PDA

View Full Version : Why Do You Put So Much Emphasis on Being "Germanic"?



UnregisteredGuest
Friday, August 20th, 2010, 07:50 PM
I am not from Germanic country and I am anti-immigration, pro-European activist for years. European preservation is one of the most important things to me.

I would like to ask, why people on this forum put so much emphasis on being "Germanic". Of course I don't have anything against Germanic culture and I think it's beautiful and worth preserving. But Europe and European-derived people worldwide face a great danger - coming from multi-culturalism, "tolerance". In the year of 2100, so called "White" people might permanently dissapear from this planet.

As I stated before, I totally support pride from one's nation, culture. But shoudln't we concentrate on ethnic, racial and cultural preservation of ALL European peoples, whether Germanic, Celtic or Slavic for that matter? I think we don't have that much freedom of choice today to pick among Europeans: "who is more worth preserving".

I am perfectly aware, that not all people on this forum have same views, there are differences in worldview between members (it's a free speech forum after all). Views of some of you might be more into preserving Europeans (and European-descended) people as a whole. I am not attacking here anyone, I am just asking a question.

I also feel like some of the members here justify their "Germanics only" stance by suscribing into nordicists ideology. But Germanics aren't racial group after all - they are linguistic/cultural group. Not all Germanic people resemble "Nordic ideal", many of them are Alpinids or Dinarids. On the other hand, people of Nordid phenotype can be found among people of Celtic, Baltic, Slavic and every other European language-group.

If some of you would be curious about my agenda, then I am - as some maybe deducted from earlier parts of this post - European preservationist. I am also into eugenics and preserving, promoting and propagating of the so called "progressive traits".

Thank you in advance for intelligent responses. ;)

Rev. Jupiter
Friday, August 20th, 2010, 11:26 PM
On one level, a lot of it has to do with the historical superiority (used in this sense to mean higher status, rather than innate merit) of Germanic culture. There is hardly a place in Europe that hasn't been touched by Germanic peoples in some way or another.
As a result of this, the word "European" as understood by the popular consciousness can be seen in many ways to refer to Germanic peoples. Indeed, even the Greco-Roman politics and Christian religion that are so connected to the more recent history of Europe would not have been preserved if not for Germanic peoples.

On another level, pan-Europeanist ideas as they exist in the context of modern movements like "White Nationalism" are just another form of political correctness. Asserting ethnic sovereignty borders on the taboo in a lot of pro-European circles. While collectivist ideologies serve political purposes just fine, politics isn't the whole of human existence. Things like culture and spirituality need to be taken into account, and modern pan-Europeanist ideas sacrifice those for the sake of the purely political.

What's most interesting about your question, though, is that I considered myself a pan-Europeanist for quite some stretch of time, and it is for that reason that I now align myself more with specifically Germanocentric ideas.
Without Germanic people, there wouldn't be a Europe.

UnregisteredGuest
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 12:10 AM
On one level, a lot of it has to do with the historical superiority (used in this sense to mean higher status, rather than innate merit) of Germanic culture. There is hardly a place in Europe that hasn't been touched by Germanic peoples in some way or another.
As a result of this, the word "European" as understood by the popular consciousness can be seen in many ways to refer to Germanic peoples. Indeed, even the Greco-Roman politics and Christian religion that are so connected to the more recent history of Europe would not have been preserved if not for Germanic peoples.

My main point is that I wouldn't be accepted as member of this forum simply because my genealogy is not fully Germanic. I completely agree with you that Germanic culture had large impact on Europe.

But you said youself that it's rather higher cultural status than some innate merit. Being Germanic is purely cultural term on European level. Most of Germanics today are germanized people of other culture/speech.

Take a look at the British Isles. Many populations settled there, starting from the native Bruenn racial type, Megalithic Mediterranoids, Kelts, ending at Germanic Anglo-Saxons and - to lesser extent - Normans. Descendants of all of these peoples speak English today (with exception of Celtic-speaking people, who usually know English as well). British people, including English, are to large extent descendants of people, who were germanized.

Being Germanic is cultural term, it's not "running through your veins". I basically don't understand, why do you accept only those with "Germanic genealogy" when it's clearly not a racial term. There can be German Nordid as well, as French Nordid. There can be German Alpine as well, as French Alpine. There is no "Germanic race", no "Baltic race".

There is no reason to alienate or reject someone of other European cultural group, there is no "biological" reason to do so. That's, what I am trying to say.


On another level, pan-Europeanist ideas as they exist in the context of modern movements like "White Nationalism" are just another form of political correctness. Asserting ethnic sovereignty borders on the taboo in a lot of pro-European circles. While collectivist ideologies serve political purposes just fine, politics isn't the whole of human existence. Things like culture and spirituality need to be taken into account, and modern pan-Europeanist ideas sacrifice those for the sake of the purely political.

Well, I wouldn't describe myself as "white nationalist" and I mostly share your opinion on that subject. I also disagree with doing "all-White state", some egalitarian country with mixed culture - even if purely European in genetic sense like some of them want to suggest. But I also think that being "only for Germanics" is wrong, especially nowadays, when our whole heritage might be destroyed.


