some Europeans' claim that the United States are not Germanic. I believe some European countries will soon have a white minority. Should we remove England from our banners for Germanic preservation? What about South Africa? It is a clear double standard.

Nah, I think this is once again just some blatantly pathetic anti-americanism in which some the posters in Germany are so keen to.....nothing really new. Its sad for Germans that Hitler got defeated but life should go on.

Soldier of Wodann
Wednesday, October 17th, 2007, 09:23 PM
I think a lot of Germans and Scandinavians don't look like what I imagine a classical white person to be. They often look very yellow or brown, generally very foreign looking, somewhat like Poles, Lithuanians or Czechs in skin colour I've observed. People from the British Isles look like the True Whites in my opinion.

Hmm I can see why he said this, personally. I am German myself, but when I visited I was quite suprised. In terms of racial characteristics, such as facial features and such, they were surely very nordic in composition (where I'm from anyway), but tended to have a somewhat..darker look than the average American white. This is mostly due to their love for tanning sallons, so my uncle tells me, and they often dye their hair darker colours. This wouldn't have been the case in the 1800s obviously, so I'm not sure what Franklin was refering to (unless they were southern Germans, who even still wouldn't be "swarthy" by any measure).

Huzar
Wednesday, October 17th, 2007, 09:41 PM
Nah, I think this is once again just some blatantly pathetic anti-americanism in which some the posters in Germany are so keen to.....nothing really new. Its sad for Germans that Hitler got defeated but life should go on.


Yes i life should go on.........but i understand them however. Hitler was, for Germans, an historical occasion to be a world superpower. Perhaps the greatest occasion in the last 500/600 years i think (since the end of Teutonic expansion/empire toward East), if we evaluate the facts in a very general historical perspective........

Soldier of Wodann
Thursday, October 18th, 2007, 12:17 AM
You'r probably going to say the same about Germany after couple of decades, right?

America is nothing but Germanic state, the current demographic development is unfortunate but nothing really different than is expected to happen in Europe. The fact is that Jewish, African-Americans or Hispanics will never be Americans in the true meaning of the word. America is Germanic because its legal system and every institutions is of Germanic origins, simple as that!

It's legal system isn't totally Germanic but I'm not going to nit-pick about that. But anyway, most of my German comrades and I say it isn't Germanic because for about the last 130 years it has been acting quite to the contrary. I don't think anyone is denying that it originally was, but it isn't now. It's "culture" (or lack thereof) is not Germanic by any stretch, and I guarantee you little to no Americans consider themselves related to their European cousins at all. Their isolation and (modern) tolerance has brought a transformation of their culture for the most part, and in a negative way.

I'm not trying to offend any of the American patriots here, and I sympathize with and understand you, as I live here too. But to claim that the modern American is culturally or spiritually Germanic is absurd, that was lost decades ago.

But I suppose I could be saying the same thing about the English in 10 years too..

Huzar
Thursday, October 18th, 2007, 12:35 AM
It's legal system isn't totally Germanic....
..


Simply there is a notable influence from France. The American written consitution is the mian example.

SwordOfTheVistula
Thursday, October 18th, 2007, 02:43 AM
Simply there is a notable influence from France. The American written consitution is the mian example.

One state, Louisiana, has the 'civil code' like the latin countries do. I am not sure, but I would guess Quebec does as well. The rest of the US&Canada uses the anglo-saxon common law.

Æmeric
Thursday, October 18th, 2007, 03:43 AM
Some states have laws that are based on Roman or civil law. Those states that were under Spanish rule at one time. Louisiana is one, though it was also French. But California, New Mexico, Texas, Florida & Arizona all have some elements of it. The one that stands out the most is the concept of "community property" in marital law. This is a Latin concept, a remnant of Spanish rule.

Gefjon
Friday, November 2nd, 2007, 09:16 PM
This country is as Germanic as it can get. The predominant ethnicities are German and English, the predomiannt language is English. Don't judge the USA by its leaders, its govt, its ghetto culture or its immigrants cause then no country would be Germanic. Sure we've got Jewish influence on the media and we've got the wigger scene, but so do you. The USA is much more than MCDonalds, come and see for yourself. Usually these generalizations come frrom people who have never set foot here.

SwordOfTheVistula
Monday, November 5th, 2007, 02:39 AM
Usually these generalizations come frrom people who have never set foot here.

Or if they have come to the US, it is only to the typical tourist destinations like NYC, Florida, DC, or Southern California which are also the most multi-culti areas of the country. To really see the US you have to get away from the cities.

Hweinlant
Saturday, December 22nd, 2007, 09:51 PM
I know this is wrong question at wrong board but someone needs to ask it. Why is USA germanic country ? There indeed is linguistical connectivity but thats it. USA is culture(s) of it's own with very little to do with Europe.

Most of the US posters here have other than germanic ancestry, you just use germanic (English language).

USA is global melting pot, she has her politics which rest of the world has to follow. Most of those politics are against the good of the actual germanic countries of Europe.

Multiculturality comes from US and has nearly destroyed the germanic countries thus far. Local (European) germanic cultures are not responsible for that.

US multikulti represents everything that will destroy germanic Europe, why it's influence is still valid and wanted here ? Why USA is germanic country ? Is everyone from US automaticly germanic ?

Gefjon
Saturday, December 22nd, 2007, 10:00 PM
I know this is wrong question at wrong board but someone needs to ask it. Why is USA germanic country ? There indeed is linguistical connectivity but thats it. USA is culture(s) of it's own with very little to do with Europe.

Most of the US posters here have other than germanic ancestry, you just use germanic (English language).
The founding fathers of the US are Germanic. The largest ethnic group in the US are Germans, then come the English. American culture is Germanic culture. And don't say it's McDonalds and Hollywood or Burger King cause that ain't US culture anymore than Döner Kebab is German culture.

USA is global melting pot, she has her politics which rest of the world has to follow. Most of those politics are against the good of the actual germanic countries of Europe.
If the politics disqualifies a country from being Germanic, then I don't see why European countries should be considered any more Germanic.
Do you read the news from Germany, a country run by self-hating, anti-German traitors who favor the Turks and other Muslim immigrants? Or maybe from Brussels, who is invaded by Muslims? How about Sweden, with its politicians supporting Muslims and excusing rape? How about England, where Muslims are more "British" than the natives? I could give you 100 more examples of anti-Germanic politics from Europe.

As for melting pot, here's a lil something for ya:

Germanic ancestry in America (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=136)


Multiculturality comes from US and has nearly destroyed the germanic countries thus far. Local (European) germanic cultures are not responsible for that.
Actually, liberalism and the likes were born in Europe. The USA was and still is one of the most "racist" countries you'll find.

US multikulti represents everything that will destroy germanic Europe, why it's influence is still valid and wanted here ? Why USA is germanic country ? Is everyone from US automaticly germanic ?
Germanic Europe will destroy itself. It's not the US who is urging them to accept Muslim immigrants and integrate them into their countries. Open your eyes and stop blaming the US for all the crap that's going on in Europe.

Hweinlant
Saturday, December 22nd, 2007, 10:13 PM
The founding fathers of the US are Germanic. The largest ethnic group in the US are Germans, then come the English. American culture is Germanic culture. And don't say it's McDonalds and Hollywood or Burger King cause that ain't US culture anymore than Döner Kebab is German culture.

If the politics disqualifies a country from being Germanic, then I don't see why European countries should be considered any more Germanic.
Do you read the news from Germany, a country run by self-hating, anti-German traitors who favor the Turks and other Muslim immigrants? Or maybe from Brussels, who is invaded by Muslims? I could give you 100 more examples of anti-Germanic politics from Europe.

Actually, liberalism and the likes were born in Europe. The USA was and still is one of the most "racist" countries you'll find.

Germanic Europe will destroy itself. It's not the US who is urging them to accept Muslim immigrants and integrate them into their countries. Open your eyes and stop blaming the US for all the crap that's going on in Europe.

USA is the birth of civil rights (not allways a bad thing) which spreaded around the world.

USA builded up the coalition of NATO which demanded Europe to open up for Turks and people like that.

USA builded up model of Multikulti , which germanic countries had to follow. Since it was "the model". You actually think that there were mosques in Germany without US's model ?

Britan is US in Europe. There are more multikulti Mosques in Britan than anywhere else.

US started multikulti in 1960's and spreaded it around the world.

There are concretes in Sweden with more immigrants than swedes, system was builded by US. US showed the way, and demanded all of us to follow.

USA which is the most powerfull country in the world tells her allies how to build up capitalist world. That world asks for building blocks in low-income social classes which are available in 3rd world countries.

USA system will kill us all. No more northern-euro's in 150 years.

Gefjon
Saturday, December 22nd, 2007, 10:23 PM
USA is the birth of civil rights (not allways a bad thing) which spreaded around the world.

USA builded up the coalition of NATO which demanded Europe to open up for Turks and people like that.

USA builded up model of Multikulti , which germanic countries had to follow. Since it was "the model". You actually think that there were mosques in Germany without US's model ?

Britan is US in Europe. There are more multikulti Mosques in Britan than anywhere else.

US started multikulti in 1960's and spreaded it around the world.

There are concretes in Sweden with more immigrants than swedes, system was builded by US. US showed the way, and demanded all of us to follow.

USA which is the most powerfull country in the world tells her allies how to build up capitalist world. That world asks for building blocks in low-income social classes which are available in 3rd world countries.

USA system will kill us all. No more northern-euro's in 150 years.
Americans don't like mosques, hello, this country is quite anti-Islam if you weren't aware. :p Besides no one's obligating European countries to adopt the multiculti model and the US is not the most powerful country in the world. Read some more news.

Fact is, millions of Americans are victims to their anti-white/Germanic, Iarael supporting leaders. The USA is not its govt or its foreign policy. How does all this disqualify the US from being Germanic? Germanic isn't about politics. Just cause you don't like what the US does doesn't mean we should stop viewing it as Germanic. By the way Germanic isn't the same as Northern European. Finns are Northern European, but not Germanic. ;)

Hweinlant
Saturday, December 22nd, 2007, 10:47 PM
Fact is, millions of Americans are victims to their anti-white/Germanic, Iarael supporting leaders. The USA is not its govt or its foreign policy. How does all this disqualify the US from being Germanic? Germanic isn't about politics. Just cause you don't like what the US does doesn't mean we should stop viewing it as Germanic. By the way Germanic isn't the same as Northern European. Finns are Northern European, but not Germanic. ;)

US pro-Israeli view doesnt affect world politics ? Strange...

Finnish existance is very much reliable how US see the world, just as Sweden or Denmark.

USA very much dictates the policy of EU. I wish there is change, EU wanted US to join Kioto agreement which US did not, so EU is paying exoencies of US. Climate change will flood more immigrants to Nordic countries, wether germanic or finnic.

US multikulti policy, more blackheads, less us.

Hweinlant
Saturday, December 22nd, 2007, 11:56 PM
Americans don't like mosques, hello, this country is quite anti-Islam if you weren't aware. :p Besides no one's obligating European countries to adopt the multiculti model and the US is not the most powerful country in the world. Read some more news.

Fact is, millions of Americans are victims to their anti-white/Germanic, Iarael supporting leaders. The USA is not its govt or its foreign policy. How does all this disqualify the US from being Germanic? Germanic isn't about politics. Just cause you don't like what the US does doesn't mean we should stop viewing it as Germanic. By the way Germanic isn't the same as Northern European. Finns are Northern European, but not Germanic. ;)


US pro-Israeli view doesnt affect world politics ? Strange...

Finnish existance is very much reliable how US see the world, just as Sweden or Denmark.

USA very much dictates the policy of EU. I wish there is change, EU wanted US to join Kioto agreement which US did not, so EU is paying exoencies of US. Climate change will flood more immigrants to Nordic countries, wether germanic or finnic.

US multikulti policy, more blackheads, less us.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a0HoHjcnHw&feature=related

http://www.alqaidafinland.com/

SwordOfTheVistula
Sunday, December 23rd, 2007, 07:35 AM
USA very much dictates the policy of EU. I wish there is change, EU wanted US to join Kioto agreement which US did not, so EU is paying exoencies of US.

If the US was controlling the EU, wouldn't they have made the EU reject the Kyoto treaty? That would have been good anyways as the Kyoto treaty is a scheme to destroy the economy/industry of 'developed' countries (ie, Germanic ones) and further the wealth transfer to the third world.

http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=157608

Research Confirms Blair Suspicion That Economic Growth Significantly Damaged by Kyoto Framework and Emissions Targets

- Kyoto Targets to Lead to Average Rises of 26% in Electricity Prices Across UK, Italy, Germany and Spain

New research published today (7th November 2005) by the International Council for Capital Formation (ICCF) reveals the broad and significant economic repercussions of adopting Kyoto for the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain - and specifically its impact for each nation on energy prices, economic growth (in terms of GDP) and jobs.

The series of in-depth studies analysed the economic and energy implications of meeting emissions reductions defined under the Kyoto Protocol through an emissions trading regime. An assumption was made that the EU emissions trading scheme will be broadened to cover all sectors, including households and transportation. The studies show a significant rise in energy costs for consumers and businesses.

The research revealed that if the four countries meet their Kyoto emission reduction targets in 2010 they face:

- Increasing energy bills: An average increase in electricity prices of 26% and an average increase of 41% of natural gas prices by 2010 (across UK, Germany, Spain and Italy - see full table in notes to editors)

- Significant job losses: Job losses of at least 200,000 in each of Italy, Germany, UK and Spain to meet Kyoto targets by 2010 - rising to as many as 611,000 in Spain in 2010

- Damage to economy: A significant reduction in GDP below base case levels by 2010: 0.8% for Germany (18.5 billion Euros), 3.1% for Spain (26 billion Euros), 2.1% for Italy (27 billion Euros) and 1.1% for the UK (22 billion Euros)

Taras Bulba
Tuesday, December 25th, 2007, 01:51 AM
USA is the birth of civil rights (not allways a bad thing) which spreaded around the world.

Actually I think it's more fair to say that Berlin is the birthplace of the American Civil Rights movement.

The founder of the Civil Rights Movement, W.E.B. DuBois, actually formulated many of his basic views on the issue of racial equality during his years of study in Berlin.

Then there was the 1934 conference of the World Baptist Alliance in Berlin, in which a certain incident occured that made it into American news reports:


"Treasuring a written promise of freedom of speech from Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels, the Baptists talked about nationalism, war & peace, separation of Church & State. A U. S. Negro heading a delegation of 30 black Baptists was all primed to present a resolution on racial equality."

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,747675,00.html

That American Negro was Reverend Michael King of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, who upon his return from Germany changed his name to Martin Luther King, in honour of the German theologian.




USA builded up the coalition of NATO which demanded Europe to open up for Turks and people like that.

Any member of NATO is free to leave, as the French did under DeGaulle.


You actually think that there were mosques in Germany without US's model ?

Uhhh....yeah:


During World War I, around 15,000 Muslim prisoners of war were interned in Germany, mainly in Berlin. It was here that the first mosque in Germany was established in 1915, although it was removed fifteen years later...In the 1920s, a small but active Muslim community existed in Berlin, mainly students and intellectuals. The ‘El-Djamah ul-Islamye’ (Islamic Community Berlin) was founded in 1922, for example (Abdullah: 1987, 29). In 1924, the first mosque outside of the mosque in the prisoner of war camp was built in Berlin. This mosque was built for the first organised Muslim community in Germany, established by the Indian Imam Maulana Sadr-ud-Din (Abdullah: 1987, 30). In 1927, the Central Institute Islam Archive in Germany was founded, which received legal status in 1942. Finally, in 1932, two further institutes were founded in Berlin: the German section of the Islamic World Congress and the Islam Colloquium, the first Muslim educational institution for children...."

http://www.emz-berlin.de/projekte/pdf/MusPol_Buch.pdf

Gefjon
Tuesday, December 25th, 2007, 06:36 AM
@ Hweinlant you still have failed to explain how foreign policy and all defines being "Germanic" or not. :confused:

exit
Tuesday, December 25th, 2007, 07:53 AM
This country is as Germanic as it can get.

Don't you mean the most Jacobin?

Gefjon
Tuesday, December 25th, 2007, 12:12 PM
Don't you mean the most Jacobin?
Nope. :)

Hweinlant
Wednesday, December 26th, 2007, 12:34 AM
@ Hweinlant you still have failed to explain how foreign policy and all defines being "Germanic" or not. :confused:

Basic policy on environment demands future policy. USA policy only provides policy for money. Germanics shooting eachother, for better washing machines or killing others for better ones. Do you have washing machine ?

Maybe the flats are so good, maybe the good will fit those ones.

Maybe they will not. Maybe they want better tv's so they will get their brains grilled better. Like yours ?

Maybe they will get fucked with their no money lives. With no future lives ?

Maybe they will wote Usaniger wives ?

Maybe they will think that there is a way for live. No more trees, no more nordic dreams.

Maybe it means, burn burn burn. Are we fucking animals or what. Fuck you. Fuck fuck you. Burn Burn Burn.

No more Nordic forests, no more living dreams.

I will go to fucking Nicgaragua! I will go to fucking Nicagarua!

Burn Burn Burn!

So ; is this nice :) Did you want this, really , for life :) . American dream , lice, American dream , twice.

Loyalist
Wednesday, December 26th, 2007, 01:10 AM
I'm willing to bet this Finn will be leaving the forum very soon.

Hweinlant
Wednesday, December 26th, 2007, 01:23 AM
I'm willing to bet this Finn will be leaving the forum very soon.

I guess we will see that soon, hypocrite.

http://www.penttilinkola.com/

SineNomine
Wednesday, December 26th, 2007, 02:21 AM
I'm willing to bet this Finn will be leaving the forum very soon.
Same here. :)

Hweinlant
Friday, December 28th, 2007, 11:46 PM
Same here. :)

My only point was only to point a USA Germanic culture as Hip Hop... There are worse lyrics against the Northern Euro's and Germanics in everyday lyrics I hear everyday. Sory if you were offended. Talk to your Germanic label bosses.. wait they are ...

Göttinger
Saturday, December 29th, 2007, 06:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boche
The United States nowadays as a Germanic Country? My answer is No.
The United States has alot of germanic people, and probably also alot of them have germanic traditions and germanic values.
But the whole United States as itself is nothing i'd call germanic.
Gruß,
Boche


=================


You'r probably going to say the same about Germany after couple of decades, right?

America is nothing but Germanic state, the current demographic development is unfortunate but nothing really different than is expected to happen in Europe. The fact is that Jewish, African-Americans or Hispanics will never be Americans in the true meaning of the word. America is Germanic because its legal system and every institutions is of Germanic origins, simple as that!


Is Berlin a Turkish city? I do not think so, even though there are many Turks living there.

The present day USA is no more a Germanic state than Berlin is a Turkish city.

And we do not have to wait a couple of decades to say that Germany is not a German state. Since the very beginning of the Federal Republic, it has been an OMF (Organizational form of a Modality of Foreign rule). This OMF term was made up by Professor Carlo Schmidt to describe the FRG.

If anything, the USA is a Jewish state with Jewish media and 100% Jewish rhetoric and values in the public space. Hoaxoco$t museums have proliferated like poisonous mushrooms. Political control is 100% Jewish with braindead goyim dying in wars for Isrealhell. And spineless wannabe politicos trying to "outjew one another" to get campaign money. Before anyone goes berserk, let me point out that the phrase "outjew one another" was publicly used by a famous Jew journalist. I am just passing on his wise insight.

If a person lives in a small town in the USA and never attended a large university, they might have a different view. I lived in northern cities and attended universities there. It has turned into an intellectual, moral, and cultural sewer IMHO. Once "the land of the free and the home of the brave", it has become "the land of the freak and the home of the knave." (Phrase quoted from a famous Jew activist)

Why on God`s good earth would any "Germanic preservationist" want to call that Germanic?

Æmeric
Tuesday, February 12th, 2008, 09:47 PM
I don't think you get to determine whose land it is. What did you do, personally, to help build the US? That's right, nothing. If we're going to get into it, blacks were used for their labour for hundreds of years, I think they're more deserving to stay in the US than someone in your position.


Their forefathers did "something". In fact they often were forced to work for the benefit of others and gained very little in return for themselves and their families. Black people work. Blacks are in the army and die for this country.

Mischak , why are you acting as a pro-Negro advocate. And a pro-Mexican advocate. You seem to care little or anything for the Whites or Germanics. Why do you feel the need to be their spokesperson. It just seems odd.

Letting Negroes stay in the US is just advocating multiculturalism. That is what you would have from allowing White & Black sociaties exist side-by-side. Establishing them in their own homeland - whether in Africa or Brazil - would seem to be the best solution for us. I don't know about them. Leaving them at the mercy of one another might be considered cruel.


According to the statistics, whites form the largest racial group on welfare;

These are the latest statitstics I could find on the subject;


Race
--------------
White 38.8%
Black 37.2
Hispanic 17.8
Asian 2.8
Other 3.4


Whites make up 2/3 of the population. Blacks make approximately 13%. I'm not sure if the figures include all welfare programs e.g. ADC, housing for the elderly etc...


You need to get a grip on reality.

Take your own advice.


It doesn't change the fact that are there millions of useless whites on welfare, so how do you know who is personally taking your tax dollars? They will get taken regardless of how many blacks or whites are on it.
Blacks use nearly as much welfare as Whites despite there only being 1/5 as many of them as Whites. Whites account for 38 cents of every dollar spent on welfare. Proportionately Whites are not as great as a problem as other groups.




There are non-Germanic whites, good luck with getting the government to cut them off too.

Many of the non-Germanic Whites have assimilated. They are not a problem from a racial pov.

OneEnglishNorman
Tuesday, February 12th, 2008, 10:32 PM
Letting Negroes stay in the US is just advocating multiculturalism. That is what you would have from allowing White & Black sociaties exist side-by-side.

Why?

Italians and Danes co-exist on a much smaller piece of land. Their geographical closeness does not imply wholesale mixing. American whites and blacks can live separate lives without resorting to the thuggish act of banishing blacks overseas.

It is not white Americans' land exclusively. Their story is similar to that of blacks. Both arrived from elsewhere.

Æmeric
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 12:24 AM
Italians and Danes co-exist on a much smaller piece of land. Their geographical closeness does not imply wholesale mixing. Not a good comparison. Italians & Danes are much more closely related then Europeans & Africans. And Denmark & Italy have never been part of the same state, unless you count the EU.

American whites and blacks can live separate lives without resorting to the thuggish act of banishing blacks overseas.

Again you are showing your ignorance of US social history. Whites & Blacks use to live in seperate neighborhoods but Negroes sued to have restricitive convenents declared unconstitutional. Because of an patholigical need to have & destroy what belong to Whites. We still lived mainly in seperate communities, the differnece is the Negro communities were once decent White communities that became sh*tholes after they went Black.The same thing happened to our public schools. Negroes are opposed to Whites having anything just for Whites. And sending Negroes overseas is not thuggish. It's the only solution to the survival of America as a White nation & to revatilize it as a Germanic nation. Giving Negroes compensation to start over away from Whitie's racism, which according to some people is the root cause of the Negro's problem, is not thuggery but buying our way out of a racial mess that has gone on far too long. And I think offering $50,000 to $100,000 apiece, while at the same time cutting off all welfare & free social services to Negroes & repealing all civil rights & anti-discrimination laws would lead most ot accept the offer.