What's most interesting about your question, though, is that I considered myself a pan-Europeanist for quite some stretch of time, and it is for that reason that I now align myself more with specifically Germanocentric ideas.
Without Germanic people, there wouldn't be a Europe.

I agree, but Germanics aren't the only one, who contributed to European culture. Preserving Germanic culture/race/languages is a good thing but doing it at the expense of other Europeans is wrong in my opinion.

Chlodovech
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:08 AM
Why do you put so much emphasis on being "European", guest? "Europe" is only relevant as a geographical factor. On the European continent you'll find a variety of cultures and peoples, most of whom the Germanic nations have no special affinity with. Moreover, NW European countries are flooded by immigrants from Eastern European nations. And we don't need any more Italians either.

Their sheer numbers are part of the problem of Germanic preservation - and we're not going to champion this evolution since we're not suicidal. I live in a nation that is constantly under threat from Romanization - and the forces who make that possible use the 'we're all Europeans anyway' argument as well.

UnregisteredGuest
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:39 AM
Why do you put so much emphasis on being "European", guest? "Europe" is only relevant as a geographical factor.

Maybe I used sort of euphemism here. I don't mean Europeans in geographical sense but also in cultural. European-Americans as well as White Australians and others qualify as "European" or "European-descended" in this definition.

Let's define them as Indo-Europeans + Baltic Finns. All these peoples have a lot in common and are closer related to each other than to non-Europeans. While we are branched into different groups like Germanics, Celts, etc. and eventually into nations, we still retain our European heritage.


On the European continent you'll find a variety of cultures and peoples, most of whom the Germanic nations have no special affinity with.

As I said, most of European cultures and nations are related and bound by common civilization. Germanics are their branch - very succesful and with a lot of contribution into common culture. I don't deny Germanic people right to preserve themselves, I just say that they are part of something bigger and they shouldn't alienate themselves from it.


Moreover, NW European countries are flooded by immigrants from Eastern European nations. And we don't need any more Italians either.

To be honest, immigration from African countries or Turkey is much bigger threat and you should be more concerned about them, not Eastern/Southern Europeans.

But I agree that Poles should live in Poland, English in England, Russians in Russia, Italians in Italy, etc.

I might be wrong but you seem to suggest that Eastern/Southern Europeans are very distinct from NW Europeans. But where these large differences exist? Slavic speech as well as Romance speech belong to the broader Indo-European family. Both Southern/Eastern Euros contributed to common European culture. If we speak about race, then northern Italians resemble Central Europeans a lot, many Poles are of Nordid affinities. Of course more south and east into Europe we go, less "Nordish" people will be but it's gradual change. It's not like: "this country isn't Germanic so there are no Nordids here".

As I said, In England, English/Germanic culture should be dominating so it shouldn't be overrun by Eastern/Southern Europeans. But it doesn't change the fact that there is no "biological gap" between different European language groups.


Their sheer numbers are part of the problem of Germanic preservation - and we're not going to champion this evolution since we're not suicidal. I live in a nation that is constantly under threat from Romanization - and the forces who make that possible use the 'we're all Europeans anyway' argument as well.

I understand you perfectly. I don't want to mix Europeans into one mass without culture or identity. But Germanics aren't only valuable people worth preserving on the world/in the Europe.

Thusnelda
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:47 AM
My main point is that I wouldn't be accepted as member of this forum simply because my genealogy is not fully Germanic.
Well, we have the right to set up and provide a board exclusively for other Germanics. The Internet offers everything: Boards for all Europeans, boards for "pan-Europeans" (PANF and Co.), boards for Slavs, boards for Romance populations, boards for Celts, et cetera. And here´s the place for Germanics. I´m glad to have a place where I can talk and discuss with other Germanics exclusively and I feel a strong emotional connection. As a German, other Germanic tribes are nearer to me than other European populations. Opinions of Danes, Swedes, Dutch or Norwegians are more important to me than opinions of Romanians, Portuguese, Italians or Bulgarians. I put no great value to their opinions.

By the way, I don´t think there has to be a 100% rational reason for the existence of a Germanic board. The fact that many Germanics appreciate the opportunity that they can talk to and talk with each other is reason enough. We´ve (approximately) 170 registered members logging in per day, along with several hundreds of unregistered visitors. All of them prove the need for a Germanic-centered board. That we refuse and reject memberships of Non-Germanics is not primarily a reason of hating others but more a reason of loving and supporting ourselves.

And I´ve to disagree with you. "Germanic" is not only a cultural term on European level. All Germanics are connected by their language ( North- and West-Germanic language tree) and by ethnicity. Ancient Germanics, coming from Scandinavia, settled in Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and a few other places in central Europe. Language and culture changed over time to some extend (like local dialects became own Germanic languages) but the old connections and links are visible and obvious in many aspects. I can understand written Dutch and Flemish up to 80% if I keep myself concentrated on the text. I can understand Swedish texts at least to 40% although I had never any Swedish lesson. Parts of Germanics had some genetic influx by other European ethnicities during the last two millenias but that was minor influx and hasn´t changed the big picture. The biggest threat for Germanics is nowadays: Multiculturalism, cultural marxism and mass immigration put our integrity, culture and preservation at risk. One reason more to have a place for Germanics only.

To put it in a nutshell: I´m not the only one who can see the age-old kinship between different Germanics. :) And why shouldn´t have Germanics the same right to maintain an exclusive board like other tribes and people? If your focus is on all-European matters then I´m sure there´re more than two boards which would suit you well. But not Skadi Forum, of course. ;)

Unregistered
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 02:13 AM
Well, we have the right to set up and provide a board exclusively for other Germanics. The Internet offers everything: Boards for all Europeans, boards for "pan-Europeans" (PANF and Co.), boards for Slavs, boards for Romance populations, boards for Celts, et cetera. And here´s the place for Germanics. I´m glad to have a place where I can talk and discuss with other Germanics exclusively and I feel a strong emotional connection. As a German, other Germanic tribes are nearer to me than other European populations. Opinions of Danes, Swedes, Dutch or Norwegians are more important to me than opinions of Romanians, Portuguese, Italians or Bulgarians. I put no great value to their opinions.

It's understandable that you feel closer to people of your own family, nationality or language group (Germanic in this case). But I think that you're generally a bit too extreme in it.


By the way, I don´t think there has to be a 100% rational reason for the existence of a Germanic board. The fact that many Germanics appreciate the opportunity that they can talk to and talk with each other is reason enough. We´ve (approximately) 170 registered members logging in per day, along with several hundreds of unregistered visitors. All of them prove the need for a Germanic-centered board. That we refuse and reject memberships of Non-Germanics is not primarily a reason of hating others but more a reason of loving and supporting ourselves.

It's not a problem for me, every ethnicity, nation or language group can have it's own forum. Keep in mind however, that non-Germanic Europeans aren't the "other world". We face serious problems today, we can't divide ourselves by "who is more fit to be preserved". We must preserve European heritage as a whole (with preserving different branches of it as well).

I of course also keep very special kinship with other people of my European branch. But it doesn't make me reject someone of Germanic heritage and it doesn't fobid me to have friends among Germanic folks.


And I´ve to disagree with you. "Germanic" is not only a cultural term on European level. All Germanics are connected by their language ( North- and West-Germanic language tree) and by ethnicity.

Just as all Slavs or Balts are connected by their language and by ethnicity. But Baltic languages are also related to Germanic ones, as well as ethnic Balts are related to ethnic Germans (in wider sense). I mean that there is no serious gap between both, there is no reason to consider other Indo-Europeans as something totally different and alien to Germanics.


Ancient Germanics coming from Scandinavia settled in Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and a few other places in central Europe. Language and culture changed over time to some extend (like local dialects became own Germanic languages) but the old connections and links are visible and obvious in many aspects. I can understand written Dutch and Flemish up to 80% if I keep myself concentrated on the text. I can understand Swedish texts at least to 40% even if I had never any Swedish lesson.

Ancient Germanics were already mix between native Scandinavian Cromagnids and incoming, Indo-European Nordids. That's - in veeeery big generalization - how Germanic group originated. As you see, despite being similiar, they weren't that much homogenous.


Parts of Germanics had some genetic influx from other European ethnicities during the last two millenias but that was minor influx and hasn´t changed the big picture.

Sometimes it was minor influx, sometimes bigger. It wasn't like Germanics were expanding into empty territories and kept perfect homogeneity - they often germanized and mixed with local peoples and "converted" them into being Germanics. That's why not all Germanics look the same. Many of people were basically Teutonized (and I see nothing wrong with that). Good example are inhabitants of British Isles: English are Germanics but many of them are descended from pre-Germanic, native population (Bruenns, North-Atlantids, etc.).

I wouldn't say that other people were not assimilable - quite contrary!


To put it in a nutshell: I´m not the only one who can see the age-old kinship between different Germanics. And why shouldn´t have Germanics the same right to maintain an exclusive board like other tribes and people?

I agree. Germanics are bound by common culture, language. There is a close kinship between them, I don't deny that. It's just like all Slavs have common culture and can understand each other.


If your focus is on all-European matters then I´m sure there´re more than two boards which would suit you well. But not Skadi Forum, of course.

Thank you for reccomendation. ;)

Svartljos
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 05:52 AM
My main point is that I wouldn't be accepted as member of this forum simply because my genealogy is not fully Germanic. I completely agree with you that Germanic culture had large impact on Europe.


I think many people on this board are actually ethno-nationalists. By this I mean they support their own nationality or folk or people, and not necessarily other Germanic people. The common linking thread between the various countries included on this board is that they are linguistically Germanic countries and have people (whether a majority or a minority) who have travelled from the point of ethno-genesis of the Germanic cultures to where they are today.

This means that the countries represented share common ancestors to a point which is a lot more recent than the ancestors they share with other Europeans. That is not to say however, that one Germanic country should get millions of Germanic immigrants from another country. Although the cultures and such are quite similar, they are different because they evolved differently and diverged, and they should remain that way.