It is not white Americans' land exclusively. Their story is similar to that of blacks. Both arrived from elsewhere.

Yes it is. Except what we let the Indians retain. Negroes didn't built this country. And they don't deserve any of it. And the story of the English & other Germanics in this country is in no way similar to that of Negroes. Negroes could never have built the world's largest economy on their own or built a nation that others would want to settle in by the millions. If Negroes had had the kind of input in developing America as you seem to suggest the US would be more like Zaire or Haiti.

Btw, you are still preaching & advocating on behalf of US Negroes & what White Americans owe them, but you never addressed the issue of the demographic messes left by the British around the globe that I brought up. Not that I expected you to.

OneEnglishNorman
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 01:20 AM
Not a good comparison. Italians & Danes are much more closely related then Europeans & Africans. And Denmark & Italy have never been part of the same state, unless you count the EU.

It serves the purpose of demonstrating geographical closeness of two different populations. Both nations exercise choice over who can enter on live on their territory. There is no reason why whites and blacks cannot live separately on the same landmass and arrange their own affairs.



Yes it is. Except what we let the Indians retain. Negroes didn't built this country. And they don't deserve any of it.

Not any of it? Absolutely no input whatsoever? Do Jews "deserve" proportionately more than Germanic Americans, as Jews are more economically productive and commit less crime? Blacks have mixed their labour with the land the same as whites, have lived there practically as long as the white population, are alien as are whites are, to that part of the world. For one to kick out the other is ridiculous.

Æmeric
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 01:39 AM
Not any of it? Absolutely no input whatsoever? Do Jews "deserve" proportionately more than Germanic Americans, as Jews are more economically productive and commit less crime? Blacks have mixed their labour with the land the same as whites, have lived there practically as long as the white population, are alien as are whites are, to that part of the world. For one to kick out the other is ridiculous.

Jews don't deserve any of it. Jews have tradionally been a middleman minority or parasitic race, whatever you want to call them. Jews settled in the US in large numbers because it was a properous Germanic country. The same reason they flocked to Holland, Germany, & Victorian Britain. They didn't built it or create the wealth, they simply took advantage of it. Israel would not be able to function economically or militarily without US aid. They are dependent on Germanics for their survival. Before us the took advantage of the Spaniards & Slavs.

I find it ironic that at a Germanic forum you advocating on behalf of Jews, the most anti-Germanic race on the planet. The arguments you make on their behalf are typical of US liberals & multiculturalists who make excuses for Negro anti-social behavior, praise the Jews as an illustrious upstanding race, speak of the (non-White) immigrant as though they were some kind of holy persons & always try to hamper attempts by Euro-Americans or Germanic-Americans to form a racial conscious or pursue an agenda on their own behalf.

Geribeetus
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 02:23 AM
Why?

Italians and Danes co-exist on a much smaller piece of land. Their geographical closeness does not imply wholesale mixing. American whites and blacks can live separate lives without resorting to the thuggish act of banishing blacks overseas.

Danes and Italians actually are both part of the same race (Indo-European), and actually don't live next each other. Nice try though. And how is the act of 'banishing blacks overseas' any different than banishing Muslims overseas? Because they've only been here 30 years (after you destroyed their countries)?


It is not white Americans' land exclusively. Their story is similar to that of blacks. Both arrived from elsewhere.

It isn't anyone's land exclusively because its former inhabitants are dead. Thus, the people best able to take/keep and run it should therefore have it. That doesn't seem to be blacks.

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 06:01 AM
[Moderation note: thread has been split and merged from here (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=4797).]


Mischak , why are you acting as a pro-Negro advocate. And a pro-Mexican advocate. You seem to care little or anything for the Whites or Germanics. Why do you feel the need to be their spokesperson. It just seems odd.

Letting Negroes stay in the US is just advocating multiculturalism. That is what you would have from allowing White & Black sociaties exist side-by-side. Establishing them in their own homeland - whether in Africa or Brazil - would seem to be the best solution for us. I don't know about them. Leaving them at the mercy of one another might be considered cruel.

I will repeat this again. The US is not a Germanic land. If you want to see true Germanic culture take a trip over to the Netherlands or Germany and spend more than a week visiting tourist hot spots, just my suggestion. The US isn't even comparable to Germanic lands. Europeans should be in Europe. I am no one's "spokesperson", it's just laughable and a typical American elitist attitude thinking you have the authority to push around millions of people and then shove them in lands which are already established and completely foreign and independent. I'm sure the white Brazilians will appreciate it.


Take your own advice.I do. I'm not stuck in some world trying to convince myself and everyone else around me that a state built on multiculturalism is "Anglo". Even if it weren't built on multiculturalism, England and the US are drastically different in almost every way aside from language. Anyone who's spent any extended amount of time in both places can attest to this. Speaking English and having some English ancestors does not make an entire nation "Anglo". You're stuck in 1800.




@ Mischak: America was clearly not built on multiculturalism. And I absolutely understand that England and America are vastly different culturally however that doesn't mean that America isn't "American" which as already stated is not based on multiculturalism and is entirely separate from "Afro-American" or "Latino-American".

I never said it was built on (non-white) racial multiculturalism. If America were not a perfect example of multiculturalism gone horribly wrong we wouldn't have most of the white population mixed with, on average, at least 3 different European ethnicities.

Also, I suggest you visit the South. Blacks have been a part of the South just long as whites, and it is especially apparent in their "culture".

Soten
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 06:35 AM
I never said it was built on (non-white) racial multiculturalism. If America were not a perfect example of multiculturalism gone horribly wrong we wouldn't have most of the white population mixed with, on average, at least 3 different European ethnicities.

Also, I suggest you visit the South. Blacks have been a part of the South just long as whites, and it is especially apparent in their "culture".

You certainly hinted at the idea that the US was built on multiculturalism...and then again you state that America is a perfect example of multiculturalism gone horribly wrong. I am 10+ European ethnicities and I don't know sh*t about 3 quarters of them at the very least. I'm American...not European. Oh the contradictions! But Soten you share blood with Englishmen, Germans, Irish, Welsh, Scots, Swiss, Dutch, Lithuanians, French, and Wallonians?!?!? But I would not fit in amongst any of those ethnic groups the way I fit in amongst Americans of European descent. I say once again that I share much more common cultural ties with most so-called "White" Americans than I do with "Afro-Americans" or any other sub-group. My family, like so many, has adopted an American culture. This American culture that my most recent Lithuanian ancestors adopted was begun by people like my earliest American ancestors who stepped off the Mayflower in 1620. If you do not feel any connection to America, if you feel it is a free-for-all no-man's-land, go the hell back...and try to be accepted by the people you believe are more common to you. Good luck.

And I have been to the South. It is one of the nicest places I have been. I do not know what part of the South you have been to but I certainly did not see any Negro influence on their culture down there. Unless you mean to say you saw Negroes around. Surely, they have Negroes, and those Negroes have their culture but the two groups have in my opinion not mixed nearly as much as you suggest.

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:15 AM
My family, like so many, has adopted an American culture. This American culture that my most recent Lithuanian ancestors adopted was begun by people like my earliest American ancestors who stepped off the Mayflower in 1620. If you do not feel any connection to America, if you feel it is a free-for-all no-man's-land, go the hell back...and try to be accepted by the people you believe are more common to you. Good luck.

American "culture":rolleyes:.

I've already "been back" and I don't have to look for acceptance. I am who I am and I pretend to be nothing. When you're genuine there is nothing to "try" for, acceptance isn't needed, but thanks anyway. :)


And I have been to the South. It is one of the nicest places I have been. I do not know what part of the South you have been to but I certainly did not see any Negro influence on their culture down there. Unless you mean to say you saw Negroes around. Surely, they have Negroes, and those Negroes have their culture but the two groups have in my opinion not mixed nearly as much as you suggest.

Well, 99% of people are going to disagree with you there. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

The Culture of the Southern United States or Southern Culture is a subculture of the United States that has resulted from the blending of a heavy amount of English, Scottish/Scots-Irish culture, the culture of African slaves, Native American culture, and to a lesser degree that of French and Spanish colonists. Southerners have a unique shared history, which includes remembrance of difficult times such as the institution of slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction, the Great Depression, segregation and the Civil Rights Movement, and more recent events or tragedies such as Hurricane Katrina.

The South also hosts a vibrant African American subculture, a sense of rural isolation, and a strong regional identity. It has also developed its own customs, literature, musical styles (such as country music, bluegrass, southern gospel, rock and roll, blues and jazz), and cuisine. This unique cultural and historical blend has caused many scholars such as sociologist John Shelton Reed to speculate that Southerners are a separate ethnic group. [1]

Æmeric
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 03:02 PM
I will repeat this again. The US is not a Germanic land. If you want to see true Germanic culture take a trip over to the Netherlands or Germany and spend more than a week visiting tourist hot spots, just my suggestion. The US isn't even comparable to Germanic lands. Europeans should be in Europe. I am no one's "spokesperson", it's just laughable and a typical American elitist attitude thinking you have the authority to push around millions of people and then shove them in lands which are already established and completely foreign and independent. I'm sure the white Brazilians will appreciate it.

I do. I'm not stuck in some world trying to convince myself and everyone else around me that a state built on multiculturalism is "Anglo". Even if it weren't built on multiculturalism, England and the US are drastically different in almost every way aside from language. Anyone who's spent any extended amount of time in both places can attest to this. Speaking English and having some English ancestors does not make an entire nation "Anglo". You're stuck in 1800.

The US was a Germanic land. Until the mid-19th century there was no significant non-Germanic immigration from Europe.The rural areas outside the South were settlers by Anglo-Saxons, Germans, Scandinavians & remained that way until the 90s. The south was settled by English, Ulster-Scots & Germans. The Slaves were not part of the political nation until the 60s & defacto & legal segregation kept the two societies apart. They were not the original inhabitants of cities like Chicago or Detroit. The US may not be a cultural the European nations, but the natiuonjs of Europe are not the same to each other, so why should the US by exactly like any one of them? By blood, it was & still is a majority (barely) Germanic & European nation. It is certainly closer to England & Holland then it is to Jamaica or Guatemala. And the Germanic nations of Euroipe all have a fair amount of non-Germanic non-Europeans inhabitants. Are you going to call them non-Germanic because London & Berlin or teeming with Muslims & Africans?

The purpose of this thread is to discuss ways of Germanic preservation, of moving away from multiracialism & multiculturalism.

Mrs. Lyfing
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 03:47 PM
Well, 99% of people are going to disagree with you there. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

The Culture of the Southern United States or Southern Culture is a subculture of the United States that has resulted from the blending of a heavy amount of English, Scottish/Scots-Irish culture, the culture of African slaves, Native American culture, and to a lesser degree that of French and Spanish colonists. Southerners have a unique shared history, which includes remembrance of difficult times such as the institution of slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction, the Great Depression, segregation and the Civil Rights Movement, and more recent events or tragedies such as Hurricane Katrina.


This unique cultural and historical blend has caused many scholars such as sociologist John Shelton Reed to speculate that Southerners are a separate ethnic group.

Let me inform you on some things about the South.

I have been here all 26 years of my life & this is what I see with my eyes.
Some of the southern states may have a more African American set up, I grew up in Tennessee...not Louisiana or Mississippi or Atlanta, were many of them reside. I don't know whats going on there but I can tell ya what goes on here. Both in Alabama & Tennessee. Nashville,Tn is the home of country music, Nashville has a very White set up although there are blacks around. Most people you find around there are in the country music business, not to many blacks in that business ;) A lot of the blacks in Nashville & surrounding towns are usually either 2 things. They are selling drugs/involved in crime....or they have a career & a family. There are some well educated blacks in Tennessee.

The quote above bothers me ...well, this one:

The South also hosts a vibrant African American subculture, a sense of rural isolation, and a strong regional identity.[/B] It has also developed its own customs, literature, musical styles (such as country music, bluegrass, southern gospel, rock and roll, blues and jazz), and cuisine.

The only thing listed there that pertains to blacks is blues & jazz :confused: which whites play as well.

I am not denying they are here, of coarse they are, they are different, they will always be different from whites.

The point is tho, the south is not just a set up for blacks, if you think that you are WRONG. Take a drive through the country side, take a look at all the farms, the farmers, the middle class family trying to make it, the good ol' country boys, the men on tractors, the family owned businesses, the mom & pop restaurants, the men who work for the city, the people who still grow all their own vegetables, its hunting USA, the deer processing stores ..;), the men out on boats fishing, the teachers at schools, & most of all your typical southern white family, were both parents work all day, take their kids to soccer, dance, & to every Tennessee Titan football game....they are all white, living the American life. There is so much pride in the Southern White American it would blow you away!

So, there is the south in my eyes.

Now, lets continue with what my eyes don't wanna see.

White women with Mexicans.
Mexicans.
White women with black men.
Muslims.
A white boy riding in his Sub-urban jamming the 50 cent ( many times will be beside the country boy in his big ol' pick up truck jamming to George Jones :p)
Sand N*ggers owning all the convenient stores.
Crack Heads

Yea, thats in the south too, but it damn sure don't make up the South, & it doesn't make us more black, funny thing is, blacks wanna fly South, where more racists are. ;)

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 04:07 PM
I will repeat this again. The US is not a Germanic land. If you want to see true Germanic culture take a trip over to the Netherlands or Germany and spend more than a week visiting tourist hot spots, just my suggestion. The US isn't even comparable to Germanic lands.
I was born and lived in a Germanic country in Europe, been there numerous times and have relatives there and I can tell ya that the US is no less Germanic than Germany. Multiculturalism exists there too, just go through Berlin and you'll find a small version of Turkey.


Europeans should be in Europe.
Shoulda, woulda, coulda. Who says that Europeans can't relocate in other countries? Germanics have done this since the beginning of time, heard of the Völkerwanderung?


I never said it was built on (non-white) racial multiculturalism. If America were not a perfect example of multiculturalism gone horribly wrong we wouldn't have most of the white population mixed with, on average, at least 3 different European ethnicities.
And European ethnicites ain't mixed? Heard of ethnogenesis? There's Celtic influence in many Germanic countries. With all the tribes roaming through Europe, nobody there's pure either. I've encountered this myth of pure Europeanness on other sites too and it's been my observation that it's mainly the delusionate thinking of self-hating, European-wannabe American folks.
American is as much an identity as German or Dutch.


Also, I suggest you visit the South. Blacks have been a part of the South just long as whites, and it is especially apparent in their "culture".
I and my sister live in two different Southern states and there isn't significant Negro influence on their culture. Folks over here in fact are still racist and don't embrace Negroes like folks on this site do.


American "culture":rolleyes:.

I've already "been back" and I don't have to look for acceptance. I am who I am and I pretend to be nothing. When you're genuine there is nothing to "try" for, acceptance isn't needed, but thanks anyway. :)
I suggest you move there for good if you hate this country so much. You might have an unpleasant surprise with European nationalists. They don't accept Americans as European. Even I ain't called European by German nationalists, though I am one by birth.


Well, 99% of people are going to disagree with you there. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.
So cause the majority would disagree with him it means he's wrong? Great logic.


The Culture of the Southern United States or Southern Culture is a subculture of the United States that has resulted from the blending of a heavy amount of English, Scottish/Scots-Irish culture, the culture of African slaves, Native American culture, and to a lesser degree that of French and Spanish colonists. Southerners have a unique shared history, which includes remembrance of difficult times such as the institution of slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction, the Great Depression, segregation and the Civil Rights Movement, and more recent events or tragedies such as Hurricane Katrina.

The South also hosts a vibrant African American subculture, a sense of rural isolation, and a strong regional identity. It has also developed its own customs, literature, musical styles (such as country music, bluegrass, southern gospel, rock and roll, blues and jazz), and cuisine. This unique cultural and historical blend has caused many scholars such as sociologist John Shelton Reed to speculate that Southerners are a separate ethnic group. [1]
You should state your source. Let me guess, Wikipedia? LOL. Yeah, Wikipedia is a very unbiased source when it comes to race issues. :D

Soten
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 04:22 PM
Well, 99% of people are going to disagree with you there. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

The Culture of the Southern United States or Southern Culture is a subculture of the United States that has resulted from the blending of a heavy amount of English, Scottish/Scots-Irish culture, the culture of African slaves, Native American culture, and to a lesser degree that of French and Spanish colonists. Southerners have a unique shared history, which includes remembrance of difficult times such as the institution of slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction, the Great Depression, segregation and the Civil Rights Movement, and more recent events or tragedies such as Hurricane Katrina.

The South also hosts a vibrant African American subculture, a sense of rural isolation, and a strong regional identity. It has also developed its own customs, literature, musical styles (such as country music, bluegrass, southern gospel, rock and roll, blues and jazz), and cuisine. This unique cultural and historical blend has caused many scholars such as sociologist John Shelton Reed to speculate that Southerners are a separate ethnic group. [1]

Yes, this is the kind of crap I've seen in multicultural works. A "unique shared history"?
Hey Gus, remember that time when your great-granddaddy lynched my great-granddaddy? Why I sure do, Jamal! And wasn't that some fun but nowadays we can look back in mutual love and understanding because of our unique shared history as a people.

I'm pretty sure Southern Blacks and Southern Whites would both cringe (or more probably burst out with laughter) at someone attempting to say they have a shared history "which includes remembrance of difficult times such as the institution of slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction, the Great Depression, segregation and the Civil Rights Movement, and more recent events or tragedies such as Hurricane Katrina". Are you serious? :confused:

I also enjoy how at the end of the quote it states at least one guy who thinks that Southerners (presumably Blacks included :confused:) are a single ethnic group. I'd buy that White Southerners are a single ethnic group but there's no way in hell both Black Southerners and White Southerners form one ethnicity. When's the last time you heard of someone discriminate against someone else who was of the same ethnicity on ethnic grounds?

If Southerners are an ethnic group then they would be much more inclined to accept White Americans from outside of the South as sharing a common ethnicity rather than Blacks I would think...

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 04:44 PM
I was born and lived in a Germanic country in Europe, been there numerous times and have relatives there and I can tell ya that the US is no less Germanic than Germany. Multiculturalism exists there too, just go through Berlin and you'll find a small version of Turkey.

I'll let someone else address that one later.


Shoulda, woulda, coulda.

Same could be said for importation and now the deportation of blacks :rolleyes:


American is as much an identity as German or Dutch.

No. American isn't an ethnicity. And last time I checked Raven wasn't even allowing it in the ethnicity field.


I and my sister live in two different Southern states and there isn't significant Negro influence on their culture. Folks over here in fact are still racist and don't embrace Negroes like folks on this site do.

All I can say is if you're going to flat out deny it then you're just being hopeful.


I suggest you move there for good if you hate this country so much. You might have an unpleasant surprise with European nationalists. They don't accept Americans as European. Even I ain't called European by German nationalists, though I am one by birth.

I never said I "hated" anything. I'm usually more neutral on the subject than anything, tbh. Considering I'm not a "nationalist" to begin with, I don't care how anyone judges me.


So cause the majority would disagree with him it means he's wrong? Great logic.

Yes.


You should state your source. Let me guess, Wikipedia? LOL. Yeah, Wikipedia is a very unbiased source when it comes to race issues. :D

Anything you provide, including your personal opinion, is going to be just as biased if not more.

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 05:14 PM
Same could be said for importation and now the deportation of blacks :rolleyes:
Yes, they shouldn't have imported blacks, but now that they did, whites must undo the crap they started.


No. American isn't an ethnicity.
Yes it is. Ethnicity is a social construct.


The classification of a population that shares common characteristics, such as religion, traditions, culture, language, and tribal or national origin.

a basis for social categories that are rooted in socially perceived differences in national origin, language, and/or religion.



And last time I checked Raven wasn't even allowing it in the ethnicity field.
Bullshit.


All I can say is if you're going to flat out deny it then you're just being hopeful.
Have you lived here for a significant amount of time? Mrs. Lyfing also disagrees with you and she's lived in the South. We have experience there, not being hopeful. But of course, folks who lived here are the ignorants and you're the authority on the subject. :D


I never said I "hated" anything. I'm usually more neutral on the subject than anything, tbh.
Yep, we've seen just how "netural" you are in this thread. :)


Considering I'm not a "nationalist" to begin with, I don't care how anyone judges me.
Good for you.


Yes.
:confused:
Ok, mischak, since you want to play this game, then the majortiy of folks here voted for repatriation and agree with the stuff you disagree with. So going by your "logic", you are wrong.

Quod erat demonstrandum.


Anything you provide, including your personal opinion, is going to be just as biased if not more.
It's not just my "opinion", it's my first hand experience. :)

Æmeric
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 05:25 PM
No. American isn't an ethnicity. And last time I checked Raven wasn't even allowing it in the ethnicity field.


It is an ethnicity. It might not be an option at the Althing, but the US Census Bureau allows it. Use mostly by persons descended from colonial era settlers in northern New England & the South, areas bypassed by non-Germanic immigration & where non-Whites or non-Germanics were historically not viewed as "American" but at best some kind of hyphened-American.



Well, 99% of people are going to disagree with you there. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

It seems most people disagree with you mischak.


Partition 1 - 3.70%
Repatriation 25 - 92.59%
Apartheid 1 - 3.7%


I noticed you didn't vote mischak.

Soten
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 05:37 PM
No. American isn't an ethnicity. And last time I checked Raven wasn't even allowing it in the ethnicity field.


If American isn't an ethnicity then what would someone like me, or every other American (despite how much they may want to be something else), state their ethnicity as. Saying Anglo-American or German-American etc is in my opinion not sufficient unless you are an immigrant or the child of an immigrant. There are very few cases of (name any European ethnicity)-Americans compared to the rest of Americans of European descent.

To say that every American citizen belongs to that ethnic group that their ancestors belonged to shows a misunderstanding of the term "ethnicity". Blood plays an important role, no doubt, but there are numerous other factors. Plus, many white Americans obviously do share blood with one another. Americans have a shared history and certainly feel more like they belong with other Americans than with any Europeans and rightly so. A so-called Anglo-American and a German-American are considered outsiders in either England or Germany but the two would in most cases not regard each other as foreign and could get along just fine because of the fact that they have so much in common.

The only thing I could understand as a rejection of the idea of a shared history between "white" Americans is the Civil War. But even that is largely viewed as a conflict between a single people...the whole brother against brother idea. I have ancestors who fought on both sides, Union and Confederate, and that is not too uncommon for Americans.

But anyway, could you give any logical answer to the question What defines an American's ethnicity? , if they are not simply American, African-American (since they differ from their African ancestors just as much as Americans differ from Europeans), etc?

skyhawk
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 05:58 PM
It seems most people disagree with you mischak.


Partition 1 - 3.70%
Repatriation 25 - 92.59%
Apartheid 1 - 3.7%

There is a big world out there and I don't think that TheAlthing is reflective of the national opinion. That is not meant as a criticism of the people here who post , it's just an observation with relevence to the disagreement over the statistics of the vote.
If you put the same poll on a Left Wing forum , or indeed a national forum ( all political bents ) I think you would find that most people do not believe that repatriation is a viable , or even an acceptable , means of dealing with the problems of a multicultural society.




I noticed you didn't vote mischak. Is that because integration isn't listed as an option?

I didn't vote either , I thought the choice was too narrow minded.

And only 25 people have voted on the subject. I don't know how many members there are here but 25 in know way could be interpreted as " most people " even here. Sometimes silence can tell you a great deal

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 06:02 PM
There is a big world out there and I don't think that TheAlthing is reflective of the national opinion. That is not meant as a criticism of the people here who post , it's just an observation with relevence to the disagreement over the statistics of the vote.
If you put the same poll on a Left Wing forum , or indeed a national forum ( all political bents ) I think you would find that most people do not believe that repatriation is a viable , or even an acceptable , means of dealing with the problems of a multicultural society.



I didn't vote either , I thought the choice was too narrow minded.
What is your viable means of dealing with the problems of a multicultural society, skyhawk? Same question to the rest who defended the US blacks. We've heard how allegedly wrong we are and how allegedly right you are, so let's hear it. What do you propose as a means to obtain racial preservation?

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 06:15 PM
Yes it is. Ethnicity is a social construct.


The classification of a population that shares common characteristics, such as religion, traditions, culture, language, and tribal or national origin.

a basis for social categories that are rooted in socially perceived differences in national origin, language, and/or religion.


Bullshit.

There are non-white Americans.

And if it's such "bullshit" then ask why it wasn't permitted on this forum.


Have you lived here for a significant amount of time? Mrs. Lyfing also disagrees with you and she's lived in the South. We have experience there, not being hopeful. But of course, folks who lived here are the ignorants and you're the authority on the subject. :D

I never said I was the authority, but you sure do like to act like one.


Good for you.

I know :)


:confused:
Ok, mischak, since you want to play this game, then the majortiy of folks here voted for repatriation and agree with the stuff you disagree with. So going by your "logic", you are wrong.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

Good thing you account for very little of society then huh? ;)


It's not just my "opinion", it's my first hand experience. :)

Experience doesn't make it factual.



It seems most people disagree with you mischak.

It seems that the two aren't even comparable and your poll isn't even relevant to what I was talking about.


I noticed you didn't vote mischak. Is that because integration isn't listed as an option?

It was a silly poll, imo.

Btw, I am only referring to the US. Of course non-Europeans should leave Europe. The "colonies" aren't of concern to me.

skyhawk
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 06:15 PM
What is your viable means of dealing with the problems of a multicultural society, skyhawk? Same question to the rest who defended the US blacks. We've heard how allegedly wrong we are and how allegedly right you are, so let's hear it. What do you propose as a means to obtain racial preservation?

You , and many others here wouldn't like where I think the best course of action to take concerning the multicultural situation.

And if I was to tell you my thoughts , you would instantly reject them on the grounds of following the same stereotypical notions you have displayed towards the blacks in the US question.

It is not a criticism just an unfortunate truth.

Is that evasive enough for you ? :D

Seriously though , I do think there are different courses to take , if we can only free our minds from the media indoctrination so rampant in the West.

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 06:25 PM
There are non-white Americans.
Just like there are "German Jews". ;)


And if it's such "bullshit" then ask why it wasn't permitted on this forum.
I did and it's permitted. Don't confuse American for white/Aryan. :)


I never said I was the authority, but you sure do like to act like one.
I offered my views from my experience, from what I've lived here, not from fairy tales I've read in Wikipedia articles.


Good thing you account for very little of society then huh? ;)
It's actually a pity that more folks don't think like me. If it were a good thing, the white race wouldn't be in the crappy situation it is today.


Experience doesn't make it factual.
But a Wikipedia article does. I rest my case. :D


You , and many others here wouldn't like where I think the best course of action to take concerning the multicultural situation.

And if I was to tell you my thoughts , you would instantly reject them on the grounds of following the same stereotypical notions you have displayed towards the blacks in the US question.

It is not a criticism just an unfortunate truth.

Is that evasive enough for you ? :D

Seriously though , I do think there are different courses to take , if we can only free our minds from the media indoctrination so rampant in the West.
Such as? That doesn'y really answer my question. I don't have to like it, I'm genuinely curious how you folks think you can achieve racial preservation without repatriating the nonwhites.

Soten
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 06:27 PM
There are non-white Americans.

And if it's such "bullshit" then ask why it wasn't permitted on this forum.


I know :confused:, they're African-Americans, Native Americans, etc. and the majority of them are completely different culturally from the majority of Americans. Not to speak of the fact that we (Americans) wouldn't consider African-Americans as Americans in the ethnic sense of the word in any case. How does that refute the claim that American is an ethnicity in any way?

Well, I managed to get away with changing my ethnicity option to American so far, we'll see what happens. If it really isn't allowed for some odd reason I would like to hear why.

skyhawk
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 06:48 PM
Such as? That doesn'y really answer my question. I don't have to like it, I'm genuinely curious how you folks think you can achieve racial preservation without repatriating the nonwhites.

I will put it forward in another thread , it 's too much of a thread split danger.

Besides I am disappearing to indulge in a spot of good old tribalism right now.

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 06:58 PM
Btw, I am only referring to the US. Of course non-Europeans should leave Europe. The "colonies" aren't of concern to me.
You're American. What non-whites in Europe should do is the business of European folks on this site.

Boche
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:17 PM
What non-whites in Europe should do is the business of European folks on this site.

Americans who say they're germanic have to care about their Roots, and their Roots are in European Countries. In my Opinion, Europe is more important than America simply because of the Roots of Germanic Culture, the different and unique Ethnicities who originated here and Europe holds all Treasure of Germanic People. Europe is the Cradle of Germanics. There is European Blood in every American.
Every American should do something for the Countries their Ancestors had fought for and shed their blood on for many many Centuries.
Americans should support and protect the Cradle they came from.




Gruß,
Boche

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:21 PM
Americans who say they're germanic have to care about their Roots, and their Roots are in European Countries. In my Opinion, Europe is more important than America simply because of the Roots of Germanic Culture, the different and unique Ethnicities who originated here and Europe holds all Treasure of Germanic People. Europe is the Cradle of Germanics. There is European Blood in every American.
Every American should do something for the Countries their Ancestors had fought for and shed their blood on for many many Centuries.
Americans should support and protect the Cradle they came from.




Gruß,
Boche
I didn't say they don't have to care about their roots but European nationalists generally find it offensive when Americans who have only been to Europe limitedly, as tourists or guests tell them how they should solve their problems especially when these Americans are European wannabes. Those who spilt on their country which is the US and not Europe are a threat and enemy to racial preservation in America. They're nothing but self-haters with an identity crisis.

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:22 PM
You're American. What non-whites in Europe should do is the business of European folks on this site.

Who are you to tell me what's my business? "American" is nothing more than a badge of citizenship to me. Also, considering my boyfriend is from Europe, someone who I plan on eventually having children with, children that will be born and raised in Europe, I think that makes it my business.

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:27 PM
Who are you to tell me what's my business? "American" is nothing more than a badge of citizenship to me.
American is an identity. Go to stirpes.net and see if European nationalists accept you as European.


Also, considering my boyfriend is from Europe, someone who I plan on eventually having children with, children that will be born and raised in Europe, I think that makes it my business.
Very convenient for you if you leave this country, you don't care whether it gets swamped by non-whites, no wonder you support Negro rights. It's the same attitude as if I said, hah Germans should build mosques for the Turks and instate Sharia, why'd I care anyway since I left the country. :rolleyes: You don't want to live among non-whites in Europe, but you think Americans should. Such an attitude is called hypocrisy where I come from.

OneEnglishNorman
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:28 PM
Jews don't deserve any of it. Jews have tradionally been a middleman minority or parasitic race, whatever you want to call them. Jews settled in the US in large numbers because it was a properous Germanic country. The same reason they flocked to Holland, Germany, & Victorian Britain. They didn't built it or create the wealth, they simply took advantage of it.

Jews in the 20th Century have performed all manner of occupations. Jews settled also because of persecution and the chance for a better life away from backward regimes. There is a problem with the Israel lobby. Yet the vast majority of American Jews are ordinary working people just like everybody else.

I won't bother to post links to research on Ashkenazi IQ. Needless to say, Jews are as or more so, economically and academically successful than European Americans. They continue to create wealth.



Israel would not be able to function economically or militarily without US aid. They are dependent on Germanics for their survival. Before us the took advantage of the Spaniards & Slavs.

Israel is in a unique situation. If the question is, "can Jews build and maintain a peaceful and prosperous nation state"? The answer is undoubtedly yes. I support a Jewish homeland, it is preservationist in essence which I like.



I find it ironic that at a Germanic forum you advocating on behalf of Jews, the most anti-Germanic race on the planet. The arguments you make on their behalf are typical of US liberals & multiculturalists who make excuses for Negro anti-social behavior, praise the Jews as an illustrious upstanding race, speak of the (non-White) immigrant as though they were some kind of holy persons & always try to hamper attempts by Euro-Americans or Germanic-Americans to form a racial conscious or pursue an agenda on their own behalf. From the arguments you've made on behalf of Negroes & now Jews you are starting to sound like a troll.

The issue here was the science fiction of deporting African Americans. It is morally bankrupt and probably unworkable.

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:33 PM
The issue here was the science fiction of deporting African Americans. It is morally bankrupt and probably unworkable.
So you like morality I see. Then maybe you could explain how is deporting non-whites from Europe any more "morally superior" or "acceptable" compared to deporting Negroes from the US? Same question goes to mischak, who expressed her support for "repatriation" of non-whites from Europe.

OneEnglishNorman
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:49 PM
So you like morality I see. Then maybe you could explain how is deporting non-whites from Europe any more "morally superior" or "acceptable" compared to deporting Negroes from the US? Same question goes to mischak, who expressed her support for "repatriation" of non-whites from Europe.

Because as been stated many times, America is a land originally foreign to both whites and blacks. Therefore for one to expel the other is illogical.

Europeans are of Europe, adapted to it's environment, related to the soil for thousands of years. There is no comparison in circumstance between the two.

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:51 PM
Because as been stated many times, America is a land originally foreign to both whites and blacks. Therefore for one to expel the other is illogical.

Europeans are of Europe, adapted to it's environment, related to the soil for thousands of years. There is no comparison in circumstance between the two.
Europeans didn't originate in Europe either OEN. ;) If this kind of "morality" must be applied then we must all go back to Africa, Asia or wherever and live in a rainbow nation.

On a general note, I'll tell you what I find funny here, OEN, mischak and other Negro rights advocates. That you are on this forum for Germanic preservation which includes the US and Americans in its orientation and mission statement, you support Negroes and other non-whites in the US and yet you claim to be pro-Germanic. That you think it's acceptable just cause you don't consider the US Germanic, well, as someone said earlier in this thread, last time I checked, the rules on this forum ain't enforced according to what you think. Else I could say I don't consider England Germanic and that it should be swamped by Pakis and get away with it. Last I checked, the Althing has no "opposing views" section.

OneEnglishNorman
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:53 PM
Europeans didn't originate in Europe either OEN. ;) If this kind of "morality" must be applied then we must all go back to Africa, Asia or wherever and live in a rainbow nation.

"Europeans are of Europe, adapted to its environment"

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:59 PM
"Europeans are of Europe, adapted to its environment"

And Americans are of America.

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 07:59 PM
American is an identity. Go to stirpes.net and see if European nationalists accept you as European.

Why do I care how they accept me? I've already said I'm not a "nationalist". I don't care if an average person doesn't accept me. I know who I am.


Very convenient for you if you leave this country, you don't care whether it gets swamped by non-whites, no wonder you support Negro rights. You don't want to live among non-whites in Europe, but you think Americans should. Such an attitude is called hypocrisy where I come from.

America=/=Europe, therefore the same things do not apply.

Allenson
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:02 PM
Is everyone having fun?

Just remember the rules of the forum, please. The staff really appreciates it when you do. ;)

And yes, you are all being watched. :)

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:04 PM
America=/=Europe, therefore the same things do not apply.
Both the US and Germanic countries in Europe are Germanic lands.

P.S. Since you love to put words in Raven's mouth without her consent, I'll quote something she really said about the US:


Anti-Germanic comments. Yes, this includes insulting Germanic Americans, sorry. No one is forced to like Americans. To be honest, I don't really like too many personally. However, this forum is, in part, dedicated to them as well.
http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=4612

As you can see, Germanic on this forum includes Germanic Americans. By supporting immigration and multiculturalism in the US, you are being anti-Germanic.

QED. I rest my case. :)

Allenson
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:11 PM
Because as been stated many times, America is a land originally foreign to both whites and blacks. Therefore for one to expel the other is illogical.


Wait, what thread are we in now?

Anyway, does it make it more logical that "we" can expel "them" because it was "we" who brought "them" here in the first place? I'm not sure--I'll have to chew on that one for a bit....

Soten
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:12 PM
"American" is nothing more than a badge of citizenship to me.

That sums up the problem quite nicely. You, just like the millions of illegal Mexicans and both legal and illegal immigrants from elsewhere, care nothing about America.

Don't you understand that there are millions of people here who call this land their home. And not just some place to make money or whatever else you can suck away from the place. To you it is just some playground and you have no concern for it or its people.

To Americans it defines who they are...those who would make America into a multicultural nation are the same people who say "American is nothing more than a badge of citizenship to me".

Parasitic.

OneEnglishNorman
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:19 PM
Else I could say I don't consider England Germanic and that it should be swamped by Pakis and get away with it. Last I checked, the Althing has no "opposing views" section.

It's legitimate to argue England is not Germanic. But to say any non-Germanic European country should be swamped by non-Europeans is questionable given this forum's preservationist outlook.

My opinion is that European Americans should be allowed to either mix with or separate from non-Europeans as they see fit. There are different ways that could happen. Likely, New York f.e. will always be a multi-ethnic place in the future. Making New York Germanic "again" is not realistic.


Wait, what thread are we in now?

Anyway, does it make it more logical that "we" can expel "them" because it was "we" who brought "them" here in the first place? I'm not sure--I'll have to chew on that one for a bit....

Still adapting to the thread split :D Trying to keep the Germanic stuff in this one if I can.

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:23 PM
It's legitimate to argue England is not Germanic. But to say any non-Germanic European country should be swamped by non-Europeans is questionable given this forum's preservationist outlook.
So is saying to hand over Germanic land to Negroes. Which part of this is incomprehensible to you?

The Althing > Germanic Lands: Around the World > The United States


My opinion is that European Americans should be allowed to either mix with or separate from non-Europeans as they see fit. There are different ways that could happen. Likely, New York f.e. will always be a multi-ethnic place in the future. Making New York Germanic "again" is not realistic.
No comment.

Allenson
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:23 PM
That sums up the problem quite nicely. You, just like the millions of illegal Mexicans and both legal and illegal immigrants from elsewhere, care nothing about America.

Yeah, I have to agree. And Mischak, I don't mean to offend or pick on you--but I remember writing this once before: you sound like the product of recent immigration yourself. You don't seem to have a vested interest in America. It's only citizenship.

For many of us Old Stockers, our familial stories go back to the Revolution and beyond. We can drive by old farm houses that our g-g-g-g-great grandfather built in 1802, say. We can find our forebearer's names on the old Beers and Walling maps (http://www.oldmapsne.com/)from the mid 1800s. We have a deep, centuries old conection and relationship to this New World and it is painful to watch it go down the crapper and to have so many new people here who seem to care nothing for it other than to profit from this citizenship.

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:27 PM
Both the US and Germanic countries in Europe are Germanic lands.

P.S. Since you love to put words in Raven's mouth without her consent,

I'm sorry you weren't around then, but the topic of using American in the ethnicity field was discussed, more than once. I asked Raven directly during a shoutbox discussion and she informed it was not an appropriate term to use.


As you can see, Germanic on this forum includes Germanic Americans. By supporting immigration and multiculturalism in the US, you are being anti-Germanic.

QED. I rest my case. :)

Raven gets to determine that, not you. Not to mention the topic has been brought up numerous times, by numerous people, and no one has ever been told it is "anti-Germanic".

Soten
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:32 PM
"As you can see, Germanic on this forum includes Germanic Americans. By supporting immigration and multiculturalism in the US, you are being anti-Germanic.

QED. I rest my case."



Raven gets to determine that, not you. Not to mention the topic has been brought up numerous times, by numerous people, and no one has ever been told it is "anti-Germanic".

Why do I get the feeling that this would not be the case if we were talking about Australia, New Zealand, Canada, or South Africa?

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:34 PM
I'm sorry you weren't around then, but the topic of using American in the ethnicity field was discussed, more than once. I asked Raven directly during a shoutbox discussion and she informed it was not an appropriate term to use.
Do you know the difference between not appropriate and not permitted? The forum also says that it considers WN inappropriate for Germanic preservation but still, WNs ain't banned from here. Nowehere in the rules does it say that American ain't permitted. And how is European more appropriate? If American ain't an ethnicity, European even less so. ;)
And don't be sorry if you don't mean it. :) Many folks use "American" in their profiles and they've never been warned. :)


Raven gets to determine that, not you. Not to mention the topic has been brought up numerous times, by numerous people, and no one has ever been told it is "anti-Germanic".
She already determined it when she said the forum is dedicated to Germanic Americans and when she and her staff included the US under Germanic lands. What's not clear to you? :confused:

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:41 PM
Yeah, I have to agree. And Mischak, I don't mean to offend or pick on you--but I remember writing this once before: you sound like the product of recent immigration yourself. You don't seem to have a vested interest in America. It's only citizenship.


That's not entirely true. I said the family I was closest with have all arrived relatively recently (comparatively speaking). Even so, my great grandparents worked just as hard as others in the US, in hard times. It's not as if they arrived in 1980. Not to mention my paternal grandfather is what you'd call "old-stock" American. One of my great grandfathers emigrated from Germany at 10 years old and then had fight in world war i against his own people. Anyway, I'd say most of my relatives "earned" their stay here, just like you consider necessary apparently.




She already determined it when she said the forum is dedicated to Germanic Americans and when she and her staff included the US under Germanic lands. What's not clear to you? :confused:

The forum also says that it considers WN inappropriate for Germanic preservation but still, WNs ain't banned from here.

Well if you want to keep on insisting it's against the rules, use your own logic.

Soten
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:47 PM
That's not entirely true. I said the family I was closest with have all arrived relatively recently (comparatively speaking). Even so, my great grandparents worked just as hard as others in the US, in hard times. It's not as if they arrived in 1980. Not to mention my paternal grandfather is what you'd call "old-stock" American. One of my great grandfathers emigrated from Germany at 10 years old and then had fight in world war i against his own people. Anyway, I'd say most of my relatives "earned" their stay here, like you consider necessary apparently.

Your paternal grandfather was Old-stock. So your father didn't feel any connection to America? Or is this just your feeling?

Either way, that may be the saddest part of all this.

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:48 PM
The forum also says that it considers WN inappropriate for Germanic preservation but still, WNs ain't banned from here.

Well if you want to keep on insisting it's against the rules, use your own logic.
My logic is perfectly logical. :D;) As I said, you need to make a difference between not appropriate and not permitted. According to the rules, anti-Germanic comments are not permitted. It says nowhere in the rules that being WN is not permitted.
So let's see, quoting from the Althing rules:


The Althing supports the preservation of our Germanic heritage, the development of an all-Germanic consciousness, as well as the defense or reestablishment of the Germanic leitkultur in all Germanic states, communities, and places of settlement.

The US is a Germanic place of settlement, mind you. Nowehere does it say that Germanics must be indegenous to that place, else we wouldn't have forums for the "colonies" and "enclaves".

Next:

Views, ideas, and contributions that are hostile to Germanics or their heritage are not permitted.

Your and OEN's views of handing over US soil to the blacks and Germanic Americans mixing with non-whites are hostile to Germanic Americans and their Germanic heritage. You are advocating the antithesis of preservation in a Germanic place of settlement.

Allenson
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:54 PM
To answer the question of the thread--yes & no. There is a strong Germanic element in America but there is now an equally strong non-Germanic element here. Of course, this wasn't always the case. From the earliest English & Dutch colonies until probably about WWII, the US was largely Germanic in people, it certainly has always been Germanic in language (since European colonization, meaning), our laws stem largely from the Anglo-Saxon common law, our traditional buildings (houses, barns, mills, etc and the manners and materials from which they were constructed--thinking of the Dutch farmhouses and barns in Hudson valley of New York and the English farmhouses and barns here in New England) are Germanic in origin as are our traditional land use patterns and agricultural practices. The classic New England town meeting has direct roots in the soil of the Anglo-Saxon moots.

Clearly, this is all eroding and it is the aim of us Germanic Americans here to see that these traits, that we hold to be valuble and worthy, to be preserved and not perverted anymore.

I hope that people can respect this. It's all we've got really. As Fallen Angel has pointed out, we are not European anymore (culturally, meaning) and I personally would never expect to be excepted as such. The other option is to turn a blind eye, continue to to stick our heads in the proverbial sand and let ourselves be overrun. I don't want to do this, personally.

Soten
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 08:55 PM
Your paternal grandfather was Old-stock. So your father didn't feel any connection to America? Or is this just your feeling?

Either way, that may be the saddest part of all this.

And wait a minute...you gave me the sarcastic rolling eyes smiley (:rolleyes:) when I said I had at least 10 European ethnicities back in my genealogy and said American "culture"...but most of those I know about only because I've done some genealogical research and discovered them in my "old-stock" lines.

Do you know anything about your paternal grandfather's family history? You might discover some interesting things.

Either way, you're almost certainly more than 3 European ethnicities...and wasn't "Americans have on average 3+ ethnicities in them" your argument for Americans not having a culture or ethnicity? How can you be whatever ethnicity it is that you believe yourself to be then?

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 09:00 PM
My logic is perfectly logical. :D;) As I said, you need to make a difference between not appropriate and not permitted. According to the rules, anti-Germanic comments are not permitted. It says nowhere in the rules that being WN is not permitted.
So let's see, quoting from the Althing rules:



The US is a Germanic place of settlement, mind you. Nowehere does it say that Germanics must be indegenous to that place, else we wouldn't have forums for the "colonies" and "enclaves".

Next:


Your and OEN's views of handing over US soil to the blacks and Germanic Americans mixing with non-whites are hostile to Germanic Americans and their Germanic heritage. You are advocating the antithesis of preservation in a Germanic place of settlement.

You can complain and try to argue and reason all you want, but until Raven tells me personally I cannot express this opinion anymore, I'll continue to express what I feel is necessary.

Allenson
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 09:01 PM
That's not entirely true. I said the family I was closest with have all arrived relatively recently (comparatively speaking). Even so, my great grandparents worked just as hard as others in the US, in hard times. It's not as if they arrived in 1980. Not to mention my paternal grandfather is what you'd call "old-stock" American. One of my great grandfathers emigrated from Germany at 10 years old and then had fight in world war i against his own people. Anyway, I'd say most of my relatives "earned" their stay here, just like you consider necessary apparently.

OK, I understand better now--regarding your family, that is.