I wouldn't support 2 million Germans moving to the UK just as I wouldn't support 2 million Poles. I also don't think it would be good if Danes were replaced by the Dutch, or anything like that.

I don't see why you have a problem with people of Germanic countries talking amongst themselves. If you want to be something you are not, that is too bad.

Anyway, there really is not much of a distinct white "race" perse anyway, so what types of people do you think should be admitted to Germanic countries? Italians? Greeks? Turks? Where do you draw the line, and why? Is it soley based on assimilability?

The type of thing you are looking for can be found in New World countries (esp. the USA and Canada as well to an extent, although it is a different situation here entirely), which have a more black and white concept of White and Black, and in which "one of us" is a lot more vague. I don't think the differences between European countries and peoples should be destroyed just because they are "sorta similar" (my words, not a quotation).

Edit: Hm apparently we have some similar beliefs. I think the difference is I see many nations as asserting an identity in general, and not necessarily a collection of people who vary genetically with some being Germanic and some not, although the differences obviously exist. They are historical, but I don't see why we should make the differences any greater. Also in another post I detailed how I view the genetic situation of Europe: it isn't entirely based on language, I agree.

hyidi
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 06:53 AM
In the year of 2100, so called "White" people might permanently dissapear from this planet.

This is why most people on here have so much emphasis being Germanic
....It is most common for the next human race to die out,would be the Germanic race,so I agree with you here.

As I stated before, I totally support pride from one's nation, culture. But shoudln't we concentrate on ethnic, racial and cultural preservation of ALL European peoples
But why?
Why should we help other races when our own race is dying out?
I am pretty sure the ones you want us to help with there preservation and concentrate on there culture and people,would love for our race to disappear for good off this planet.

Thusnelda
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:09 PM
It's understandable that you feel closer to people of your own family, nationality or language group (Germanic in this case). But I think that you're generally a bit too extreme in it.
Well, that´s your opinion. While you think we´re a bit too extreme I think others are a bit too lenient. ;) Tastes differ and both sides have to accept it. That is why I don´t post on Pan-European boards. And due to the fact that we´re discussing on a Germanic-orientated board right now it´s obvious that our "taste" counts here. Everything else would be inconsistent and a betrayal of our board goals.


It's not a problem for me, every ethnicity, nation or language group can have it's own forum. Keep in mind however, that non-Germanic Europeans aren't the "other world". We face serious problems today, we can't divide ourselves by "who is more fit to be preserved". We must preserve European heritage as a whole.
I see the relationship between Germanic people and tribes as some kind of family relationship. The family is in danger, thanks to mass immigration, cultural marxism, multiculturalism, islamisation, et cetera. Do you handle family business within your family or do you ask your neighborhood and people of other streets for help? I want to take care of it within the Germanic sphere. My emotional and cultural distance to Slavs or Romanics is too great that I would feel the urge to discuss with them. And last but not least, I oppose Non-Germanic immigrants to Germanic countries as well. We don´t need more Bulgarians, Ex-Yugoslavs, Italians or Russians in our countries. An Albanian is as foreign to me as a Turk or North African. I understand that an Albanian or Bulgarian who has a all-European stance would feel rejected by my opinion ("But we are all Europeans!") but that´s the reason why he´s not registered and allowed to post here but in other boards. Again, here´s the place for Germanics and there´s no need to argue about it. We stick to that exclusivity.


I of course also keep very special kinship with other people of my European branch. But it doesn't make me reject someone of Germanic heritage and it doesn't fobid me to have friends among Germanic folks.
Many of our members, even staff members, feel the more general and tie with other European people, too. Not as strong as the Inter-Germanic connection, but existent. We don´t wish other Europeans bad but our focus is on ourselves. We have members who are friends with Finns, Slavs, Romanics and other European ethnicities. No one forbids anyone to be friends with someone else. Some members here are members of other boards who have a different focus. But the decisive factor is that if they´re visiting Skadi Forum, the focus is solely on Germanics.

UnregisteredGuest
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:29 PM
I think many people on this board are actually ethno-nationalists. By this I mean they support their own nationality or folk or people, and not necessarily other Germanic people. The common linking thread between the various countries included on this board is that they are linguistically Germanic countries and have people (whether a majority or a minority) who have travelled from the point of ethno-genesis of the Germanic cultures to where they are today.

This means that the countries represented share common ancestors to a point which is a lot more recent than the ancestors they share with other Europeans. That is not to say however, that one Germanic country should get millions of Germanic immigrants from another country. Although the cultures and such are quite similar, they are different because they evolved differently and diverged, and they should remain that way.

I wouldn't support 2 million Germans moving to the UK just as I wouldn't support 2 million Poles. I also don't think it would be good if Danes were replaced by the Dutch, or anything like that.

It's a very intelligent approach and I agree with it.


I don't see why you have a problem with people of Germanic countries talking amongst themselves. If you want to be something you are not, that is too bad.