And why the quotes around old stock? Not a valid term? I mean it in a manner that describes Americans who descend from pre-Revolutionary families. It seems like a logical way to describe them/us.

And "earning their stay"? Of course people should "earn their stay". Would you let a bunch of freeloaders with no jobs live in your house, eat your food, use your electricity, crank up the heat and generally sully your abode? Sounds fishily communal to me--in other words, the Tragedy of the Commons.

Soten
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 09:04 PM
You can complain and try to argue and reason all you want, but until Raven tells me personally I cannot express this opinion anymore, I'll continue to express what I feel is necessary.

I would never want you to stop expressing your opinions but I don't think Fallen Angel is trying to do that so much as prove you wrong. :D

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 09:05 PM
Do you know anything about your paternal grandfather's family history? You might discover some interesting things.

He was English.


I would never want you to stop expressing your opinions but I don't think Fallen Angel is trying to do that so much as prove you wrong. :D

Yet until Raven tells me it's not allowed, Fallen Angel won't be proving me wrong.

Gefjon
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 09:10 PM
You can complain and try to argue and reason all you want, but until Raven tells me personally I cannot express this opinion anymore, I'll continue to express what I feel is necessary.
And so will I. I'm not stopping you to express your anti-Germanic opinions, just wanted to point them out. ;)

Soten
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 09:12 PM
He was English.

Smith is a nice English name but when you look at the family's history back 350+ years in America you may just start to find names like Van something-or-other (Dutch), Mercereau (French), Thomas (Welsh), perhaps a Johnston from Scotland, a Sullivan from Ireland. And who knows you might even get something more exotic like Italian or Polish or Portuguese or Cherokee or Negro...who knows! There were plenty of oddball immigrants to the New World.

mischak
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 09:21 PM
And so will I. I'm not stopping you to express your anti-Germanic opinions, just wanted to point them out. ;)

You can claim I'm "anti-Germanic", I really don't care.

Æmeric
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 09:33 PM
Americans who say they're germanic have to care about their Roots, and their Roots are in European Countries. In my Opinion, Europe is more important than America simply because of the Roots of Germanic Culture, the different and unique Ethnicities who originated here and Europe holds all Treasure of Germanic People. Europe is the Cradle of Germanics. There is European Blood in every American.
Every American should do something for the Countries their Ancestors had fought for and shed their blood on for many many Centuries.
Americans should support and protect the Cradle they came from.




Gruß,
Boche


I think America & Canada & Australia are just as important as Europe. You what they say about land, "They don't make it anymore." Europe is the ancestral homeland of Germanics & other European descended peoles around the globe. But the settlement of new sparcely populated lands in North America & the southwest Pacific gave Germanics the opportunity to expand their living space & increase their numbers. The Ubited Kingdom, Germany & the Benelux countries would fit into Texas with room left over. I think it is a mistake to kiss off the colonial lands, to let the Mestizos or Negroes or whoever else have them. I feel the same way for Argentina & southern Brazil which allowed the Latin peoples of Europe to expand their living space. It shouldn't be surrendered.


To answer the question of the thread--yes & no. There is a strong Germanic element in America but there is now an equally strong non-Germanic element here. Of course, this wasn't always the case. From the earliest English & Dutch colonies until probably about WWII, the US was largely Germanic in people, it certainly has always been Germanic in language (since European colonization, meaning), our laws stem largely from the Anglo-Saxon common law, our traditional buildings (houses, barns, mills, etc and the manners and materials from which they were constructed--thinking of the Dutch farmhouses and barns in Hudson valley of New York and the English farmhouses and barns here in New England) are Germanic in origin as are our traditional land use patterns and agricultural practices. The classic New England town meeting has direct roots in the soil of the Anglo-Saxon moots.

Clearly, this is all eroding and it is the aim of us Germanic Americans here to see that these traits, that we hold to be valuble and worthy, to be preserved and not perverted anymore.

I hope that people can respect this. It's all we've got really. As Fallen Angel has pointed out, we are not European anymore (culturally, meaning) and I personally would never expect to be excepted as such. The other option is to turn a blind eye, continue to to stick our heads in the proverbial sand and let ourselves be overrun. I don't want to do this, personally.


What many persons don't understand when stating that "America is not a Germanic country" or "America has always been a multicultural country" that it isn't true or at least it was always true. We still make roughly 50% of the population. And that the same conditions are developing in Europe, where many nations have more cultural diversity then the US had in 1970. If there is a solution to solving the demographic crisis in Europe it will probably come out of America, because frankly we are near the breaking point & will either have to take drastic action or give up. If there is no solution then just look to America to see where Europe will be in 30-years - just substitute Hispanics with Muslims.

Boche
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008, 10:14 PM
I think America & Canada & Australia are just as important as Europe.

If it comes to Red Alert then Europe is more important. Because Europe has our Roots, our Ancient Architecture and Culture, our Ancient Religious Places and the Soil which our Forefathers Blood have been shed on for over 1000 Years, finally their Dead Remains which became a Part of Europe.

As it was nicely said in an old german Poem:

"We're not only living a german Life, we also die a german Death, and dead we also remain german and are a whole Piece of Germany. A Crumb of the Acre for the Corn of our Grandchildren."


But the settlement of new sparcely populated lands in North America & the southwest Pacific gave Germanics the opportunity to expand their living space & increase their numbers.

Yes, which is something good.


The United Kingdom, Germany & the Benelux countries would fit into Texas with room left over.

Not even the whole Terrain of the USA could ever mean so much in Value as Germany, the United Kingdom and the Benelux Countries together.
There is alot of History, Culture, Blood and Drudgery in these Lands.


I think it is a mistake to kiss off the colonial lands, to let the Mestizos or Negroes or whoever else have them.

I agree, Germanics conquered these Lands and Life is about the Survival of the Fittest. But if Germanics fail to defend it, then they don't deserve to live in it.




Gruß,
Boche

ChaosLord
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 12:06 AM
I'd say that the U.S. is still a Germanic nation, but it's integrity is faltering, mainly due to corrupt politicians and non-Germanic special interests groups. Most non-Germanic immigrants don't even have much respect for this country. All they want is a free-ride on the welfare system or take advantage of our social services. African-Americans still have a chip in their shoulder for the "oppression" that they suffered, but in all actuality it was their very own people who sold them for slavery. European colonists put them to good use by having them work on the land. Yeah, it may have sucked for them, but they were offered to return back to Africa and some did, hence Liberia.

Those who stayed behind did so on their own accord. In fact it probably helped a number of their people out, because now the desendents are living life as citizens of the U.S. while complaining about past-oppressions. Yet, there is slavery and genocide going on now in Africa and they don't do anything to try and solve it. Repatriation is the best thing, but they wouldn't do it because there's nothing in it for them and no means of racial support. I doubt that many African-Americans who call themselves African-Americans share any cultural interest to Africa.

Then we have the Latino population. They of all people do not care what the Founding Fathers wanted this country to become. They don't even want to assimilate! Instead, they come here illegally in droves and attempt to push their language and culture on us as an act of revenge from taking "their land." The problem is that most Americans have a lack of cultural interest because multi-culturalism has brain-washed people into thinking that culture is irrelevant and of the "old ways." Plus, with immigrants gaining access to welfare and having multiple children it's harder for Germanics to have children because the wealth is distributed to thin and the social taxes are picking at our pockets. Instead of money going to our own families it is instead going to the families who choose not to assimilate and make something of themselves.

Emder
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 02:05 AM
I´ve never considered America a Germanic nation. Sure there are areas where German immigrants settled and built communities and carried on with their traditions. But the Irish, French, English, Polish, Russians, etc. did the same thing. Many of the children of their descendents are still living in those areas. To me America never has been nor will be Germanic. Its a mish mash.

Deary
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 02:06 AM
You can claim I'm "anti-Germanic", I really don't care.

That's the troubling thing about it, Mischak. You really don't care.

Æmeric
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 02:11 AM
I´ve never considered America a Germanic nation. Sure there are areas where German immigrants settled and built communities and carried on with their traditions. But the Irish, French, English, Polish, Russians, etc. did the same thing. Many of the children of their descendents are still living in those areas. To me America never has been nor will be Germanic. Its a mish mash.

Germanic as it is used at the Althing is a meta-ethnicity, including Germans (including Austrian & Swiss), Dutch, Swedes, Danes, Frisians, norwegians, Icelanders & English. Most of the founding population of Germanic stock or CeltoGermanic stock, such as the Ulster Scots. The rural areas were origianlly settled by Germanics & the major cities founded by Germanics. All the other groups were johnny-come-latelies.

Gefjon
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 02:34 AM
You can claim I'm "anti-Germanic", I really don't care.
That's exactly the problem, as Deary said, you don't care. It's really sad that you don't stop and think about it a bit, how you're offending so many of the Americans over here with your anti-Germanic comments. Much as you obsess with Europe, this country was the country that fed ya and your folks. Talk about biting the hand that feeds ya. It's the same attitude Jews take. They want Iarael to be Jewish but racemixing in all other countries.


I´ve never considered America a Germanic nation. Sure there are areas where German immigrants settled and built communities and carried on with their traditions. But the Irish, French, English, Polish, Russians, etc. did the same thing. Many of the children of their descendents are still living in those areas. To me America never has been nor will be Germanic. Its a mish mash.
Most of the mish mash is of Germanic ethnicities though. The largest ethnic groups and German and English. The English are Germanic. Don't confuse Germanic (germanisch) with German (deutsch). ;)

Mrs. Lyfing
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 02:49 AM
America is a freemasonic/zionist paradise. In otherwords a landfill. I wouldn't even call it a Germanic landfill. It's just a place to deposit one's garbage.

Thats sad. Garbage? Huh? Did you just say that?

I had to look up the word Zionism...:rolleyes:

Leof
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 02:57 AM
lol not you guys. <3 I mean in general.

My good buddy in Finland asked me if I thought it was healthy for someone to hate their own country as much as I did. I responded, "no I don't think it's at all healthy at all. I don't want to hate my own country but I do and I have nothing to say in my defense. In the same vein I'm not going to lie to myself."

Galloglaich
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 03:08 AM
...My opinion is that European Americans should be allowed to either mix with or separate from non-Europeans as they see fit. There are different ways that could happen. Likely, New York f.e. will always be a multi-ethnic place in the future. Making New York Germanic "again" is not realistic...

I know this is going to be anathema to a lot of people on this forum (and I apologize ahead of time for offending), but I really agree with this statement. There are many European-American families (mine among them) that are proud of their heritage and would not mix (interbreed) with non-Europeans. I personally wouldn't interbreed with anyone that wasn't Germanic or Celtogermanic. I raise my children to honor the ways and cultures of their ancestors. This includes their heritage that is uniquely "American". My family know who they are and where we came from. They will also know their place in continuing our heritage. I see my (and my family's) role as part of the greater continuing volkwanderüng of our people. I am essentially "preservationist". Inevitably, some people will not feel the same and they will engage in miscegenation. That is their choice. I can't advocate the race police telling people who they can and can't choose to affiliate themselves with.

All that being said, I would not deny any other ethnicity's contribution to this great country (however small that contribution is). I happen to have friends that are Asian, Polish, Italian, and Lithuanian (OMG:eek:!). I don't feel any affinity for their ancestral cultures and I wouldn't want my children intermarrying with them, but I can enjoy their company. Europe is the cradle of European civilization. America is inextricably tied to that cradle, but it is not exclusive to that cradle.

Like it or not, America is a land of immigration. I have a vested interest in this country, I am decidedly "old stock". The first of my ancestors came here in 1716 and almost all of them were here before the War for Independence. A few came here in the early 19th century. Besides that, my children live here. Of course I want this country to be the best that it can be. I think we need to get a handle on illegal immigration, welfare, etc.-but hating someone for their ethnicity (which is what seems to be behind some of the sentiment on this thread) is absurd. People here should be free to congregate as they see fit. This includes people of Germanic heritage as well as anybody else. I would love to see enclaves of Germanic people in this country choosing to habitate together. Does this mean that other people whose whose ancestors have been here as long or longer should be denied the same rights? Besides, continuing to blame all our problems on black & Jew boogeymen (not that there aren't some legitimate problems) won't fix the big picture. Germanic Americans need to find a way to take pride in themselves without all this authoritarian B.S. that undermines everyone else's legitimacy. If we Americans wish Germanic culture to continue to be the predominant culture (which I do feel it is), we need to demonstrate that dominance by exhibiting it's greatness and outcompeting its rivals, not by eliminating everyone else who happens to be here.

Bridie
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 03:40 AM
I haven't read through the thread. I will just answer the question "Is America a Germanic Country"?

Germanic... Celtic... Slavic... Romance... all just labels, all just semantics. Labels are only of value in politics in the context of them identifying and distinguishing between folk, allies, friends and foes in a clear and concise way.

Who cares if America is wholly Germanic or not? The Americans here are our friends and our allies... they fight for the same things that we do (for the most part). Some are our folk (those of Germanic blood), and some aren't. What the country is labelled at the end of the day, is somewhat petty.

mischak
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 10:26 AM
That's exactly the problem, as Deary said, you don't care. It's really sad that you don't stop and think about it a bit, how you're offending so many of the Americans over here with your anti-Germanic comments. Much as you obsess with Europe, this country was the country that fed ya and your folks. Talk about biting the hand that feeds ya. It's the same attitude Jews take. They want Iarael to be Jewish but racemixing in all other countries.

Why would I alter what I say and believe simply because some Americans do not agree with it? Wouldn't that go against everything you're "about", and have professed to be about over and over again? You know, "I say what I want and don't care what anyone thinks about it"? Take your own advice before you spout it off to me. And btw, some Indian or Chinese kid who was raised in the US and becomes Americanized is no less American than you, considering your ancestors also did nothing to "contribute" to this country.

Boche
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 11:18 AM
The rural areas were origianlly settled by Germanics & the major cities founded by Germanics.

Yes, and all the Areas in North-America wouldn't have been settled if the Germans and other Europeans wouldn't have fought bravely for it for over 1000 Years against the Enemies from the East and sacrificed theirselves to let the Germanic People survive.

That's why North-America is less important than Europe if it comes to a Showdown. It's a Question of Honour, if the Enemy is occupying whole Europe, then he also controls the Sacred Places and the whole Spirit of Germanic People.
And if someday Germanic People are needed to protect their Ancestral Land in Europe, then everybody who comes over and helps deserves Respect, and everyone who stays in America and doesn't care about his Ancestral Land is not a Germanic Preservationist in my Eyes.

If the Enemy destroys Places and 1000 Year old Families in Germany, Scandinavia or other Places and its 1000 Year old Sanctuaries, Fortresses and tramples the Earth your Forefathers lost their Life on to protect our Ancient Culture and our Families, it's a much worse Strike than if Mexicans take over the White House.




Gruß,
Boche

Bridie
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 11:58 AM
Yes, and all the Areas in North-America wouldn't have been settled if the Germans and other Europeans wouldn't have fought bravely for it for over 1000 Years against the Enemies from the East and sacrificed theirselves to let the Germanic People survive.

That's why North-America is less important than Europe if it comes to a Showdown. It's a Question of Honour, if the Enemy is occupying whole Europe, then he also controls the Sacred Places and the whole Spirit of Germanic People.
And if someday Germanic People are needed to protect their Ancestral Land in Europe, then everybody who comes over and helps deserves Respect, and everyone who stays in America and doesn't care about his Ancestral Land is not a Germanic Preservationist in my Eyes.

If the Enemy destroys Places and 1000 Year old Families in Germany, Scandinavia or other Places and its 1000 Year old Sanctuaries, Fortresses and tramples the Earth your Forefathers lost their Life on to protect our Ancient Culture and our Families, it's a much worse Strike than if Mexicans take over the White House.

In other words, you think that Germanic Americans should blindly give support to Europeans and expect to receive NOTHING in return (except maybe a barrage of insults for being "culturally inferior"). That's a bit selfish of you Boche. "Hey, you obliged to come and help us survive, but don't expect us to help you because we're special... we live in your ancestors homelands!" :rolleyes:

Anyone who doesn't support US Germanics, is no Germanicist... excuses about Europe needing to be top priority for all, even those who don't live in it any longer, because the Europeans are the protectors of the ancestral lands is getting old. If Europeans are the protectors of the Old World, then "colonials" are the protectors of the New World. Shall we have a brawl over which is more important? The ancient past or the more recent past??

At the end of the day... don't expect support when you have no intention of giving any support yourself.

OneEnglishNorman
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 12:13 PM
To be perfectly frank, keeping El Paso "Germanic" is not my biggest concern...


http://i30.tinypic.com/2ywd9ci.jpg

Bridie
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 12:18 PM
To be perfectly frank, keeping El Paso "Germanic" is not my biggest concern...


http://image03.webshots.com/3/2/67/97/9126797rsUsBvXnmF_fs.jpg

Sure. But don't expect to get support if you don't want to give it. You reap what you sow...

Gagnraad
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 12:48 PM
What many persons don't understand when stating that "America is not a Germanic country" or "America has always been a multicultural country" that it isn't true or at least it was always true. We still make roughly 50% of the population.

Yes, after you slaughtered the indians and other natives, you mean? You are descendants of people from Britain, Spain, France and countries all over Europe.

Bridie
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 01:00 PM
Yes, after you slaughtered the indians and other natives, you mean?
Well they were in the way... ;)

Kadu
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 01:18 PM
Well they were in the way... ;)

The survival of the fittest, isn't it?!Too bad for Colonials, they're tasting their own Venom.

Bridie
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 02:00 PM
The survival of the fittest, isn't it?!Too bad for Colonials, they're tasting their own Venom.
... says Mr Portugal. ;) I do believe the Portugese are not strangers to Empire building.

In any case, the natural order of things has temporarily been disrupted. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. The sick and feeble are now surviving at rates never before seen in history due to the "miracle" of modern medicine. Politics are interfering with Dawinism... the weak and intellectually impaired are proliferating and outbreeding the weak... so on and so forth. All bodes badly for the future...

Do not see the modern trend of the strong being overtaken by the weak as a good thing dear Kadu.

Boche
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 03:10 PM
In other words, you think that Germanic Americans should blindly give support to Europeans and expect to receive NOTHING in return (except maybe a barrage of insults for being "culturally inferior"). That's a bit selfish of you Boche. "Hey, you obliged to come and help us survive, but don't expect us to help you because we're special... we live in your ancestors homelands!" :rolleyes:


Putting Sentences i didn't say in my Mouth is not nice. I never wrote that i expect support from America. I don't care about if they support us or not. I only said that i respect Americans who decide to defend their Ancestors Country.



Anyone who doesn't support US Germanics, is no Germanicist... excuses about Europe needing to be top priority for all, even those who don't live in it any longer, because the Europeans are the protectors of the ancestral lands is getting old.

Getting old? Cultural Preservation is never getting old, because we havn't reached it yet.


If Europeans are the protectors of the Old World, then "colonials" are the protectors of the New World.

Yes, but if the Old World is in Danger, Colonials with a Shard of Honour for their Ancestors would support it rather than the new World.


Shall we have a brawl over which is more important? The ancient past or the more recent past??

No, because this is not the Kindergarten. I have my Opinion and Others have their Opinion about what is right or wrong.



At the end of the day... don't expect support when you have no intention of giving any support yourself.

Let's say Europe is secure from every Threat, and America has a War in their Germanic Terrain, then i would support them aswell.
But if both are threatened, then Europe is more important. Europe is the Heart of Germanics. I explained this with more detail in my previous Posts.




Gruß,
Boche

Gefjon
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 03:17 PM
Why would I alter what I say and believe simply because some Americans do not agree with it? Wouldn't that go against everything you're "about", and have professed to be about over and over again? You know, "I say what I want and don't care what anyone thinks about it"? Take your own advice before you spout it off to me.
These are two different instances mischak. My context was about personal things between members, this is a matter of being in support of the destruction of your country.

Stirpes is a better forum for this kinda attitude. With a lil luck, if they insist they're European, selfhating colonials can get accepted. Or they can end up dumped into some alien usergroup. Good lesson in any case, for folks who pretend to be something they ain't.


And btw, some Indian or Chinese kid who was raised in the US and becomes Americanized is no less American than you, considering your ancestors also did nothing to "contribute" to this country.
When did I say they did? The US is my country nevertheless and I'm white, unlike the Indian or Chinese kids. The US wasn't constructed as a multiracial place. Most white American racialists would have no problem with Germanic immigrants, they'd gladly prefer them over folks from India or Asia.

OneEnglishNorman
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 03:38 PM
How is the child of, say, Spanish immigrants, more American than a black child whose American roots go back for hundreds of years??

Gefjon
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 03:42 PM
How is the child of, say, Spanish immigrants, more American than a black child whose American roots go back for hundreds of years??
Lord Jesus give me patience. Which part of the above didn't you understand? America is the white man's land, built by whites for whites. The Spanish are whites. Negroes ain't. Just look at the acceptable immigrants, at first not even Southern Euros were acceptable... even today. Negroes, Jews and the like were always at the bottom of the ladder.

Cuchulain
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 03:50 PM
Whether or not The United States is a Germanic country is largely dependent on what ones definition of a germanic country is. The appropriate pre-requisite to answering this thread is to state what you believe a Germanic country is.
I personally don't care whether or not America is considered a Germanic country, its not going to make me move away or anything, or change my life in any way. I will say however, that a comprehensive history of Germanic people would be quite incomplete without a significant section devoted to the US.

Bridie
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 03:52 PM
support from America. I don't care about if they support us or not. That's rather unwise.



No, because this is not the Kindergarten. I have my Opinion and Others have their Opinion about what is right or wrong.I was being ironic Boche. :rolleyes:

mischak
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 03:55 PM
These are two different instances mischak. My context was about personal things between members, this is a matter of being in support of the destruction of your country.

Stirpes is a better forum for this kinda attitude. With a lil luck, if they insist they're European, selfhating colonials can get accepted. Or they can end up dumped into some alien usergroup. Good lesson in any case, for folks who pretend to be something they ain't.

You having an issue with it, as well as anyone else, makes it your personal issue. There are Germanic Americans living in the US, but I do not consider the US Germanic as a whole, therefore this supposed "destruction" of my country is not a "destruction" to me. It's my opinion, it's not changing, so deal with it.


When did I say they did? The US is my country nevertheless and I'm white, unlike the Indian or Chinese kids. The US wasn't constructed as a multiracial place. Most white American racialists would have no problem with Germanic immigrants, they'd gladly prefer them over folks from India or Asian.Just like it's their country.


Lord Jesus give me patience. Which part of the above didn't you understand? America is the white man's land, built by whites for whites. The Spanish are whites. Negroes ain't. Just look at the acceptable immigrants, at first not even Southern Euros were acceptable... even today. Negroes, Jews and the like were always at the bottom of the ladder.

I'd love to see where it says it's "the white man's land" written in the constitution. And jsyk, English Americans didn't originally consider Germans to be "white" either. And talk about "acceptable" immigrants? Most Americans don't even know the difference between a Spaniard and a Mexican.

Gefjon
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 04:04 PM
You having an issue with it, as well as anyone else, makes it your personal issue. There are Germanic Americans living in the US, but I do not consider the US Germanic as a whole, therefore this supposed "destruction" of my country is not a "destruction" to me. It's my opinion, it's not changing, so deal with it.
You didn't understand what I meant by personal issue. This isn't a you vs. me matter, it's about an entire country, whose white folks are at stake. You ain't denying only my right to live in a prosperous white land, but the rights of million other whites.


Just like it's their country.
Some argument that is. Most of your arguments are poor oneliners. Well, I can respond to those easily.
No, it's not. :)

Allenson
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 04:18 PM
Yes, after you slaughtered the indians and other natives, you mean?


Shall we discuss Norwegian treatment of the Saami? Or perhaps your violent history of raiding the coasts of western Europe.

Lindisfarne ring a bell perhaps?

No offence, but I find it absurd when Europeans criticize Americans for "our" treatment of American Indians. The blood that has been spilt on your continent, amongst yourselves, is equally, if not more, wretched. Quite frankly, the endless wars of Europe was a sizable piece of the puzzle of motivations for folks to settle here in the New World.

Proverbially speaking, don't chuck around rocks when you live in a house of glass yourself.

mischak
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 04:38 PM
You didn't understand what I meant by personal issue. This isn't a you vs. me matter, it's about an entire country, whose white folks are at stake. You ain't denying only my right to live in a prosperous white land, but the rights of million other whites.

Because 5 or 6 American "racialists" on the internet think I'm against an entire country, doesn't make it so. Since it's not "white man's land" to me, I don't think "white folks are at stake" anyway. (Btw I don't know how many times I have to repeat that)


Some argument that is. Most of your arguments are poor oneliners. Well, I can respond to those easily.

It wasn't an argument, it was a statement.

Kadu
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 04:42 PM
Proverbially speaking, don't chuck around rocks when you live in a house of glass yourself.

Everybody has it, the only difference is that i recognize the mistake and Bridie(and you i think) does not.
Imperialistic views of that kind are against ethnic preservation, how can someone claim the ethnic preservation of his kind when they are in favour of ethnic slaughtering???

Bridie
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 04:55 PM
Everybody has it, the only difference is that i recognize the mistake and Bridie(and you i think) does not.
Imperialistic views of that kind are against ethnic preservation, how can someone claim the ethnic preservation of his kind when they are in favour of ethnic slaughtering???
My Imperialistic views are in support of the ethnic preservation of my own people. Excuse me for not wanting to jump on the *hippy love* bandwagon.

Gefjon
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 04:59 PM
Because 5 or 6 American "racialists" on the internet think I'm against an entire country, doesn't make it so. Since it's not "white man's land" to me, I don't think "white folks are at stake" anyway. (Btw I don't know how many times I have to repeat that)
Don't know how many times I have to repeat that you are posting on a forum which considers the US a Germanic land.


It wasn't an argument, it was a statement.
Well a statement doesn't prove me wrong.

skyhawk
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 05:11 PM
My Imperialistic views are in support of the ethnic preservation of my own people. Excuse me for not wanting to jump on the *hippy love* bandwagon.

It's hardly a " hippy love bandwagon " to forward views against Imperialism.

Just commom sense in my opinion.

Bridie
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 05:18 PM
^ Ok, your opinion differs from mine.

Death and the Sun
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 05:20 PM
Is America a Germanic Country

No, America is a landmass comprising three different continents.

mischak
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 05:23 PM
Don't know how many times I have to repeat that you are posting on a forum which considers the US a Germanic land.

It doesn't mean I have to consider it and I'm obviously allowed to have my own interpretation. You're so adament about it, yet no one on the staff has warned or infracted any of my posts on the matter, so obviously they don't feel I'm "anti-Germanic". Until they do, I'm done discussing the matter with you.


Well a statement doesn't prove me wrong.

Nothing you said proved you right either. You can't use the defense that US is the "white man's land" when the fact is the government disagees and citizenship is determined by birth or naturalization, regardless of race.

skyhawk
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 05:37 PM
Lord Jesus give me patience. Which part of the above didn't you understand? America is the white man's land, built by whites for whites. The Spanish are whites. Negroes ain't. Just look at the acceptable immigrants, at first not even Southern Euros were acceptable... even today. Negroes, Jews and the like were always at the bottom of the ladder.

You wouldn't need a heaven sent bolt of patience if you had the capacity to accept that other people differ with your conception of who built America and why.

Allenson
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 05:52 PM
Everybody has it, the only difference is that i recognize the mistake and Bridie(and you i think) does not.
Imperialistic views of that kind are against ethnic preservation, how can someone claim the ethnic preservation of his kind when they are in favour of ethnic slaughtering???


How presumptuous of you to say this. :)

Of course I'm against ethnic/racial slaughtering. I can't help what has been done in the past though. All I can do is carry on myself, in the present and keep in mind the mistakes of the past.


Just don't criticize Americans for the treatment of the native Indians 100, 200, 300 or 400 years ago when your past and history is just as bloody, if not more.

skyhawk
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 06:22 PM
Of course I'm against ethnic/racial slaughtering. I can't help what has been done in the past though. All I can do is carry on myself, in the present and keep in mind the mistakes of the past.



This is a major point , none of us can help what mistakes were made in the past. But if we wish to create a better future we need to drop the colonial mentality and blind nationalism that was the cause of those mistakes.

The people who , imo , are expressing a more progressive opinion are the real hope for the future. Not those who are still beating the colonial drum and supporting continued Imperialism

Æmeric
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 06:35 PM
This is a major point , none of us can help what mistakes were made in the past. But if we wish to create a better future we need to drop the colonial mentality and blind nationalism that was the cause of those mistakes.



But the US is no longer a colony & should not allow itself to be colonized. The belief that the US is not entitied to the same sort of sovereignty as European nations - including the right not to overwhelmed by third world immigrants is a "colonial mentality."

OneEnglishNorman
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 06:54 PM
Lord Jesus give me patience. Which part of the above didn't you understand? America is the white man's land, built by whites for whites. The Spanish are whites. Negroes ain't. Just look at the acceptable immigrants, at first not even Southern Euros were acceptable... even today. Negroes, Jews and the like were always at the bottom of the ladder.

OK... but you know Spanish are not Germanics. So according to you, America is just for Germanics. Yet the Spanish also did not build the USA. But you would accord them an American identity over and above a black, who is descended from those who did contribute, did raise families, did own their own homes, in the USA for decades and decades.

Trying to eliminate blacks from being American on the basis of some vague judgement of historical input is a non-argument. For even if blacks did contribute less, they would still "deserve" something. Whatever that is.

Anyway, sending the blacks to Africa is still nuts.

Kadu
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 07:02 PM
How presumptuous of you to say this. :)

Of course I'm against ethnic/racial slaughtering. I can't help what has been done in the past though. All I can do is carry on myself, in the present and keep in mind the mistakes of the past.

Neither do i, i don't have to bare with the guilt of my ancestors and neither you.
But we must admit the facts to understand the state of our nation's situation.
I also must apologise because i included you in same bucket as Bridie.



Just don't criticize Americans for the treatment of the native Indians 100, 200, 300 or 400 years ago when your past and history is just as bloody, if not more.


If you re-read my previous post


Everybody has it, the only difference is that i recognize the mistake and Bridie(and you i think) does not.

Aeternitas
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 07:26 PM
To clarify some of the doubts expressed in this thread, Skadi cares for and supports Germanic preservation, but not only in Europe. Though I can understand why some people say what they say about the Colonies, Skadi Forum is for Germanics from the New World as well and we can't apply different standards when it comes to offenses to Germanics from Europe than to Germanics from the Colonies as that would mean disrespecting what our mission statement says, that we don't discriminate against Germanic people, regardless from where.

Additionally, I will have to ask some minimal common courtesy and reason from both European Germanics and Germanics from the New World when it comes to discussing their continental problems. When a moderator asks you to calm the discussion level down (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=44326#post44326), please adjust your conduct. The Staff will be handing out infractions and potentially ban the culprits from the discussion if this warning is further ignored. We wouldn't like to have to close this topic, so let's try to keep the criticism civil & benevolent. :)

Otherwise, please carry on.

OneEnglishNorman
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 07:32 PM
The one thought I had earlier; the fact that this thread exists, "Is America a Germanic Country" logically means that members are fully entitled to question if America is Germanic, even if the official forum policy is to treat all Germanics as the same (whether from Europe or America etc).

But could a member ask the question... Is Denmark Germanic? If a member did, would they be warned for "retarded posts" or would they be tolerated?

Sorry if this is not a clear question :-/

Aeternitas
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 07:42 PM
Yes, generally, members here are allowed to discuss the "Germanicity" of various countries and we do have such threads already, e.g. "Is Scotland Germanic?", "How Germanic is the English Language?" etc. So if someone wanted to discuss whether Denmark is Germanic, they could open a thread as well, no issue there.

However, that doesn't mean that making comments hostile to Danes and their preservation will be okay. While debating "Germanicity" is one thing, Skadi's policy is clear: we consider Denmark Germanic and we support its preservation. It depends on how the thread is worded and whether the starter(s)/participant(s) has/have a hostile agenda. Usually, such threads rather question the level of "purity" or degree of Germanicness, e.g. whether Scotland would be more Celto-Germanic rather than predominantly purely Germanic, whether the English language has a significant input of non-Germanic words to render it partially Germanic, etc. While if they have an agenda to "prove" the "ungermanicness" of Denmark in order to justify the dilution of its heritage, a la "we are all immigrants", then it is most probably not going to fly.

So we can discuss how Germanic the US is, whether it was founded as a Germanic nation and whether its founding fathers meant it to be Germanic or European, or something else. However, we must keep in mind that Skadi supports the preservation of Germanic heritage in the US and US Skadi members are as entitled to fair and benevolent criticism as any other Germanic members.

Allenson
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 08:53 PM
Neither do i, i don't have to bare with the guilt of my ancestors and neither you.
But we must admit the facts to understand the state of our nation's situation.
I also must apologise because i included you in same bucket as Bridie.


If you re-read my previous post


Well, in many regards, I'd love to be in a bucket with Bridie. ;)

But, getting back to the discussion--my post wasn't meant to be directed solely at you, but to Europeans in general.

I think we have an understanding now though. :)

Soten
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 09:07 PM
Nothing you said proved you right either. You can't use the defense that US is the "white man's land" when the fact is the government disagees and citizenship is determined by birth or naturalization, regardless of race.

...oh my God, you're right. It's all so clear now. The government currently disagrees! And what is more the governments of Germany, Sweden, England, Denmark, The Netherlands, etc they all disagree with the notion that their should be any reason to prevent mass immigration into their countries. By Jove, I think you've hit it right on the head, mischak...just obey!

So why do we have this forum again?

And as far as the US being "white man's land" I wouldn't agree completely...seeing as how the definition of "white" kept getting changed. However, you should be aware that for most of its history the US blatantly left non-Europeans out of the framework. A white person and a black person couldn't even get married until 1968! There were many laws in place from the beginning of our nation to very recent times that should make it clear that the US perceived itself as having only European-descended full citizens. The laws were made by whites for whites. That should be clear. The US was trying to create a homogenous people and a homogenous nation out of European immigrants but failed horribly due to opening immigration first to the rest of Europe and then basically the whole world to now where you can just walk on in. They dealt with the Indians by putting them on reservations...clearly, to keep them outside of US society. They set up a segregation system to keep blacks in their own society outside of our own. So on and so forth. If they really wanted to succeed they should have sent the African slaves back when they had the chance and they should have limited immigration and then mostly from Northwestern Europe. Greed is really the only reason I can come up with as to why they have failed.

Brynhild
Thursday, February 14th, 2008, 10:28 PM
My personal take on this is we need a bit of perspective on all of this.

By that, I'm saying we have no excuses for playing the blame game on who has done what. The Germanics (and Indo Europeans in general) did found the New World, slaughtered the natives, brought Africans over on cargo ships as slaves blah blah blah.

It is on everyone's shoulders to reflect and learn from the past, the good, the bad and ugly? :p because the past has a ripple effect on all of us - regardless on how (un)involved we feel we are.

Whether the Europeans like this or not, they are as accountable as everyone else is, because Europe alone wasn't good enough for the intrepid explorers who wanted to travel to parts unknown to attain a better quality of life. But so what, who gives a f*ck when it's easier to blame the (former) colonials that were shipped out of their own countries as convicts, the natives who "got in the way" and the blacks who were originally slaves.

Unless people are truly honest with themselves and are able to look inside their own backyard for what it really is, I don't see how any of us have got the right to preach to others about how we want our world to be! If we can't uphold our own standards first (and let's face it, everyone's standards are different) we're behaving like hypocrites.

And for those people who keep saying that what happened 400 odd years ago doesn't really concern us? What a load of bollocks! That's falling into the blame game trap.

I'm not suggesting that we should tolerate the new influx of immigration or miscegenation or anything like that, not at all. But like it or not, the people who have built, shaped (and reshaped) the new world are citizens in their respective countries. As for preservation, what is preservation about if we don't give a f*ck about the past and how everybody attributed to it? Why waste our time with it then?

SwordOfTheVistula
Friday, February 15th, 2008, 12:53 AM
Imperialistic views of that kind are against ethnic preservation, how can someone claim the ethnic preservation of his kind when they are in favour of ethnic slaughtering???

Imperialistic means expanding to extend dominance over others, not defending the place you already live.

As to preservation, if someone broke into your home, it would be in the preservationist interest of you and your family to get rid of the intruder by whatever means necessary. Even if the person was originally invited in, if you discover the person is a convicted sex offender who steals from you, you get them out of your house. Likewise, when millions of people break into your people's homeland, in order to preserve your homeland you have to remove the intruders. Likewise, if you discover that the presence of certain others who were once invited is a severe detriment to the future prospects of your people, they must be removed, or at least marginalized.

Generally, actual violence is not required, just showing that you are willing to stand up for yourself if necessary is enough to make the unwanteds leave.

Bridie
Friday, February 15th, 2008, 12:58 AM
I was opposed to Imperialism in the past too... but now I see the value of it. :) Survival of the fittest is of utmost importance, and this entails battles for resources, land and power, with the fittest coming out the successors. That's life and human nature, and nothing will ever eliminate the human tendency for competition.

What is most important for any population is that they come out "winners" rather than "losers"... by advocating Imperialism for my people alone, I support their success in the big competition that is life. To carry on about how immoral Imperialism is just weakens our position in my opinion. While we carry on about how best not to hurt others the Muslims take advantage and come out the fittest because they're not so compromising and emotionally generous. Currently, they are stronger than us. Their strength lays in their support of each other and their own people regardless of how it affects outsiders, ie, they are group oriented, rather than individualstic.

If all population groups were as soft as Europeans are today biological Dawinism would have been seriously limited... possibly with the strongest, fittest and most evolved people dying out because of a lack of resources available to them.

If people want to deny the facts of life and get all warm and fuzzy, that's up to them... but it's not a natural way to be. It defies the natural order of human evolution.

skyhawk
Friday, February 15th, 2008, 09:14 AM
But the US is no longer a colony & should not allow itself to be colonized. The belief that the US is not entitied to the same sort of sovereignty as European nations - including the right not to overwhelmed by third world immigrants is a "colonial mentality."

You support Capitalism which is the reason why you are in this mess in the first place. :confused: They are brought in for cheap labour remember.

On sovereignty. What about the sovereignty of Iraq , Cuba ( still illegally occupied by the US ), Nicaragua , Honduras , Columbia, Vietnam..........I haven't got time to compile a full list but I'm sure you get the picture.

I don't think you will have any sympathies as regards the right of sovereignty for the countries I mentioned but you obviously think that the US is a special case , a country who's sovereignty is somehow to be judged seperately from all others. I don't see any reason why such a special case facility should be enjoyed by the US alone.
The United Nations/World Court were set up to deal with disputes between nations and the question of sovereignty , allegedly , and yet the US has been one of the most hostile members towards any of their rulings or proposals , with most of the rest of the world in the opposing corner everytime. Americans maybe cannot see the irony in any US promotion of the sovereign rights of nations , the rest of the world , however , are not so blind to it.


Imperialistic means expanding to extend dominance over others, not defending the place you already live.

What a limited concept of Imperialism you have presented here.

Do you not have to defend the place you already live in from others who would extend their dominance over you , given the chance?

Did the British not sure up its own defence first , via the strength of the Royal Navy , before it attempted any imperialistic ambitions around the globe ?

Home defence is the number one priority and staging post of imperialistic nations.

I know you said Imperialistic and not Imperialism I just wanted to expand on what the results of imperialism actual mean in real terms and defence is a key part of any debate about it.


I was opposed to Imperialism in the past too... but now I see the value of it. :) Survival of the fittest is of utmost importance, and this entails battles for resources, land and power, with the fittest coming out the successors. That's life and human nature, and nothing will ever eliminate the human tendency for competition.

I might have liked you more in your younger days then :D but the scynicism of advancing years is also something already researched ;) I have had to resist it too at times , but for some reason hope springs eternal here. :)

I think we have a choice. We can either accept the chains that Darwin has unwittingly set upon us and remain forever in a animalistic limbo or we can aim for something better. Even if we fail at least the attempt will provide us with hope , something sorely lacking in todays society.

I believe that we see ourselves as only competitors because we have been indoctrinating by a system that relies on the promotion of competition between people. Any altruistic tendencies , which I believe we have also naturally inherited from our past , are dealt with scorn in such a system for reasons that should be clear enough to most people.

I also think we have reached a point where cooperation is not an alternative but a necessity for survival of the species never mind any dominant race issues people may raise.

The questions inspired by Darwins work do I think tell us much about nature/species but I think there are other lines of enquiry we should pursue before we give up the ghost and accept that , as Phleg said , we will be usurped by cockroaches and rats.

Didn't someone once say the meek shall inherit the earth.

Northern Paladin
Friday, February 15th, 2008, 10:56 AM
America is a Multicultural country IMO. Sure Germanics immigrated here but most Americans are willing to sell their Country to Immigrants for the right price. It's easy to see, Americans are voting for people who don't care about selling out. Why do people betray their Race?

In My Opinion it all boils down to greed, short-sightness and stupidity.


I was opposed to Imperialism in the past too... but now I see the value of it. :) Survival of the fittest is of utmost importance, and this entails battles for resources, land and power, with the fittest coming out the successors. That's life and human nature, and nothing will ever eliminate the human tendency for competition.

What is most important for any population is that they come out "winners" rather than "losers"... by advocating Imperialism for my people alone, I support their success in the big competition that is life. To carry on about how immoral Imperialism is just weakens our position in my opinion. While we carry on about how best not to hurt others the Muslims take advantage and come out the fittest because they're not so compromising and emotionally generous. Currently, they are stronger than us. Their strength lays in their support of each other and their own people regardless of how it affects outsiders, ie, they are group oriented, rather than individualstic.

If all population groups were as soft as Europeans are today biological Dawinism would have been seriously limited... possibly with the strongest, fittest and most evolved people dying out because of a lack of resources available to them.

If people want to deny the facts of life and get all warm and fuzzy, that's up to them... but it's not a natural way to be. It defies the natural order of human evolution.

Imperialism is good in terms of sheer economic efficency, its still operating for better or worse.

Bridie
Friday, February 15th, 2008, 12:21 PM
I might have liked you more in your younger days then but the scynicism of advancing years is also something already researched I have had to resist it too at times , but for some reason hope springs eternal here. I'm not cynical at all.... on the contrary. :p

And I doubt you would have liked me at all when I was younger. ;) I was a mantra singing hippy, an extremist environmentalist, and a (radical) feminist. I enthusiastically studied "women's studies" in uni, while I did volunteer work for Greenpeace, joined a Bhuddist commune and tied myself to trees in protest. :D One could say extremist left wing actually.

Luckily, I've grown wiser with age. ;)



I think we have a choice. We can either accept the chains that Darwin has unwittingly set upon us and remain forever in a animalistic limbo or we can aim for something better. Even if we fail at least the attempt will provide us with hope , something sorely lacking in todays society.

I believe that we see ourselves as only competitors because we have been indoctrinating by a system that relies on the promotion of competition between people. Any altruistic tendencies , which I believe we have also naturally inherited from our past , are dealt with scorn in such a system for reasons that should be clear enough to most people.No. Competition is something that is as old as time itself. It is part of living a physical life, in a physical world, where we have physical needs. It's not part of some modern day conspiracy. It's our innate nature to compete. And to try to destroy it or deny it would be nothing but damaging to ourselves, denying who we really are and weakening to our societies. Humans NEED hierarchical social orders for security, stability and to cater to meeting basic human needs (having set boundaries, superiors one can rely on to protect them etc).

To deny competition between people and populations, is to advocate egalitarianism.

And of course, hierarchies on a national and international level necessarily entail social and biological Darwinism... survival of the fittest. On this level, in an ideal world, we see the weak and primitive eliminated from the larger population, and the stronger, more capable, more evolved people go on to prosper and evolve further.

I see competition and establishment of "pecking orders" in children as young as 2 years of age... as we get older, these hierarchical structures become more important to maintaining social order, but they don't really change in nature. The dominant will win, the weaker members will be subordinate to varying degrees, depending on their place in the pecking order... everyone has their place and their value to the group.

Darwin set nothing upon us. He was just describing the nature of evolution.



I also think we have reached a point where cooperation is not an alternative but a necessity for survival of the species never mind any dominant race issues people may raise.Co-operation yes. Egalitarianism no.



The questions inspired by Darwins work do I think tell us much about nature/species but I think there are other lines of enquiry we should pursue before we give up the ghost and accept that , as Phleg said , we will be usurped by cockroaches and rats.We will be usurped if we don't get off of our collective asses and prevent it. We are superior creatures to cockroaches and rats, ;) therefore we are the fittest. Whether or not we decide to let them outlive us is our choice. :p



Imperialism is good in terms of sheer economic efficency, its still operating for better or worse. There is more to it than just economics. Although that is a big part of it, yes. Money is power.

Æmeric
Friday, February 15th, 2008, 04:49 PM
You support Capitalism which is the reason why you are in this mess in the first place. :confused: They are brought in for cheap labour remember.

On sovereignty. What about the sovereignty of Iraq , Cuba ( still illegally occupied by the US ), Nicaragua , Honduras , Columbia, Vietnam..........I haven't got time to compile a full list but I'm sure you get the picture.

I don't think you will have any sympathies as regards the right of sovereignty for the countries I mentioned but you obviously think that the US is a special case , a country who's sovereignty is somehow to be judged seperately from all others. I don't see any reason why such a special case facility should be enjoyed by the US alone.
You have a selective memory because I have made myself clear on many occassions that I'm opposed to an interventionalist (US) policy abroad & that I have advocated bringing US forces home, including those station in Europe. And I am opposed to the import of cheap labor, which is the reason for mass non-White immigration.

Kadu
Friday, February 15th, 2008, 08:59 PM
I think we have an understanding now though. :)

Good! I was trying to explain to you and Bridie that unlike Europeans, Colonials settled on a place wich wasn't theirs, so giving the USA example we have the natives, the indians, followed by old stock Americans(WASPs and Blacks) and after by various European ethnicities including more WASPs/Germanics.
I reacted to some opinions, namely Bridie's and Americ's.
Bridie doesn't mind in slaughtering native populations, i'm against it since i'm native to my country and i believe that my ethnicity(like all) deserves to be preserved.
Aemeric says that Blacks should be deported, wich i don't understand especially because they belong some much in America as WASPs. Not to mention his Brazilian hypothesis:nono0000: wich is a disrespect to the Brazilian people.