I don't have any problem with Germanics having their own forum. My question wasn't about forum membership only, it was about attitude of some people here. I am no Germanic wannabe (even if I have German ancestors). I mean rather... extreme attitude of some people like Germanics would be the only group worth preserving today.


Anyway, there really is not much of a distinct white "race" perse anyway, so what types of people do you think should be admitted to Germanic countries? Italians? Greeks? Turks? Where do you draw the line, and why? Is it soley based on assimilability?

I define the White Race as types native to Europe, which participated in development of European Culture. It would include: Nordids, Cromagnids, Osteuropids, Dinarids, Alpinids and Mediterranids.

I don't think anyone should be admitted to Germanic country. I just point that we're not that different. There are basically these six races I mentioned in almost every European country, there's a significant overlap between them. Of course proportions might be somewhat different, but the basic "6 European races" scheme remains.

I don't care about Turks. Greeks are rather... suspicious people, but I guess some of them have fully "White" ancestry. Italians? It depends if you mean north or south. North Italy - as far, as I remember - doesn't differ that much from Central Europe due to Teutonic settlement there.

It's not that "white & black". Not every Germanic had 100% Germanic ancestors, not every non-Germanic had 0% Germanic ancestors. It's very variable and leads me to consider "Germanic" purely as cultural term. Culture worth preserving and propagating.


The type of thing you are looking for can be found in New World countries (esp. the USA and Canada as well to an extent, although it is a different situation here entirely), which have a more black and white concept of White and Black, and in which "one of us" is a lot more vague. I don't think the differences between European countries and peoples should be destroyed just because they are "sorta similar" (my words, not a quotation).

I agree with you. In earlier post I spoke against forming "all-White state" or other of white nationalist ideas. Different European cultures are worth preserving. But if Germanics cooperate with non-Germanic Europeans in bigger goal of preserving Europe as a whole, I don't see anything wrong in it and I don't know, how it would cause danger to Germanics.

Being European preservationist doesn't equal melting all ethnicities into one, "all-White" ethnicity, I think I was misunderstood here.


Edit: Hm apparently we have some similar beliefs. I think the difference is I see many nations as asserting an identity in general, and not necessarily a collection of people who vary genetically with some being Germanic and some not, although the differences obviously exist. They are historical, but I don't see why we should make the differences any greater. Also in another post I detailed how I view the genetic situation of Europe: it isn't entirely based on language, I agree.

But identity of nation is a cultural invention. We should remember about our identity but we shouldn't forget about common, European bond if you know, what I mean.

As for genetic situation in Europe, as I said, it changes gradually. Not all people who are now Indo-European, were such in the past. This whole "central belt" of brachycephals, id est Alpinids and Dinarids, who cluster in Southern France, Southern Germany, Southern Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia, had a lot in common before they were teutonized/slavicized. If we talk about Germanics or Slavs, we can only talk about present-day. There wasn't that much continuity. Many Russians today are in fact slavicized Finno-Ugrics. But I call them Slavs since they're speaking Slavic language and subscribe to Slavic culture, they were assimilated.


This is why most people on here have so much emphasis being Germanic
....It is most common for the next human race to die out,would be the Germanic race,so I agree with you here.

But there is no Germanic race is biological sense. There is only a Germanic ethnic/linguistic group, but not race.

But if you still keep your claim that Germanic race exists, then I have question: what are bodily characteristics of Germanic race.

I've seen a lot of Germanics and they were differing in look a lot.


But why?
Why should we help other races when our own race is dying out?

All European countries consist of European races, but in different proportions. Races which exist in Scandinavia, exist just as well in Italy, but are differently spread. Therefore, there's a huge overlap between European countries.

Only people alien to Germanics in racial sense, are people of non-European ancestry.


I am pretty sure the ones you want us to help with there preservation and concentrate on there culture and people,would love for our race to disappear for good off this planet.

Why would, for example Frenchman want to destroy Germanic culture? I don't see any reason.

There are more thing European peoples have in common, than differences between them. When we're endangered as a whole, we should work together (keeping our tradition, culture and language apart).

Erbe
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:34 PM
I am with the germanic past a bit in sympaty. That's when they were able to survive and could fight. Germanic is a part of my relatives.

I am white and i don't see myself related with cromagnid germanics! On no basis at all. And it was said there were cromagnid elements in germanics.
I am of neolitic root and identify myself with atlantid and 70% mediteranid humans.

The minds are very different and depend on genetics, place of born and so on. I found out many cromagnids/brunns are behind the ability of neolithic invaders. In my view they can't have metaphysic talent. Their appereance is old way back to the upper palaelithicum.

UnregisteredGuest
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:37 PM
I see the relationship between Germanic people and tribes as some kind of family relationship. The family is in danger, thanks to mass immigration, cultural marxism, multiculturalism, islamisation, et cetera. Do you handle family business within your family or do you ask your neighborhood and people of other streets for help?

It's a very interesting part of your post. ;)

I see relationship between Germanics as kind of close-family relationship. I see relationship between Germanics and other Europeans still as family relationship, but family somewhat more distant (but still!).