Soten
Friday, February 15th, 2008, 10:03 PM
Against better judgment, I recently headed over to the Stirpes Forum to see what all the fuss was about regarding The Althing. I found the thread "The Althing" and discovered that a lot of their problems were over the fact that The Althing even allows members from the so-called "former colonies". Now I know that Stirpes Forum members are not the best people to get any kind of consensus out of but that together with the current thread and the many general misunderstandings between Americans and other "colonials" and Europeans has got me thinking about the whole situation.

When it comes down to it I care very little if European Germanics consider Americans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, and Afrikaners or their countries "Germanic". A lot of the perceived "un-Germanicness" seems to stem merely from the fact that we ventured outside of Europe and have created new cultural identities for ourselves. In my opinion, this is much like the Angles and Saxons moving to the British Isles to conquer the Brythonic Celts. The Anglo-Saxons clearly have created a new cultural identity for themselves in their new homeland different from that they had previously and this seems to be the case for most Germanics at one point or another. However, these people (all Germanics, not just the English) are usually not regularly questioned too seriously about their "Germanicness". While I am at it I think it necessary to mention that another big reason, or so I gather from Euro-nationalists, to separate themselves from "colonials" is the issue of conquering and replacing "aboriginal" peoples, not to mention slavery. This all seems rather hypocritical to me. I would like to hear about any European ethnicity that was so saintly to its neighbors that they never conquered another people, outright slaughtered populations, replaced these people, etc. I believe it is a symptom of more liberal strains of political indoctrination for European and Germanic nationalists to want to separate and basically to clear their names from "colonial activities". As if it was not their nations that made the very colonization and slavery possible.

When an American speaks of an American people and an American nation the inevitable response from any European nationalist is What "people" and what "nation"? I think it may be beyond our ability to get any European nationalist to understand the unique situation of the American, the Canadian, the Australian, etc. through anything but having them have a personal experience with it, perhaps. It seems as though only "colonials" can understand "colonials" from other "former colonies".

All nationalist "colonials" appear to have concerns over the future of Europe. The same cannot be said in reverse for European nationalists. In a way it defeats the purpose of having a Pro-Germanic Forum that includes a section for "Germanic Lands: Around the World" when one cannot discuss the situations unique and the things pertinent to us without our "Germanicness" or even peoplehood challenged. I believe it was another member on this forum who stated that if there is any hope for Europe, America would need to change first. I think this statement has merit. Not only is it mostly super-liberal policies from the USA in many ways that influence and hold the current situation in Europe in place, but I also believe that if America could ever make any headway then Europe could then do the same and probably quicker and easier then it would in America...once America has made progress in that direction. America is far more entrenched in multiculturalism than any other nation.

There are many more important issues that could and should be discussed about the current situations in all "former colonies" than whether or not these places constitute nations, in the ethnic sense, are "Germanic", or even have a sense of peoplehood amongst much (although not all...) of their populations.


Now with all that said, I would like to throw something out there. Most likely it will get shot down. No hard feelings of course, I'm not even sure what I think of it yet either. Would it be completely unwise, nonsensical, etc. to have a different forum devoted to "colonial" nationalists since there seem to be vast misunderstandings from European Germanic nationalists? This may come off as disrespectful to The Althing but I truly enjoy The Althing and would, of course, visit either way. I obviously also think it is incredibly important to know as much about our European heritage and to maintain contact between "colonials" and Europeans with essentially the same goals. I wonder if this last paragraph is even a smart idea to include, but it popped into my head so I figured "Why not ask?". Sure seems like I'm trying to secede from The Althing...but what else would you expect from an American? :D

Signed,

Soten Thomas Jefferson

John Hancock John Adams

Benjamin Franklin Benjamin Rush

;)

Odin
Friday, February 15th, 2008, 10:26 PM
I'm European Germanic and I think the US is Germanic. I have relatives there. Stop slandering the US with your holier than thou rhetorics. This forum isn't a black nationalist forum. Just joined and read it's dedicated to Germanics. The administrator message should be clear too. Why people continue to slander the US despite her warning is beyond me. :rolleyes:

SwordOfTheVistula
Friday, February 15th, 2008, 11:08 PM
The United Nations/World Court were set up to deal with disputes between nations and the question of sovereignty , allegedly , and yet the US has been one of the most hostile members towards any of their rulings or proposals , with most of the rest of the world in the opposing corner everytime.

How does an international globalist body that is trying to operate as a one-world government square with sovereignty? Iraq and Serbia were invaded on the pretense of 'violating international law' with sanction from these international governing bodies. Serbia was bombed, invaded, it's civilian population and infrastructure attacked, it's democratically elected leaders seized and brought to trial on in a foreign country with foreign judges for actions which were legal in their country, their president denied transport to Russia for medical treatment and allowed to die in prison, a region of their country invaded and Serbs ethnically cleansed from it, prohibited from reuniting with the Serbian part of Bosnia-all under the direction of these international bodies, the UN, World Court, EU, NATO, etc. The only way to maintain sovereignty is by maintaining a strong defense and fighting for yourself, and maintaining voluntary alliances with countries with similar ends.






Against better judgment, I recently headed over to the Stirpes Forum to see what all the fuss was about regarding The Althing. I found the thread "The Althing" and discovered that a lot of their problems were over the fact that The Althing even allows members from the so-called "former colonies". Now I know that Stirpes Forum members are not the best people to get any kind of consensus out of but that together with the current thread and the many general misunderstandings between Americans and other "colonials" and Europeans has got me thinking about the whole situation.

That forum isn't a good representation of European nationalists, it's just a handful of kiddies on their computers. As far as actual European nationalists go, we've got good relations with the actual nationalist parties in Europe such as the British National Party, the Vlaams Belang in Flanders (Belgium), the National Front in France, and are working on building stronger ties with nationalists in Russia and other eastern European countries. Their leaders frequently come on speaking tours in the US, and when David Duke got in trouble over trumped up charges, it was Ukraine which offered him a home and a teaching position. So don't let a handful of malcontent kiddies disrupt the cooperation we have with preservationists of our ethnic kindred back in the old country.

skyhawk
Saturday, February 16th, 2008, 12:56 AM
I'm not cynical at all.... on the contrary. :p

And I doubt you would have liked me at all when I was younger. ;) I was a mantra singing hippy, an extremist environmentalist, and a (radical) feminist. I enthusiastically studied "women's studies" in uni, while I did volunteer work for Greenpeace, joined a Bhuddist commune and tied myself to trees in protest. :D One could say extremist left wing actually.

Luckily, I've grown wiser with age. ;)

I still think I would have liked you more then ( tied to a tree and wearing an Afghan coat :D) than I like the person you have become. It's your life and I respect the right of people to tread their own path but , imo, ( which does not count for anything) I think you have made the switch from a butterfly to a caterpillar.



No. Competition is something that is as old as time itself. It is part of living a physical life, in a physical world, where we have physical needs. It's not part of some modern day conspiracy. It's our innate nature to compete. And to try to destroy it or deny it would be nothing but damaging to ourselves, denying who we really are and weakening to our societies. Humans NEED hierarchical social orders for security, stability and to cater to meeting basic human needs (having set boundaries, superiors one can rely on to protect them etc).

I have never denied that competition is part of our inherited nature or suggested that it is a modern day conspiracy.

I think there are two very contrasting aspects of human nature. The competative side and the altruistic side. If we see ourselves in just the one light we are missing some of our natural inheritance , imo.

If we where able to return to the 1790's - 1850's we would see the widespread general disgust at the onset of Capitalism, or rather the selfish, dignity stripping nature of its construction. Most people alive then found this new system wholly unnatural.

Wage slavery was something most people saw as an immoral form of economic organization. A destroyer of traditional ( natural ? ) socio-economic relations between people. Infact it was often compared to the chattel slavery of the day.
Two hundred years down the road and most people in the western industrial nations seldom see wage slavery in this light. After two centuries of indoctrination in the promotion of selfish individualism should we be surprised .

Darwin did talk about the survival of the fittest but it was based around the ability ( or not ) to adapt to a changing environment. Those who adapted best survived , those who didn't perished. If we wish to survive I think the choices are still the same. Adapt in favour of cooperation or don't and carry on towards extinction.


To deny competition between people and populations, is to advocate egalitarianism.

As I have said I don't deny the need to compete I just think we should find less destructive means of fullfilling that need




Co-operation yes. Egalitarianism no.

You can't be pro Imperialism and pro cooperation at the same time , imo.



We will be usurped if we don't get off of our collective asses and prevent it. We are superior creatures to cockroaches and rats, ;) therefore we are the fittest. Whether or not we decide to let them outlive us is our choice. :p


I think our ability to adapt will determine whether or not the meek will inherit the earth sooner rather than later. I am not a critic of Darwin , infact I hold his work in the highest esteem .

And the choice still remains...............cooperation or competition between nations. Which is best for preservation full stop ?

Kurtz
Saturday, February 16th, 2008, 01:42 AM
Is the USA a Germanic Country?

The trickier question is: Should the US still be considered Germanic if Barack Obama becomes president?

skyhawk
Saturday, February 16th, 2008, 01:59 AM
You have a selective memory because I have made myself clear on many occassions that I'm opposed to an interventionalist (US) policy abroad & that I have advocated bringing US forces home, including those station in Europe. And I am opposed to the import of cheap labor, which is the reason for mass non-White immigration.

How do you expect the US to profit from all the resources in other countries without it having an interventionalist type foreign policy ? That's how it works ,but I do apologize for maybe tarring you with a more extreme brush than is merited.

Bridie
Saturday, February 16th, 2008, 03:45 AM
Good! I was trying to explain to you and Bridie that unlike Europeans, Colonials settled on a place wich wasn't theirs, so giving the USA example we have the natives, the indians, followed by old stock Americans(WASPs and Blacks) and after by various European ethnicities including more WASPs/Germanics.
I reacted to some opinions, namely Bridie's and Americ's.
Bridie doesn't mind in slaughtering native populations, i'm against it since i'm native to my country and i believe that my ethnicity(like all) deserves to be preserved.
Aemeric says that Blacks should be deported, wich i don't understand especially because they belong some much in America as WASPs. Not to mention his Brazilian hypothesis wich is a disrespect to the Brazilian people.
If you want to join in the debate Kadu, you're going to have to come up with arguments instead of vague opinions.

Saying something along the lines of, "I don't approve of Imperialism because I don't want to be conquered" doesn't make sense to me. A bit like saying "I don't approve human competition because I don't want to lose".

Anyway, going along with your line of reasoning (that whatever you do to others, you can expect the same done to you) Portugal made it's bed long ago. For your Imperialistic past, you should be conquered and colonised just as the areas of South America were by the Portugese. Don't think that just saying "oh sorry, we made a mistake" will ever be enough... the world doesn't work that way. If you say "sorry" and then allow your own ideas of what you put out you also must receive to take reign, then you must accept Imperialism thrust upon Portugal.

Your reasoning, not mine.


@ Soten - great post mate. I think you hit the nail on the head with a lot of things :)... but as Sword of the Vistula (bless him) has already said, the "real world" is quite different to the "internet world" (Thank God! :D)...

That forum isn't a good representation of European nationalists, it's just a handful of kiddies on their computers. As far as actual European nationalists go, we've got good relations with the actual nationalist parties in Europe such as the British National Party, the Vlaams Belang in Flanders (Belgium), the National Front in France, and are working on building stronger ties with nationalists in Russia and other eastern European countries. Their leaders frequently come on speaking tours in the US, and when David Duke got in trouble over trumped up charges, it was Ukraine which offered him a home and a teaching position. So don't let a handful of malcontent kiddies disrupt the cooperation we have with preservationists of our ethnic kindred back in the old country.You give us hope Sword of the Vistula. ;) :)



I still think I would have liked you more then ( tied to a tree and wearing an Afghan coat ) than I like the person you have become. It's your life and I respect the right of people to tread their own path but , imo, ( which does not count for anything) I think you have made the switch from a butterfly to a caterpillar.Now you're just getting personal. That's quite unnecessary, unless it's just to make you feel better about yourself by insulting me. Not a good debating technique though, as it merely serves to compromise your integrity.



I have never denied that competition is part of our inherited nature or suggested that it is a modern day conspiracy.
That is how I interpreted this...

I believe that we see ourselves as only competitors because we have been indoctrinating by a system that relies on the promotion of competition between people. Any altruistic tendencies , which I believe we have also naturally inherited from our past , are dealt with scorn in such a system for reasons that should be clear enough to most people.
So you think that our competitive sides should be ignored/denied? Or that our the nature of competition between individuals, communities and nations should be tempered by altruism applied to foreigners perhaps? Well, the latter idea has merit I'm sure, but the question that would naturally follow from that would be just what degree of altruism can be applied before it begins to weaken your nation's position???

If you're thinking that one's competitors (or enemies) won't take ruthlessly advantage of such altruistim, think again. Just look at what's happening now to countries subscribing to overwhelming notions of altruism (putting others' needs before one's own) in foreign policy, including immigration - Masses of primitives (cultural and racial) are descending upon these wealthy "altruistic countries" and taking whatever they can get at the cost of the local populations. They are also permanently changing local populations... racially, behaviourally and culturally.

Give an inch and they'll take a mile - as the saying goes.

I should say that there should always be a degree of compassion applied when involved in competition, but altruism (as distinctive from compassion) must first and foremost be applied to one's own people (something I've always highly advocated). Compassion should by applied where is possible (without weakening one's position) to foreigners. Possibly even altruism as long as it doesn't interfere with the successes of one's own people.

Foreigners' needs should never come before the needs of one's own people.


As I have said I don't deny the need to compete I just think we should find less destructive means of fullfilling that need
Death must always come before re-birth. Creation and destruction are interdependent... intertwining... inseparable. This is a natural law. There will be no positive evolution without sacrifice... we just have to make sure that it's not us who sacrifice ourselves for purely emotional concerns.

To suggest the end to destruction, suggests the end to growth and positive evolution. It suggests stagnation. This defies the natural order of life, which is dynamic.



You can't be pro Imperialism and pro cooperation at the same time , imo.Sure you can. Just depends on who you wish to co-operate with.



I think our ability to adapt will determine whether or not the meek will inherit the earth sooner rather than later. For sure. Adaptation, both social and biological, are of utmost importance. I don't see where you think I've ever denied that. Perhaps you and I just disagree on which adaptative strategies to adhere to. You advocate something rather unnatural, untried, untested... which will ultimately result in evolutionary stagnation. And I advocate the opposite. You left, me right. ;)



And the choice still remains...............cooperation or competition between nations. Which is best for preservation full stop ?Cooperation with those who will best serve as our allies, competition with those who won't.

Kadu
Saturday, February 16th, 2008, 04:22 AM
If you want to join in the debate Kadu, you're going to have to come up with arguments instead of vague opinions.

Saying something along the lines of, "I don't approve of Imperialism because I don't want to be conquered" doesn't make sense to me. A bit like saying "I don't approve human competition because I don't want to lose".

No, it's more like "i don't like a political ideology(Communism, Fascism or Capitalism,etc...) because it's harmful to my people".


Anyway, going along with your line of reasoning (that whatever you do to others, you can expect the same done to you) Portugal made it's bed long ago. For your Imperialistic past, you should be conquered and colonised just as the areas of South America were by the Portugese. Don't think that just saying "oh sorry, we made a mistake" will ever be enough... the world doesn't work that way. If you say "sorry" and then allow your own ideas of what you put out you also must receive to take reign, then you must accept Imperialism thrust upon Portugal.

Your reasoning, not mine.





I already explained my thoughts on the threads i adressed to Allenson, so don't try to provoke me, and especially, don't put words on my mouth or conjecture about my thoughts.

SwordOfTheVistula
Saturday, February 16th, 2008, 07:39 AM
How do you expect the US to profit from all the resources in other countries without it having an interventionalist type foreign policy ? That's how it works ,but I do apologize for maybe tarring you with a more extreme brush than is merited.

Easily, by exchanging manufactured goods, information services, and agricultural goods for them.

Bridie
Saturday, February 16th, 2008, 08:09 AM
No, it's more like "i don't like a political ideology(Communism, Fascism or Capitalism,etc...) because it's harmful to my people".Care to expand on that? Because just saying rather ambiguously that "it's harmful to my people" is still merely a simple opinion, and not an argument.



I already explained my thoughts on the threads i adressed to Allenson, so don't try to provoke me, and especially, don't put words on my mouth or conjecture about my thoughts.

On the posts you addressed to Allenson? I must be missing them then as I re-read over the thread looking for them, because really all I've seen you come up with is this...

Bridie doesn't mind in slaughtering native populations, i'm against it since i'm native to my country and i believe that my ethnicity(like all) deserves to be preserved.

Everybody has it, the only difference is that i recognize the mistake and Bridie(and you i think) does not.
Imperialistic views of that kind are against ethnic preservation, how can someone claim the ethnic preservation of his kind when they are in favour of ethnic slaughtering???
All I see there are two rather flimsy, unsubstantiated opinions (that Imperialism is wrong because you don't want Portugese to be slaughtered and it's occurrence in the past was a mistake), one illogical implication (that if one accepts Imperialism one must also accept Imperialism being imposed upon themselves), and one rhetorical question (implying that Imperialism is a mistake because whatever you put out, you must receive). I, on the other hand, have argued at length about the philosophies behind political theories and ethics, even touching on biological and social Darwinism, yet you still think you have the right to accuse me of provocation?? Take a good at how personally insulting you've been towards me, and presumptuous you've been (with no good, logical explanation as to why you hold such presumptions). Now that is provocation. You have been deliberating provocative here. I have not. I have a strong foundation for my political convictions (which I've communicated). You appear to have none.

Now, as for the idea that advocating Imperialism for one's own people, (and even perhaps one's own close allies), necessitates the acceptance of Imperialism being imposed upon themselves by foreigners, I would say that this is akin to saying something like (for example) because one may favour a particular offensive technique in say, football, that one must necessarily accept defeat by their opponent (via using the same technique). Now this would be a strange concept.... the acceptance of defeat, rather than fighting to win, just because you think that "it's only fair". Advocating an offensive or defensive strategy doesn't mean one has to lay down and allow others to conquer them. Your opponent can use the same technique (and concerning Imperialism, expansionism, colonialism THEY WILL whether you advocate it or not, since such forces stem from human nature - which is COMPETITIVE) but you never have to accept defeat.

I can understand wanting to change the rules of the game because you think they're unfair or because you don't think your chances of winning are too high, but on the international stage, you (or any one nation), don't write the rules of the game. Natural evolutionary processes are not a force within your, or anyone else's, control. To endeavour to eliminate such processes on a global scale, one must first eliminate them on an individual scale... and as I explained in previous posts, this is not in anyone's best interests (nor do I believe that it's possible).

You are kidding yourself if you think that opposing something as old and inevitable as expansionism of human populations will prevent foreigners from offensively expanding into your own territory. The Muslims sure as hell won't care whether or not Portugal opposes Imperialism... they will still impose it on you if your position is weak enough. And taking the passive role of believing that all populations are equal (international cultural/racial egalitarianism) and actively supporting all other ethnic groups on earth who inhabit their native land (whoever they're supposed to be, since all human populations originated from Africa) weakens Portugal's position. On the same token, accepting that national expansionism is inevitable, and a force to be embraced if necessary for the prosperity of one's own people (along with embracing ethnic nationalism), is a good defensive and offensive strategy. And believe me, whether Portugal embraces it or not... other nations already do.

One does not win the game by supporting one's own opponents... hoping that they'll all play nicely and not take advantage of one's own weaknesses. ;)

skyhawk
Saturday, February 16th, 2008, 08:50 PM
If you want to join in the debate Kadu, you're going to have to come up with arguments instead of vague opinions.

I 'm sure Kadu's English is better than your Portugeuse Bridie and I'm sure you appreciate how difficult it is to fully express an opinion in a non native tongue.
As Take That say ............ " Have a little Patience" :) ( I hasten to add I am NOT a fan )
Besides , who is to say who should be allowed to join in a debate here ? :)
Anything else could be mistaken for a dictatorship ;)



Now you're just getting personal. That's quite unnecessary, unless it's just to make you feel better about yourself by insulting me. Not a good debating technique though, as it merely serves to compromise your integrity.

Firstly , if I have insulted you please accept my apologies. The reference to the stages of a butterfly's life cycle was intended to indicate a backward step in development not to imply that you look like a caterpillar. I haven't the foggiest idea what you look like.
The reference to Afghan coats and hippy culture was a lighthearted comment on something you yourself had commented on ,with smilies. Sorry if it is now offensive.
Lastly, I have no integrity here to compromise :D , I doubt many people here even read anything I post :) or if they do they don't take it seriously anyway. But I certainly take no pleasure in insulting people and certainly would not feel better in anyway if I did. I have only ever been accused of insulting somebody once before , if I remember rightly ( in over 200 posts ) Considering the topics I post on and my own particular bent I think thats not a bad average


That is how I interpreted this...

I still don't see how you interpreted that way , it clearly indicates the two sides of human nature I have been refering to..........

Originally Posted by Skyhawk
I believe that we see ourselves as only competitors because we have been indoctrinating by a system that relies on the promotion of competition between people. Any altruistic tendencies , which I believe we have also naturally inherited from our past , are dealt with scorn in such a system for reasons that should be clear enough to most people.



So you think that our competitive sides should be ignored/denied? Or that our the nature of competition between individuals, communities and nations should be tempered by altruism applied to foreigners perhaps? Well, the latter idea has merit I'm sure, but the question that would naturally follow from that would be just what degree of altruism can be applied before it begins to weaken your nation's position??? ...

You cannot deny the fact that people will compete so how could you possibly deny or ignore it ? You just have to live with it and try and turn the whole competitive process to social account instead of having it line the pockets of a few billionaires around the globe.

A very much more altruistic foreign policy would be an improvement , imo. It is working in Venezeula who swap national oil reserves for Cuban doctors. There is no money involved as far as I know , except for maybe payments made to the Cuban doctors themselves. One country has an abundance of oil but a shortage of doctors , especially in the poorer regions , the other an abundance of doctors but no oil. It makes sense to have this type of co-operation. None of this would have been possible today because Venezeula's oil reserves were due to be privatized 10 years ago due to pressure from western imperialists and a handful of already wealthy Venezeulans.

I don't think the power of the west is under threat or would necessarily be under threat even if a more compassionate , realistic solutions were extended to the needier nations. If you don't let then develop nuclear weaponry ( by giving them the technology ( Israel ) how can they realistically be a threat.
In the 1980's Ronald Reagan considered Nicaragua a threat to the defence of the US , Grenada , and so on. What we are often told are threats are necessary illusions , distortions , to deflect another imperialist intervention.






If you're thinking that one's competitors (or enemies) won't take ruthlessly advantage of such altruistim, think again. Just look at what's happening now to countries subscribing to overwhelming notions of altruism (putting others' needs before one's own) in foreign policy, including immigration - Masses of primitives (cultural and racial) are descending upon these wealthy "altruistic countries" and taking whatever they can get at the cost of the local populations. They are also permanently changing local populations... racially, behaviourally and culturally.


As I said earlier , don't sell them the weaponry and they are not a threat

Immigration is the need of a capitalist society. Cheap labourers. If you have a problem with them take it up with the privateers who benefit from paying the low wages. Force them to cut their profits and employ nationals.

We are living through heavily revisionist times , you may have noticed.

The welfare state is deliberately , imo , being misused so as to bring doubt about the merits of a welfare system. It's an old but effective ploy. The national health service in Britain is effectively being privatized.

The business sector love all this. Cheap labourers you can hire and fire at will , who if they become ill use the national health service ( much to everybodies disgust because the immigrant workforce is also marginalized and submissive ) All these fine institutions are under attack so we can go back to the days with little or no healthcare for much of the nation , and private interests back in control and profiting from the nations health ( or lack of it)


Give an inch and they'll take a mile - as the saying goes.

Well someones got to start sometime. Or we become extinct pretty sharpish.



I should say that there should always be a degree of compassion applied when involved in competition, but altruism (as distinctive from compassion) must first and foremost be applied to one's own people (something I've always highly advocated). Compassion should by applied where is possible (without weakening one's position) to foreigners. Possibly even altruism as long as it doesn't interfere with the successes of one's own people.

Where's the compassion in Imperialism?

Ones own people should constitute all of ones own people.


Foreigners' needs should never come before the needs of one's own people.


That's exactly what Imperialism is. You are just looking at it from one direction.

We are the foreigners to the people/nations whos mineral wealth/economy is lining the pockets of western elites. And that's exactly what they think about it too when they are subjected to live under a western sponsored oligarchy . I'm glad you see their point. :)


Death must always come before re-birth. Creation and destruction are interdependent... intertwining... inseparable. This is a natural law. There will be no positive evolution without sacrifice... we just have to make sure that it's not us who sacrifice ourselves for purely emotional concerns.

I remember Bakunins comments on the positive force of destruction , for which he was criticized , I agree with him and you. I think we are very much in decline , all nations . What evolves is down to the people of the here and now.




To suggest the end to destruction, suggests the end to growth and positive evolution. It suggests stagnation. This defies the natural order of life, which is dynamic.

There is no end to all that stuff. It will survive us whatever path we take.

I think nature will see to it we get our fix of destruction if we can't manage it ourselves :)



Sure you can. Just depends on who you wish to co-operate with.

Who can you trust?

The same week Britain declared support ( military support) to the US invasion of Iraq , the US slapped big taxes in the US on imported British steel.

I think the truth is that we are all out for ourselves ( with regards to nations and the powerful elites who run them )



For sure. Adaptation, both social and biological, are of utmost importance. I don't see where you think I've ever denied that. Perhaps you and I just disagree on which adaptative strategies to adhere to. You advocate something rather unnatural, untried, untested... which will ultimately result in evolutionary stagnation. And I advocate the opposite. You left, me right. ;)


I have never suggested you have denied anything. I think I was the one who included adaptation to the survival of the fittest line in my last post. I don't remember you mentioning it to be honest


Cooperation with those who will best serve as our allies, competition with those who won't.

Okay , you are entitled to your opinion.

BTW now I am aware you are so sensitive , I will try my best to ensure my words cannot really be deemed insulting in future.

Sorry but I temporarily subscribed to the Aussie stereotype of thick skin , earthiness and so on.

skyhawk
Sunday, February 17th, 2008, 12:42 AM
Easily, by exchanging manufactured goods, information services, and agricultural goods for them.

Does the US still have a vibrant manufacturing industry? I thought most US manufacturers used the sweatshops of Asia to manufacture their goods.

If we are talking more hi-tech goods , a plasma television is no use to anyone without electricity.

Agricultural goods would be a vast improvement on arms sales ( which is the major US export to the third world nations )

But it goes deeper than trade as I suspect you might already know.

Intervention in the past has had much to do with the overthrow of democratically elected governments who have the audacity to actual want to look after their own people with the revenue from their own resources

SwordOfTheVistula
Sunday, February 17th, 2008, 08:51 AM
Does the US still have a vibrant manufacturing industry? I thought most US manufacturers used the sweatshops of Asia to manufacture their goods.

Yeah, we don't do manufacturing anymore that requires large amounts of low/unskilled labor. The main exports in the US are in agricultural products which take advantage of advanced farming techniques combined with large amounts of land (mainly corn&soybean products, lumber, cotton), advanced machinery such as construction machinery and airplanes, intellectual property, and information&financial services.

Some of the displacement of our manufacturing industry has to do with artificial constraints such as a high corporate income tax and low VAT/sales tax in the US compared to the reverse in Europe, currency depression by the Chinese government in order to keep exports high, and low interest rates by the US Federal Reserve to inflate housing prices and allow people to withdraw money from their houses with 2nd mortgages in order to purchase imports from overseas. Recently the housing bubble burst, leading to a bank crises, and the purchase of American bank assets by the countries which we 'exploited' by purchasing things from them with borrowed money.

As far as interventions go, they have been for political reasons, either combating communism in the Cold War, or in a crusade to spread 'democratic pluralism' in the 1993-current period, with considerable influence by a lobbies related to the Israel-Palestine conflict in the Iraq War. The fact that communist China is now our 2nd biggest trading partner after Canada should be ample evidence that we do not need to overthrow a country's government in order to get them to trade with us.

skyhawk
Sunday, February 17th, 2008, 09:20 PM
Yeah, we don't do manufacturing anymore that requires large amounts of low/unskilled labor. The main exports in the US are in agricultural products which take advantage of advanced farming techniques combined with large amounts of land (mainly corn&soybean products, lumber, cotton), advanced machinery such as construction machinery and airplanes, intellectual property, and information&financial services.

That's because American capitalists make more money employing Chinese people than they do employing their own people. It's not like Americans don't use these products , they just import them back . More Americans on welfare , rich pickings for the capitalist with no loyalty to his or hers people , imo.
They also sell genetically modified seeds , patented seeds , to poor countries. One of the clauses is that these poor people around the world are not allowed to save some seeds for next years crop. They don't actual own them , I know it's strange but it is true.
Also , the same group who own the patented seeds also has clauses stating the use of pesticides/herbicides must be confined to the " Round-Up " range of products. Which they also own. Failure to comply leads to ruinous fines. A company head actually stated it amounted to " ownership of the food chain." This is where we are at.


Recently the housing bubble burst, leading to a bank crises, and the purchase of American bank assets by the countries which we 'exploited' by purchasing things from them with borrowed money.

There is no rule to say you cannot be beaten at your own game. I am aware of how precarious the US economy is . They didn't own large parts of the US economy before the US business sector decided to cash in on China when it opened the door.




As far as interventions go, they have been for political reasons, either combating communism in the Cold War, or in a crusade to spread 'democratic pluralism' in the 1993-current period, with considerable influence by a lobbies related to the Israel-Palestine conflict in the Iraq War. The fact that communist China is now our 2nd biggest trading partner after Canada should be ample evidence that we do not need to overthrow a country's government in order to get them to trade with us.

Here is a list of US interventions , they cover the spectrum. Opposition to nationalist movements , overthrow of democratically elected leaders all over the world , support for their oligarchy friends ,

http://www.krysstal.com/display_acts.php?year1=0000&year2=0000&regioncountry=ALL&countrya=USA&topic=ALL

Overthrowing the elected leader of Haiti or Chile isn't the same as taking on China. They have a nuclear capacity too. The same happened with North Korea recently. Much Washington rhetoric towards the alleged axis of evil member but no military build up around its territory. Why? because they too have a nuclear capability. Iran hasn't and look at the difference in tactics.

China also has the capacity to effect large parts of the US economy , as you pointed out earlier.

The balance of power is shifting towards China all the time. All achieved without any deployment of Chinese soldiers around the globe. Remarkable when you think about it

This will all come to a head , and I think the West will find itself at war with China ( allied with Russia and the arabs. Indeed , any nation that has suffered at the hands of Western Imperialism........ that's nearly everyone else too. But all this is better debated in a different thread maybe.

Drakkar
Monday, February 18th, 2008, 03:26 AM
If you ask any American this question, they will probably look at you as if you had two heads. Historically, this country was built by predominately English immigrants. They incorporated their language, architectural techniques, governmental and law structure, culture, and so on. After a short amount of time, however, immigrants from other countries came in hopes of making money. Soon after, millions of people from every country in the west came for that same reason. I'd really like to know what immigration policy they had during the transition period into the 19th century, because they obviously didn't care too much about opening the flood gates. As you can see today, the border is not very secure anyway, even legally. That's the problem that America has always had. When faced with the dilemma of a national identity, I suppose it was decided that because most of the cities and infrastructure was built by immigrants, it was in fact a nation of immigrants. Therefore, it was more and more accepted for people from more diverse backgrounds to be Americans and integrate after a couple of generations. That is where the mentality is now. Everyone is from another country originally, unless you are a Native, and everyone had to work hard on their own to get a better life. A rich Italian will treat a poor Anglo beggar like crap and get away with it if he wants. After all, they're both considered Americans (WASP was created as a negative connotation btw, and used disdainfully). If you understand where I'm coming from, it will probably make sense to you that I believe less and less every decade that America was ever a Germanic country. There are so many historical and present ethnic enclaves that even though they had an Anglo filter, they were distinct and not really Anglo in nature. All of these enclaves are practically a definition of America. If I may digress a bit, these were not particularly harmonious. Many riots over the last 250 years of American existence were over ethnicities. It's never been pretty.

Æmeric
Monday, February 18th, 2008, 05:15 AM
I'd really like to know what immigration policy they had during the transition period into the 19th century, because they obviously didn't care too much about opening the flood gates.

There was a political party in the 1850s called the American Party, that wanted to control immigration & limit it to Protestants from Europe. This was in response to the immigration of Irish Catholics & of Germans with radical political ideals in the wake of the 1848 revolution. The business establishment which was in favor of cheap immigrant labor tarred them as the Knownothing party, which is their historical name.

There were restrictive immigration laws against Asian immigrants in the 19th century. This was response to Chinese immigration on the West Coast. Congress finally restricted immigration from China after race riots. Then later came the Japanese in the early 20th century which was ended due toi a gentlemens agreement with Japan. By the 1920s it was virtually impossible for Asians to immigrate to the US. Had these laws not been passed the western US would have been overrun by Asians before WWII.

Gagnraad
Monday, February 18th, 2008, 02:28 PM
You all forget that America are built of immigrants. None of you are "ethnic" americans, since most of you are descendants of European people. The native american population are the only ethnic americans.

But the past doesn't matter, the whole world are driving itself in ruin, and I dare to say that America is the country that are the driving force of the inevitable end.

Nachtengel
Saturday, February 14th, 2009, 02:35 AM
There are threads about the Germanic character of Scotland, England and other countries. How about America. I'm curious because I've seen many introductions by American members, and I rarely found a case where their ancestry was fully Germanic. I saw Italian, French, Irish, Polish and other ethnicities into the pile. Is this a case with most Americans, or is it just a coincidence that Skadi gets the most mixed ones? Or is it the case that Americans list every known part of their ancestry, even if it's as small as 1 %, as someone else said?

Oswiu
Saturday, February 14th, 2009, 02:53 AM
There may be a factor of ethnic consciousness (and thereby Skadi membership) being rather higher, or more elaborate, among individuals who know what ethnic differences mean on a personal level, when dealing with different family members. I show this myself, and often get frustrated with pureblood Englishmen I meet who hardly deserve the title, from what little they know of their heritage. Just a guess, but; The large numbers of fully Germanic Americans are less evident here (or is it a matter of perception?) as they might not have given any thought to this aspect of their identity, certainly not enough to prompt them into joining our sort of forum.

Zauberspruch
Saturday, February 14th, 2009, 04:00 AM
I somehow doubt that Scotland or England have more Germanic character than America. It's just that we have been forced to hide our flags and our customs. Guilt and Shame have taken a heavy toll. MC and PC have fallen heavy on the minds of our kindred Folk. Germans were persecuted here in both world wars to the point that Dachshunds were renamed Liberty Dogs (some were even set on fire out of hatred for all things German). Towns were renamed (Germantown, Tennessee became Neshoba) and good old Sauerkraut was called Victory Cabbage for a while. The hatred for all things Teutonic was thorough and lingers on today with Germans often cast as villains by Hollywood. On the other hand, in Colonial times German almost became the national language and on into the early 20th Century entire neighborhoods retained their German ethnic populations. Just look at Chicago, NYC and places like Milwaukee and St. Louis. There were Saengerbund and Liederkranz clubs in many cities of any size and some still exist today. The Turnverrein and Sons of Hermann were once almost everywhere.

The Irish are free to parade on Patty's Day, but let a hundred drunken Germans gather in the streets for a parade on any day and everyone else runs for cover. Sadly, we Germans do not protest the burden of guilt laid upon us as we should, nor do we celebrate our ethnic roots as we should publicly. Guilt and Shame. Sssshh. Don't say anything! And that, methinks, is why we are so hard to find.


Zauberspruch






.

Sigurd
Saturday, February 14th, 2009, 05:48 PM
Much of the book is about oddly Soviet-coloured in the way matters are applied in Robert Harris' Fatherland, a novel where the scenario is a victorious NS Germany. There was so much corruption and bs in the book that it's really more what the Soviet Union turned out to be ... but amidst a lot of ideological and analytical rubbish, one certain quote stuck quite well --- because in a way it is oft so true. :P

Placards announced them from left to right, in descending order of acceptibility to the authorities. [...] March was a One/Two; Fiebes, ironically a borderline Three. But then the racial fanatics were seldom the blue-eyed Aryan supermen - they, in the words of Das Schwazes Korps were "too inclined to keep their membership for granted". Instead, the swampy frontiers of the German race were patrolled by those less confident of their blood-wothiness. Insecurity breeds good border guards. The knock-kneed Franconian schoolmaster, ridiculous in his Lederhosen; the Bavarian shopkeeper with his pebble glasses; the red-haired Thuringian accountant with a nervous tic and a predilection for the younger members of the Hitler Youth; the lame and the ugly, the runts of the national litter - these were the loudest defenders of the Volk.

In a way, it is quite true: The more peripheral someone is to identifying with something, the more important it will be to them to safeguard it. The most fierce Germans were always the one near the ethnic and state boundaries - whilst the people in the heartland had nothing to worry about, really: If half of their country's territory was shed, they'd still be safe.

Likewise, if someone is let's say 3/4 German and 1/4 Italian. That makes him predominantly Germanic. If he married a fully German woman then his children would be even more predominantly German and Germanic. Yet if he married a fully Italian woman then his children are going to be predominantly Italian and Romance ... A man however, who is fully German can marry any woman and as long as she has a minute German ancestry, even if it's only 1/32 --- and his children will still be more German than any other ethnicity. So obviously it is going to be more important to the former the marry a fully German woman than to the latter.

You can apply that to other matters, such as general genetics as well. Assume you have a person who is not blonde himself, but is a strong carrier of the "blonde gene", as his mother was blonde - yet on his father's side, his great-grandparents rather than his grand-parents were blonde (to be blonde yourself on a primary level, as a general rule, at least one of the two grandparents on either side must be blonde --- other than that, you're likely just a carrier of the genetic mutation enabling full blondism). To make sure that his children can receive the entire spectrum from light-blonde to dark-brown, he would have to marry a blonde woman, or at least one who has a blonde parent --- otherwise it is very unlikely that his children or grandchildren can be blonde. A blonde man, however can marry either a blonde or brunette woman and his children may still be blonde, as the amount of carriers of the gene transcends those where it actually becomes phenotypical rather than just genotypical by far.. Obviously, the former is thus going to be more particular about it...

Oft people only realise the value of what they have when they have lost it. Therefore, the more endangered they are of losing it, the harder they are going to cling to it. With 25% of all leading NS, the 10% of Austrian Germans were over-represented --- and that is likely directly based upon the fact that the provision in the St. Germain treaty forbade a union with their brother nation: Identification as a German nationalist was thus all the more important. Even nowadays, the "right-wing" movement in lost areas such as South Tyrol is disproportionately strong.

As such, I would not assume that mixedness amongst "Germanic Americans" is particularly strong --- but that those who are closer to the periphery will find it in the nature of the thing that it is more important for them to identify with it and make choices in life accordingly, and like everywhere they'll thus be over-represented in defending that proverbial border fort.

Ossi
Saturday, February 14th, 2009, 06:11 PM
BS. Actually mixed people, Americans or not, are prone to more mixing. Look in the threads like Slavic and Germanic. It's the mixed people who wouldn't mind a foreign partner in the family, because they're already mixed and they're afraid of being thought of as "hypocritical" if they do otherwise. It's a simplistic psychology ethnically and racially mixed people adopt. The more mixed they are, the more they support everyone else to become like them. "I'm mixed and if I don't support mixing it means mixing is bad. Therefore I'm bad too. But I don't want to be bad, I want to feel good about myself." That some register on a Germanic forum doesn't make them staunch supporters of Germanic preservation. Many confuse it for a WN forum and you'll see it in their stance. They won't mind immigration from Southern and Eastern Europeans.

oneandonlyjoanie
Saturday, February 14th, 2009, 07:08 PM
I am a German-American. My family on my mothers side began in America with a Hessian soldier and his English wife. Their son Frederick married the daughter of an American revolutionary war soldier. Their grandson, John Henry, fought on the Union side in the American Civil War. My grandfather fought in the Navy for the USA in WWI. My father was career US Army and fought in Korea and Viet Nam. My brother was in Dessert Storm. On my father's side of the family we are all German descent who immigrated in the late 1800's. My grandfather, the first American born on that side of the family had a career as a brakeman on the train in Buffalo New York.
Like many other German-Americans I have been the victim of attempted identity assasination. Fortunately, God is good and I have been able to find my family history and true identity. I do not yet know how to speak, read and write German but would like to learn.
I am happy that my family went to Germany in the fifties as human shields in the post-war period. Now I would like to work to become a German-American activist and fight to insure that diversity hypocrites do not deprive German-American students of their heritage and support for their family relationships in America and Germany and the UK.
I joined a Palatine genealogy group and look forward to celebrating the 300th anniversary of the Palatine immigration to America with them this year and next. They were very kind to the Hessians and we have close ties from Pennsylvania and Maryland.
My family basically has two speeds, fighting and farming. We, like the Palatines, are steadfast Protestants. Our religion makes us different from most Germans and our intermarriage with the English 300 years ago makes us a unique Eurofusion. We have been happy and blessed living in America. I would like to link up with Germans more, since as America becomes more diverse I have little in common with the new arrivals and we can no longer trust the economic system.
We have always been great patriots but now I sometimes think I might prefer to become a subset people of the EU rather than an American because I would prefer to be with people who would not object to German ancestry. Both the UK and Germany are members of the EU. I think the EU has better benefits and that it would be more secure to be part of an ethnically homogeneous group rather than an unstable, diverse multicultural environment.
I wish I knew how we could link with Germany economically so that we could help them fill their order books but produce things here in the USA to avoid high shipping costs. They could be the brain and we the hands and feet that give them access to vast America with her productive land and consumer markets. I wish there were more like the Valkyrie project.

johnereb
Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 03:44 AM
My family line is German on both sides.

In a small city about 90 miles from here they used to hold a wonderful Oktoberfest. With the flood of Mexicans into the area and there being more blacks than before, during the 80s and 90s the Oktoberfest came under attack as being racist.

No one claimed the Mexicans celebrating Cinco de Mayo as being racist or the blacks suddenly celebrating "Juneteenth" as being racist, but Oktoberfest was racist. Too white and too German is what they meant.

Eventually the city council gave in and renamed the event Fall Fest and specifically recruited Mexican and black "entertainers" and others to the event. What was once a wonderful, family friendly event has become a cesspool where no white in their right minds would want to be.

Germans in the region lost their last major connection while the non-whites gained another victory and stole away with another holiday.

sei_stolz
Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 05:24 AM
I don't think anyone could have put it any better than Sigurd did. I myself am a quarter Italian, but was raised just about as German as you can get outside of the Fatherland. Just to boast my "credentials", I speak German fluently, my best friend is living in Berlin, I've been back to the Fatherland several times...for whatever reason, the Germans I've met are always surprised to find out that I'm from America...

Anyway, what I'm getting at is that my identity as a German person is strongly intensified by my recognition of the preference I have for my Teutonic blood as opposed to the Italian. From what I observed during my stay in Berlin just this last December, I hold my heritage in higher regard than many of the Germans who live in Berlin...naturally, there are those who hold onto their culture, but there are quite a few douche bags with Turkish haircuts and clothes, standing around on the Bahnsteig, ending and beginning every statement with, "weißt du, Alta?"

Ossi makes a great point in saying that those of us who have other blood will be more tolerant in immigration of non-Germanic Europeans, but there are many Germans who are just as tolerant.




p.s.

The rightward movement holds Rudolf Heß in very high regard, considered by most as an outstanding German. He himself was half Greek and born in Egypt. Just food for thought...

Dagna
Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 05:26 AM
I am American. I have no non-Germanic ancestors (that I know of).

Jäger
Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 10:10 AM
I am American. I have no non-Germanic ancestors (that I know of).
But ancestry is not equal to ethnicity.

Sigurd
Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 10:23 AM
BS. Actually mixed people, Americans or not, are prone to more mixing. Look in the threads like Slavic and Germanic. It's the mixed people who wouldn't mind a foreign partner in the family, because they're already mixed and they're afraid of being thought of as "hypocritical" if they do otherwise.Fundamental failure to read between the lines. Of course, there will be two sides of the fence, and some come down on the "must regain ethnic purity" side whilst some others come down on the "must continue ethnic make-up". Whether they choose to become less mixed, or more mixed, they do so conscientiously.

He who can take his membership of the folk for granted as living in a heartland , exhibiting full heritage and exhibiting all characteristics typical for the ethnic group in question, will however in general approach the matter with more ease, as he takes this membership and heritage as too granted.

In the light of this - many people in rural Southern Germany remained relatively unmixed until the advent of fast mass transport (railways, motor vehicles), whilst there would seem to be a dividing line between those right on the ethnic border, or in fact living in enclaves: They either blended in and intermixed over generations --- or they sought to keep foreign blood out of it as much as possible.

When projected onto the entirety of the population, I would however say that these "borderline cases" are the least likely to be fence-sitters and will take either side: "We are all mixed anyway" or "We have to defend our membership of the folk" ... it can't be a coincidence, surely that the least mixed areas often cast their votes for the least defined and least prolific characters, whilst the periphery tends to adopt more radical positions, whatever the direction may be. ;)

Zauberspruch
Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 12:23 PM
I sometimes think the discussions about "How German Are You?" are more devisive than definitive and more destructive than anything else ... as if we are helping the nefarious Ones in their quest to prove to us that we aren't really any different than the mongrel hordes that are lurking at our gates.