I wouldn't compare Balts, Romanics or Celts to "neighbors" or "people living on the other street". These would be non-Europeans in my opinion. ;)

*****

As for rest of your post, I generally agree but some members here (judging by posts I've seen in other threads) are very hostile to other European ethnicities. But I guess it's not the stance of majority or official stance of Skadi, but of individual members since it's a free speech forum after all...

The Aesthete
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:41 PM
I am also an anti-immigration, pro-European activist so our goals are the same.

We should preserve the identity of European peoples while preserving our own racial and cultural identities. The two are not mutually exclusive. If Germanics preserve their own race and culture it would not be at the expense of other Europeans if anything it would help them do the same.
Nordids are very progressive.

Germanics are a racial group that includes many types e.g. Hallstatt Nordid, Anglo-Saxon, Trønder, Borreby but does not include Armenid, Arabids etc. Someone who is fully Dinarid cannot be Germanic in my books even if they speak a German language and uphold our culture unless there is Germanic admixture.

Angles and Saxons are Germanic tribes as were the Norse who also settled in parts of Britain and their blood does indeed flow through the veins of the British as does some Celtic.

The races of Europe are genetically different, though there are also many genetic similarities. The races of Europe are closely related but still different, just as we are culturally similar but still different.

Germanic people have certain alleles in common that are not common amongst other Europeans, so mixing with say East Mediterraneans for example would alter our identity.

Compare the average Swede to your average Spaniard and the difference is self evident, though this difference is minor when compared to the average Liberian.

We are distantly related to negroids as well so to justify things on distant affinities are what the multiculturalists do.

Many non Germanics have a slight Nordish influence because historically Germanics were in parts of Europe that are no longer considered Germanic today, for example the Germanic tribe of the Lombards settling in Lombardy in Northern Italy or the Transylvanian Saxons in Romania.

Some members want only to preserve their Germanic identity, e.g. Prussian for example and don’t care about other Germanics much. I think the further we splinter as a movement the harder we make it, but the Prussians for example I believe should still be able to keep their identity intact as part of a greater Germanic movement as I think Germanics should in a greater European movement working for the same goal being the end to multiculturalism.

I believe we all do need to work together to end this, I believe many nationalist parties in various EU countries are already working cooperatively and this is a good thing.

I highly admire Romantic and Hellenic culture by the way.

Germanics are racially and culturally very similar, a second generation Germanic from say the Netherlands can fit into my country perfectly but a second Generation Portuguese will still have something other about them, but nowhere near as other as a Arab who will not fit in anywhere near as well.

UnregisteredGuest
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:42 PM
Erbe,

but these people are Germanic today because they belong to the Germanic linguistical and cultural group. But I'm glad that you noticed that Germanics are composed of different races and sub-races.

You identify yourself with Mediterranids? So you're Atlanto-Mediterranid or North-Atlantid?

The Aesthete
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:49 PM
As one would expect from this protected insularity, all of the indigenous races of Europe belong to the same subspecies -- the Caucasian. (Non-Caucasians did not begin entering Europe in significant numbers until 1955). But they do not all belong to the same race, as they are not all able to interbreed without negating or diminishing the racial traits of one or both parent stocks. In fact, the European population consists of several different regional racial groups or geographic races whose traits are not genetically compatible but are negated or diminished by interbreeding between the groups.

Erbe
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 01:56 PM
Many non Germanics have a slight Nordish influence because historically Germanics were in parts of Europe that are no longer considered Germanic today, for example the Germanic tribe of the Lombards settling in Lombardy in Northern Italy or the Transylvanian Saxons in Romania.


That is true. But overall nordid, dalofaelid, mediteranid, baltid, alpinid and atlantid Germanics didn't interbreed with Romanians, Hungarians, gipsies on a large scale.
You know what i mean? They kept it under themselves. That's why we Saxons could stay 850 years a strong power in Romania.

Unregistered
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 02:16 PM
I am also an anti-immigration, pro-European activist so our goals are the same.

I'm glad to hear that!


We should preserve the identity of European peoples while preserving our own racial and cultural identities. The two are not mutually exclusive. If Germanics preserve their own race and culture it would not be at the expense of other Europeans if anything it would help them do the same.

Yes, I agree with it. But I am also into eugenics - propagation of progressive racial elements in every European country, not only Germanic ones.


Nordids are very progressive.

I'd risk to say they're the most progressive race living on the Earth today. ;)

But Nordids aren't necessarily Germanic and Germanics aren't necessarily Nordids. You can easily meet Nordids in Western Finland, Baltic states, Northern Russia or historical Northern Poland. And they aren't only "Teutonic offshoots". All Indo-Europeans eventually started from Nordid (or proto-Nordid) races but then assimilated local people. Earliest Germanics were predominantly Nordid, just as earliest Celts or Slavs.


Germanics are a racial group that includes many types e.g. Hallstatt Nordid, Anglo-Saxon, Trønder, Borreby but does not include Armenid, Arabids etc.

No, Germanics aren't a racial group but linguistic/cultural group. What you said about races would apply to any other group. The same thing could be said about Balts, for example:

"Balts are a racial group that includes many types e.g. Nordid, West-Baltid but does not include Armenid, Arabid, etc."

No folk, which is racially and culturally European, includes Armenid or Arabid sub-races.


Someone who is fully Dinarid cannot be Germanic in my books even if they speak a German language and uphold our culture unless there is Germanic admixture.

Germanic Alpinids and Dinarids are Teutonized autochtones of "central European belt".

Keep in mind that Cromagnids weren't Germanics from the start as well. They also adapted their culture from Indo-European (pred. Nordid) invaders.


Angles and Saxons are Germanic tribes as were the Norse who also settled in parts of Britain and their blood does indeed flow through the veins of the British as does some Celtic.

Large amount of these Anglo-Saxons mixed with local population of Bruenn racial type. Thus they created Anglo-Saxon type. As you see - autochtones were succesfully assimilated into Germanic cultural group.


The races of Europe are genetically different, though there are also many genetic similarities. The races of Europe are closely related but still different, just as we are culturally similar but still different.

But these races aren't connected with cultural groups. As I said - go to Northern Poland or Baltic states - you'll see many Nordids there. And they aren't of Germanic origin.

Imagine races of Europe as having it's centre. More far away from the centre, less race is present. Nordids cluster in SE Norway and SW Sweden and more we go away from that point, less Nordids we'll meet. And it has nothing to do with spoken language.


Germanic people have certain alleles in common that are not common amongst other Europeans, so mixing with say East Mediterraneans for example would alter our identity.

Yes but I don't encourage mixing (even if you gave rather extreme example). I just encourage cooperation.


Compare the average Swede to your average Spaniard and the difference is self evident, though this difference is minor when compared to the average Liberian.

But we're talking about "average". There are "Swedish-looking Spaniards" and "Spanish-looking Swedes" but not that evident since this example is also rather extreme. :) But in Latvia there are many people, who could pass as Scandinavian for instance.


We are distantly related to negroids as well so to justify things on distant affinities are what the multiculturalists do.

I agree...


Many non Germanics have a slight Nordish influence because historically Germanics were in parts of Europe that are no longer considered Germanic today, for example the Germanic tribe of the Lombards settling in Lombardy in Northern Italy or the Transylvanian Saxons in Romania.

Not slight influences but - sometimes - strong influences. "Nordish" types aren't exclusively Germanic and presence of it in non-Germanic peoples doesn't mean they had to have "Germanic ancestors in the past".

Erbe
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 02:29 PM
Erbe,

but these people are Germanic today because they belong to the Germanic linguistical and cultural group. But I'm glad that you noticed that Germanics are composed of different races and sub-races.

You identify yourself with Mediterranids? So you're Atlanto-Mediterranid or North-Atlantid?

I am Saxon with neolitic roots of mediteranid/atlantid being. All of my humble sympathies goe out to the people who are the same. I never felt so bad in here, knowing that this land here is a weak place without honour and proudness.

To the germanics of ancient times they were able to hold themselves and gave their skills to the ancestors that ridicated villages in Transylvania. It worked and with christian faith life was ordered and confirming.

Sigurd
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 02:46 PM
I live in a nation that is constantly under threat from Romanization - and the forces who make that possible use the 'we're all Europeans anyway' argument as well.

Yes - and also the factor that as soon as territorial issues come into dispute, there is a huge uproar and suddenly they no longer wish to extend their brotherhood to us.

I live some 35 km away from an artificial border between South-Bavarian dialect speaking German Tyroleans and South-Bavarian dialect speaking German Tyroleans. Whenever the idea pops up about self-determination for the majority German-speaking population, it's the Italian Nationalists that scream the loudest how this isn't possible and how this is really their soil by rights, how the Treaty of Saint-Germain finally remedied 1000 years of wrong, and other fabricated nonsense and bla bla.

For some reason I don't however see such a huge animosity brooding between Dutch and Frisians, no big squabble between Danish and Swedish Nationalists over Scania, no animosity between Danes and Germans in the respective bordering regions.


Language and culture changed over time to some extend (like local dialects became own Germanic languages) but the old connections and links are visible and obvious in many aspects.

And most importantly, they are subconsciously still felt. Back in school, we had an Italian boy and a Swedish girl (in the next class). Even though Italy is geographically more proximate, he was conceived by all classmates as a foreigner, whilst she wasn't conceived as particularly foreign. Mere coincidence, or perhaps an older subconscious link between Germanics? ;)


I don't have any problem with Germanics having their own forum. My question wasn't about forum membership only, it was about attitude of some people here.

Regarding forum membership we actually did have a more open membership criterion in place some while ago - first this was anyone European, then this was anyone European as long as they were visibly pro-Germanic, then it became Germanic-only and ever since there've not been such squabbles around here --- and I'm really talking about big stuff that has no place on a Germanic board like infighting between Finns and Russians; Skadi was at one point known as the "Germanic forum where Finnic Finns talk about Finnish things". :|

At some point we decided that it was best to go Germanic-only and just for some reason the amount of hundred-page drama decreased from once per week to about once or twice per year, so the forum atmosphere certainly proves us right that this was the best decision we could have made. :thumbup


I am no Germanic wannabe (even if I have German ancestors). I mean rather... extreme attitude of some people like Germanics would be the only group worth preserving today.