Take the case of Hans-Joachim Marseille, a German of French Huguenot ancestry, who was in the words of the General of the German Fighter Arm, Adolf Galland, "The unrivaled virtuoso of fighter pilots." His ability to sometimes destroy entire squadrons of enemy aircraft in a single sortie is the substance legends are made of, and the kind of material ripe for critics to study and either deny or defend. Marseille is still regarded by most German Luftwaffe pilots to have been the best of the best; excelling as a marksman, an acrobatic pilots, as well as one of the best combat tacticians in the Luftwaffe. Together, the synergy created by the accumulation of these talents forged one of the most lethal fighter pilots of his era.
<< http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/hanstate.html >>

Is he less welcome among us because of his French Huguenot ancestry?

The Vandals settled much of Northern Italy and Dietrich built his Amal stronghold in Verona. Those must be very Germanic parts of Italy and I would welcome those Teutonic Italians in my family anytime, especially if their hearts were as solidly Germanic as that of our Kamerad “Sei Stolz,” whose Italian blood may well be more Teutonic than the Berliner “douche bags” that he mentioned, who go about aping Turkish ways.

My compliments to “Sei Stolz” for reminding us of the Greek ancestry of Rudolf Heß … and I might further mention that there are those who ardently believe that it was the Dorians, those Northern Greeks of ancient times, who were the Culture Bearers of our ancient Aryan blood.

Let’s not get so hung up in the borderlines wherein our ancestors were born, but rather cling to the Germanic “Geist” of our Folk, no matter where they were born, and preserve our bloodlines from the corruption and influence of the Nefarious Ones and the Turd World mongrels who would see our kin destroyed and our bloodlines polluted by the Nappy Headed Ones whose traces last forever.

Being and remaining "Germanic" is not that complicated!

Zauberspruch









.

sei_stolz
Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 02:28 PM
Thanks for the compliment, Zauberspruch. Hats off to you as well for bringing up Hans-Joachim Marseille, I never knew of his story.

Jäger
Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 03:01 PM
Is he [Hans-Joachim Marseille] less welcome among us because of his French Huguenot ancestry?
There is already a very good definition for who is German.

From "Das kleine abc des Nationalsozialismus" :

German is who
a) is an honest working person,
b) is of German blood (consists of not more than the six German races - after v. Eickstedt),
c) is of German custom and culture,
d) and speaks the German language.

Case closed?

TheGreatest
Sunday, February 15th, 2009, 03:20 PM
No, American families are just not ashamed of their ancestry. We don't feel the need to conceal anything.
Europe has always been about conformity. If your Grandfather was a Soviet Soldier, best you kept that fact a secret, less your Grandmother is labeled a whore and yourself to be an outsider.


Of course this process of conformity is not a modern development. If one of your ancestors had been a Swedish Soldier during the 30 year wars (military rape and pregnancy), than obviously your ancestors would have concealed this fact.

Allenson
Monday, February 16th, 2009, 08:48 PM
For one thing, the question is how Germanic. Not how German are we.


There are threads about the Germanic character of Scotland, England and other countries. How about America. I'm curious because I've seen many introductions by American members, and I rarely found a case where their ancestry was fully Germanic. I saw Italian, French, Irish, Polish and other ethnicities into the pile. Is this a case with most Americans, or is it just a coincidence that Skadi gets the most mixed ones? Or is it the case that Americans list every known part of their ancestry, even if it's as small as 1 %, as someone else said?

Well, such a question is a very large one that perhaps will be subject to much debate....and by virtue of lineages, could potentially lead back to Europe and the Germanicness of the native lands therein.

But, with ethnic shortcuts in mind, I would reckon that the number of Americans that are purely, one-hundred percent of Germanic origins is very small. But then again, this number will be very small in Europe too--what with continental Celts and other assorted tribes in mind and whatnot. Oops, I said I was going to keep the shortcut in mind! Sorry! ;)

The number of Americans that are predominantly Germanic in heritage though is considerable.

Haven't we discussed this at great length before? :P

Hauke Haien
Monday, February 16th, 2009, 10:44 PM
American Germanics originate from a very recent migration/recombination of European Germanics, which should conclude any attempt to turn the matter into a contest.

Old immigrants were mostly Germanic, other British Isles, a few French, but they never had an identity as a Germanic "American" people rather than a collection of ethnic communities within an American state, with the English dominating. Since 1790 "whiteness" has been used as an umbrella, which later expanded to cover new immigration from southern and eastern Europe and "whiteness" therefore proved instrumental in reducing the Germanic character of the "white" population.

Spiritually, the situation looks very dire. There is still a strong immigrationist attitude that imagines America as the center of the world where all kinds of people convene in order to eat a burger and live happily ever after by giving up their identity. The cultural countermovement consists of people who imagine themselves as unique snowflakes belonging to ethnic groups thousands of miles away, without having any cultural connection to them, and also liberal racists, who are unable to figure out why fellow "whites" have absolutely no sense of loyalty towards each other.

An attempt to forge a uniquely "American" (Germanic) identity is not discernible and a revival of the former Germanic groups in any non-cartoonish fashion seems unlikely.

Jäger
Monday, February 16th, 2009, 10:51 PM
The number of Americans that are predominantly Germanic in heritage though is considerable.
As I said, ancestry is not ethnicity, the questions are: were Americans capable of assimilating non-Germanics into a Germanic society, or could they separate themselves from non-Germanics (culturally and racially), or did they form a new ethnicity through ethnogenesis.
What makes it difficult is that all these three questions could be answered with a yes, depending on the location.

However, as history shows us, it is our elite who defines us, and sadly, neither in the US nor in Europe have we leaders dedicated to a Germanic cause :(

forkbeard
Monday, February 16th, 2009, 11:26 PM
Here is a good map showing Germans (in light Blue) being majority in nearly every American state and most counties.
http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp234/wilhelmII/germap.png
No doubt this must be influencing the American national character which now seems more Prussian than Anglo-Saxon (i.e bullying third world countries)
Presumably the USA will go the same way as Prussia too.

Who says Gernmanics have to be hard working? Tacitus says they were lazy. I suppose we all have a slightly different version of what is Germanic. My definition is the one of Tacitus. i.e Barbaric.

Nachtengel
Monday, February 16th, 2009, 11:42 PM
Here is a good map showing Germans (in light Blue) being majority in nearly every American state and most counties.
http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp234/wilhelmII/germap.png
No doubt this must be influencing the American national character which now seems more Prussian than Anglo-Saxon (i.e bullying third world countries)
Presumably the USA will go the same way as Prussia too.

Who says Gernmanics have to be hard working? Tacitus says they were lazy. I suppose we all have a slightly different version of what is Germanic. My definition is the one of Tacitus. i.e Barbaric.
I've seen this map before. But what exactly is the definition of "German" here? Does it include German speakers? Some heritage societies in the US accept "Germans" of Jewish or black descent who speak German. Does it include people who are mixed with non-Germanic ethnicities but identify as German? I've seen some cases on the site, where someone lists German as ethnicity and the ancestry is also Italian, Polish, Czech, etc. So I wasn't really interested in official census figures, but in a more realistic estimation of the number of "pure" Germanics (i.e. Germanics who haven't significant non-Germanic ancestry) in the US.

Æmeric
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 12:00 AM
Here is a good map showing Germans (in light Blue) being majority in nearly every American state and most counties.
http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp234/wilhelmII/germap.png




That map only shows the largest ancestry claimed by county, not the majority. And people can claim more then one. So persons claiming German may also claim Irish or Swedish. Someone claiming German or Irish may actually be more English then anything else. And remember again.... English ancestry is under reported because ethnic to many means something else then English. And a sizable portion of Euro-Americans do not even claim an ancestry because of that. And those claiming American are mostly of English-Scots descent from the colonial era.


No doubt this must be influencing the American national character which now seems more Prussian than Anglo-Saxon (i.e bullying third world countries)

I suppose the Anglo-Saxon altered by German admixture in America may have given us a peculiar nature. A freedom loving people who are determine to force democracy on the rest of the world, whether they want it or not.;)

TheGreatest
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 12:29 AM
If we're not Germanic than what are we? Please... I don't know where people get these idea that your average American is a Black-Mexican-Homosexual-Jew from Sex in the City


And the Mediterranean blood is referenced to no end. You guys do realize that outside of New York, New Jersey and Montreal, that Italian blood isn't all that common in North America?

Vindefense
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 12:59 AM
Since the original question concerns the word Germanic, not German (although it would have been more fitting given some responses.) I offer this perspective: Historians define Germanic as being descended from the following- The Franks, Saxons, Lombards, Vandals, Visogoths Frisians, Thuringians, Angles, etc. These tribes were not content to inhabit the region known in ancient times as Germania. They branched out conquering and inhabiting the surrounding regions forging North, East, West and South. They settled the modern countries of France, Italy, England, Sweden, Denmark, almost every "western" nation, that makes up modern day Europe.

Americans are only the most recent result of the ancient Germanic expansion. When English settlers poured into the New England coast they brought with them the indomitable Germanic spirit and culture. Though, many years had passed these settlers still held on to the same values that their forbears had. Values that were primarily Germanic. Such as their understanding of Law, marriage, labor, family and nobility. Now, since almost all people of western decent can follow their lineage back to these early Germanic tribes I (and many historians) can not see how any one can doubt not only the authenticity but the dominance of the Germanic culture in America however mixed it may be. Unless they themselves are confusing Germanic with German or simply do not have a good understanding of the term Germanic. The likely hood of "Western" Americans having non Germanic blood is no more than what would be expected from over 1000 years of intermingling in Europe. It is culture which defines a civilization, not ethnicity, which concerns national identity.

Nachtengel
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 01:16 AM
If we're not Germanic than what are we? Please... I don't know where people get these idea that your average American is a Black-Mexican-Homosexual-Jew from Sex in the City
I don't think anyone on Skadi believes that kind of crap or watches Sex and the City. :)

I don't think anyone has doubts that the Founding Fathers of the US were Germanics and that the first waves of immigration were largely Germanic. My question was whether it has stayed that way. Whether the descendants of these Germanic settlers stuck to their own kind or mixed with non-Germanics.

Just some examples, from the introduction threads:


Ethnicity: German
Ancestry: English, Irish, German, Italian,Portuguese, French Canadian


Ethnicity: German/Scottish/Irish/Greek
Ancestry: Scotland, Ireland, Germany, Greece


Ethnicity: Western European-American
Ancestry: German, Italian, Swedish

I've seen these kind of profiles more often so I got curious. I'm asking, is this what the average Germanic American is like?

Arundel
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 04:54 AM
There are threads about the Germanic character of Scotland, England and other countries. How about America. I'm curious because I've seen many introductions by American members, and I rarely found a case where their ancestry was fully Germanic. I saw Italian, French, Irish, Polish and other ethnicities into the pile. Is this a case with most Americans, or is it just a coincidence that Skadi gets the most mixed ones? Or is it the case that Americans list every known part of their ancestry, even if it's as small as 1 %, as someone else said?

Germans in America
There are (many) German descendants in America, many have German genes from both sides of the family. Even here in Missouri, many are of German ancestry. Many of our towns were settled by Germans. I live in a small rural county seat town and a good share of the population here are German descendants, even the last names are German. Many of these families married back and forth keeping the German genes strong. Our biggest church they used to call the German church & they even have a German cemetery. They used to speak German in the church, but I think World War II put an end to that. Our area isn't unusual, the entire state is heavily populated with German descendants. I have read the profile on Missouri counties and the highest listing of ancestry is German, some Irish, a few English, very few French. I am surrounded by germanic neighbors, but I am over 90% English, which is unusual. But my ancestors were the first American settlers coming here in the 1600's. Most of the german families haven't been here very long, many of them had grand parents that came from Germany & spoke German.


There may be a factor of ethnic consciousness (and thereby Skadi membership) being rather higher, or more elaborate, among individuals who know what ethnic differences mean on a personal level, when dealing with different family members.

English genes
Even though I am an 11th generation American, nearly all of my genes came from England, probably over 90%. After they came to this country they all continued marrying other Englishmen, which makes the English genes very strong in me. I do know where they came from in England too, as I have been researching my ancestors' origins in English, it is very interesting research. I am proud to be an englishman, even if I am a misplaced one.

triedandtru
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 05:20 AM
Considering Todesengel seemingly directly referenced my profile, I would say that the fact that we identify ourselves as Germanic would make it at least somewhat Germanic, but the manner might be different. America is, after all, all about freedom of speech, religion, and ideas. I don't think there is necessarily an 'average' Germanic American.

Vandal Lord
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 07:08 AM
There are threads about the Germanic character of Scotland, England and other countries. How about America. I'm curious because I've seen many introductions by American members, and I rarely found a case where their ancestry was fully Germanic. I saw Italian, French, Irish, Polish and other ethnicities into the pile. Is this a case with most Americans, or is it just a coincidence that Skadi gets the most mixed ones? Or is it the case that Americans list every known part of their ancestry, even if it's as small as 1 %, as someone else said?

I think it is mostly a case of Germanic Americans being very honest and accurate when reporting "all" their known ancestries even if they have a very minor % of Non Germanic heritage. In many of these cases the amount of Non Germanic heritage is very small and has no influence in their cultural identity and loyalty as Germanics. I have heard of Europeans who did their genealogy and found out that they were not quite 100% of one nationality like they thought they were.

For example in my introduction post I admitted to being 1/8 Spanish and the rest of my ancestry being Germanic with a Celtic ancestor or 2. I identify as a "Germanic", that was my cultural upbringing and that is where my ethnic loyalty is. I don't identify with the Spanish, being only 1/8 it wasn't an influence on my upbringing. My Spanish great grandfather on my fathers side died very young in a car accident at 26 and my German great grandmother had to raise my young grandmother and granduncle by herself for awhile. They were close to getting a divorce before he died due to "cultural differences."

Todesengel, do you think American Germanics should bother to list any very minor Non Germanic ancestry or do you should think they should list "all" known ancestries even if they don't identify with them? I almost didn't list Iberian in my ancestry but thought I should be honest and accurate even if it is very little.


Spiritually, the situation looks very dire. There is still a strong immigrationist attitude that imagines America as the center of the world where all kinds of people convene in order to eat a burger and live happily ever after by giving up their identity. The cultural countermovement consists of people who imagine themselves as unique snowflakes belonging to ethnic groups thousands of miles away, without having any cultural connection to them, and also liberal racists, who are unable to figure out why fellow "whites" have absolutely no sense of loyalty towards each other.

An attempt to forge a uniquely "American" (Germanic) identity is not discernible and a revival of the former Germanic groups in any non-cartoonish fashion seems unlikely.

Are you saying we Germanic Americans should just not bother with trying to fight and preserve our Germanic Identity in our country? So we just all imagine ourselves as unique snowflakes belonging to ethic groups thousands of miles away without having any connection to them whatsoever? That if we try to forge a uniquely American Germanic identity that it will only wind up being superficial and cartoonish to quote you? Wow I don't know what what to say, I guess you think the culture of us American Germanics here at Skadi is cartoonish and superficial.:mad

Look, I don't disagree with many of your criticisms of America and some of the dicey prospects of Germanic cultural survivability in the U.S. but Germanic Culture is not guarantee to survive anywhere in this world including Europe unless those of us who still care and are willing to fight for the preservation of our people. I realize there are many challenges we American Germanics face but you Germanics in Europe face many as well. Along with a lack of unity among European Germanics there is a rapidly aging population, falling birthrates, large amounts of muslim, asian, and african immigration, hate speech laws to prevent you from really protesting or fighting for your cultural rights without potentially being arrested and a largely unarmed population to protect yourselves from any threats. Lets not kid ourselves, these are probably going to be the most difficult times in history when it comes to fighting for our Germanic survival globally. I am optimistic though we will survive and prevail.

Vandal Lord
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 07:12 AM
Correct, the map above only shows the largest ancestry claimed by county and not by majority. I think what should be reemphasized though is that when it comes to historic European Immigration to the U.S., the overwhelmingly amount came from "Northern Europe" NOT from Southern and Eastern Europe. It began even when the English established their colonies and the other Germanic ethnic groups came to settle and live in the the English colonies, many more Germanics came in the 2nd wave of American immigration as well.

Most of the ethnicities that came where German, English, Ulster Scots, and Irish, these are the dominant descended ethnic groups in America by far. The Dutch and Scandinavian immigrants should not be forgotten either. The Irish who came a little later are mostly confined to the Northeast, the rest of these dominant ethnic groups can be found through out the U.S. in various degrees and numbers. So one can say that America is mostly Germanic descended, but getting these Americans to acknowledge that they are mostly a mixture of these various Germanic ethnicites, that is the issue and goal.

Hauke Haien
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 07:30 AM
Are you saying we Germanic Americans should just not bother with trying to fight and preserve our Germanic Identity in our country?
It has not happened, especially as far as the non-English are concerned. The development of the Anglo-Americans (and their assimilants) has been problematic as well, mostly because of the reliance on Hobbesian/Lockean liberalism as a source of identity. It is tantamount to us Germans taking pride in Holocaustianism and institutionalised self-hate, which is actually happening in this farcical state called FRG, but there seems to be a lack of consciousness for the fact that the US is just as useless for Germanic purposes.


That if we try to forge a uniquely American Germanic identity that it will only wind up being superficial and cartoonish to quote you?
You are not quoting me.

An attempt to forge a uniquely "American" (Germanic) identity is not discernible and a revival of the former Germanic groups in any non-cartoonish fashion seems unlikely.
I am talking about two separate concepts here:
Ethnogenesis: The recombined Germanic groups in America form a new ethnic group, without including all other members of whiteness; or the whole world, for that matter. Ethnic revival: The former Germanic groups relearn their languages and use them in social communities in order to create a whole way of life shaped by their ethnic group. This has nothing to do with ethnic pride parades, Oktoberfest celebrations and similar nonsense; it is a national awakening.

Soten
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 07:48 AM
I've seen these kind of profiles more often so I got curious. I'm asking, is this what the average Germanic American is like?

The great majority of "average Germanic Americans" do not have any recent mediterranean ancestors, such as the Greek, Portuguese, Spanish, and Italian mentioned.

A fair amount will have Irish or Welsh ancestors though.

SwordOfTheVistula
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 07:59 AM
What's wrong with Hobbes and Locke?

TheGreatest
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 08:30 AM
The great majority of "average Germanic Americans" do not have any recent mediterranean ancestors, such as the Greek, Portuguese, Spanish, and Italian mentioned.

A fair amount will have Irish or Welsh ancestors though.

Also known as 90% of the European population in North America that does not have Italian ancestry.
Anyway Mediterranean blood is a foreign component and shouldn't even be considered White in the United States. What's the point of ''White Preservation'', if we all end up looking like Jason Biggs and Ray Romano?


I've seen this map before. But what exactly is the definition of "German" here? Does it include German speakers? Some heritage societies in the US accept "Germans" of Jewish or black descent who speak German. Does it include people who are mixed with non-Germanic ethnicities but identify as German? I've seen some cases on the site, where someone lists German as ethnicity and the ancestry is also Italian, Polish, Czech, etc. So I wasn't really interested in official census figures, but in a more realistic estimation of the number of "pure" Germanics (i.e. Germanics who haven't significant non-Germanic ancestry) in the US.


Census has never been accurate.
They claim in my city (that is 50% European; therefore I've doubled the statistic) is 20% Eastern European and 16% Southern European. The problem being, I rarely run into people who have Slavic or Mediterranean surnames.
Statistics most of the time are pure bull

forkbeard
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 10:42 AM
Its best for Americans to see themselves as White. White is self evident, as in it can't be confused with other races. It also takes into account various admixtures, throwbacks, shades, variations within the White community. It is inclusive rather than exclusive. Many White people may feel rejection from a strict definition of Germanic like mine. But the message of White preservation, expansion and survival is for everyone that sees themselves as being White.
Its like the Atlantic ocean. We know where it is as a whole it just gets blurred where it mixes with the Pacific or Indian Ocean.
To preserve the Germanic ideal, which is the White ideal, Americans need to practice personal eugenics to maintain that Germanic type.

I believe the map originally posted just refers to majority German ancestry.

My ancestry is purely English but I see the English as the descendants of Herman and the Cherusci (As suggested by Sir Edward Crecy- In his decisive battles of the Western world). I also see the English as maintaining their ancient primative virtue in contrast to modern Germans.
My definition of Germanic (which is not gospel- more Tacitus) is blue eyes, hair of any shade and pinkish skin (as in red neck). As in these photos of British soldiery.
http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp234/wilhelmII/scan0040.jpg
http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp234/wilhelmII/scan0041.jpg

Vindefense
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 02:13 PM
Since no one has engaged my post, I will assume that the information I offered can not be disputed. Furthermore, I question those who believe themselves of pure German blood. Take a look at this map, understand what it means and instead of holding on to the notion of Pan German Imperialism, embrace the outward advance of the Germanic tribes for the greatest cultural expansion and domination of the civilized world as we know it. One that has evolved into what we now term "western civilization." And one where all the various Germanic cultures are dominant because of the indomitable spirit that survives with in the blood lines of its descendants. So to dispute weather or not one is Germanic based upon German lineage, I feel misses the whole purpose of this forum. And I am under the impression such is dedicated to the ideal of Germanic culture and not German nationality. If I am wrong, please correct me.

Jäger
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 02:18 PM
Take a look at this map, understand what it means and instead of holding on to the notion of Pan German Imperialism, embrace the outward advance of the Germanic tribes for the greatest cultural expansion and domination of the civilized world as we know it. One that has evolved into what we now term "western civilization."
This so called "western civilization" is our downfall, as was "Roman civilization" to Rome, and "Greek civilization" to Greece.

Allenson
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009, 08:21 PM
As I said, ancestry is not ethnicity

Correct--but without the former, there is not the latter. ;)



the questions are: were Americans capable of assimilating non-Germanics into a Germanic society, or could they separate themselves from non-Germanics (culturally and racially)


Historically speaking? It's well documented how difficult it was for later waves of immigrants to assimilate completely into old American society--Irish, Italians, Jews, etc. Until very recently, these groups largely self-segregated. But, those days seem to be on the wane, if not altogether gone.



or did they form a new ethnicity through ethnogenesis.


Certainly various groups have almost formed new ethnicities here in the New World--until recently, Italians have been very insular, the Amish need no introduction, perhaps even those of the Mormon faith have formed a ethno-religious group (largely blond, blue-eyed and of English/Danish extraction) and then the plain ol' American folk who are largely of Protestant, northwest European, "Celto-Germanic" stock.


Americans are only the most recent result of the ancient Germanic expansion. When English settlers poured into the New England coast they brought with them the indomitable Germanic spirit and culture. Though, many years had passed these settlers still held on to the same values that their forbears had. Values that were primarily Germanic. Such as their understanding of Law, marriage, labor, family and nobility. Now, since almost all people of western decent can follow their lineage back to these early Germanic tribes I (and many historians) can not see how any one can doubt not only the authenticity but the dominance of the Germanic culture in America however mixed it may be. Unless they themselves are confusing Germanic with German or simply do not have a good understanding of the term Germanic.

Thanks for writing this better than I ever could. :thumbup



The great majority of "average Germanic Americans" do not have any recent mediterranean ancestors, such as the Greek, Portuguese, Spanish, and Italian mentioned.

A fair amount will have Irish or Welsh ancestors though.

Correct. :)