We're not the only group worth preserving, but charity starts at home. What point is there for me to run around with a "Free Tibet" sign whilst my own country is being run to shit by a few inept politicians played for puppets by folks with an agenda and my folk being outbred on our own soil? :P

Ediruc
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 04:51 PM
Without a forum like this, a young Germanic like myself would never have had the chance to express how he FEELS inside fully about such topics as (illegal) immigration, racial mixing, ect..., without being refuted and called a "hateful racist" by some multiculturalist idiotic family member or friend or peer or some random person. Without this forum everything I write would be kept on Word and no one would be allowed to see it because I would be too afraid of being persecuted for things I have felt naturally inclined towards since, well, I was a youngster. Without this forum, I would have little breath or a prayer in this multicultural hellhole I live in. Without a forum like this, I would never know anybody truly like-minded, because I live in a multicultural hellhole, where everyone think it is "normal" to race-mix. Look at a White father or a White mother cradling a chocolate skin baby with a chestnut colored fro (doesn't resemble them IN ANYWAY), and tell me, IS THAT NORMAL???? Ahem! Without this forum, no one would have seen my The Fall of the West story (one of my best works of art, I think). Without this forum, well, I wouldn't be telling you this right now.

I have nothing truly against other Europeans. I have many Italian and Irish-American friends, but, I live in a multicultural society, where to speak my mind means I'm a hateful racist bastard who deserves to die just because I feel naturally inclined to preserve my race and shun those who don't. This forum gives me space to breath. If anybody is hateful, it is the race-mixers and non-white races. They are the progenitors of hatred. They are the pawns of darkness. They are the true wicked children of Satan and whatever devil.

As for my emphasis on being Germanic. It is my identity. My culture. My race. My Pride. My People. It what makes me, ME. I know where I have come from. I know where I fit in. It makes me feel like I'm not an alien to this world.

The Aesthete
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 08:19 PM
“You can easily meet Nordids in Western Finland, Baltic states, Northern Russia or historical Northern Poland”.

They are mostly East-Nordid and they often do have some Germanic ancestry, for example the Swedish Finns.

Germanics include many different sub races; Balts and Nordids are different sub races but a Balt can have Nordid admixture and vice versa.

Nordids are overwhelmingly Germanic full stop.

The northern region is inhabited by the Nordish racial group ("Nord" being the word for north in both French and German). The latter can be divided into two subgroups: an Inner or Central subgroup consisting of the Nordic, Borreby, Brünn, Fälish, Trønder and Anglo-Saxon subraces and subtypes of the British Isles, Scandinavia, northern Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium; and an Outer or Periphery subgroup, which includes the Atlantid subtypes of the British Isles, and the Noric, East Baltic and Neo-Danubian subtypes which predominate in northern France, southern Germany, Switzerland, Austria, the Czech Republic, Finland, the Baltic States, Poland and northwestern Russia. These last inhabit the racial clinal zone between the Central Nordish and Alpine racial groups, and are intermediate types resulting from hybridization or intermixture between these two groups, with the Nordish element being generally more numerous and predominant. The term Nordish is here used to refer to the indigenous peoples of northern Europe as a whole, including both Central and Periphery types, and also those peoples in North America, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and elsewhere whose ancestors were of Northern European racial origin.

Germanic is in the blood as is European otherwise any Negroid can adopt European or Germanic culture and call themselves one of us.

“Swedish-looking Spaniards” there are not many!

“Spanish-looking Swedes” yeah with Mediterranid admixture

“In Latvia there are many people, who could pass as Scandinavian for instance”.

Especially at first glimpse, but fair hair and eyes does not makes someone automatically Nordid; there is much admixture there and the epicanthic fold is quite common there. They are not as pure Nordids as the Scandinavian people, and most of the Nordid influence has been gained over centuries during Germanic and Scandinavian colonization and settlement.

In the former Baltic lands, the Estonians are very blond. They have ash-blond-hair and light blue-grey eyes, are mostly tall, and medium to moderately round-headed. For the most part, the Estonians are East-Baltid and Nordid in race, the former more in the east and the latter more in the west of the country. There are some weak, and certainly very ancient, Mongolid traits. These comprise the slanted and flat position of the eyes, coarse hair form, thick and dense skin, a higher frequency of blood type gene q (on the average about 18%) than all surrounding regions, and a surprisingly low frequency of blood type gene p. The Latvians resemble the Estonians in anthropological structure. However, they are somewhat more round-headed and also somewhat darker in pigmentation. The Latvians show some Dinarid and more East-Mediterranean strains. The latter are concentrated in a remarkable manner in western Courland. Very light, clear-blue eyes, rarely the East-Baltic gray-white-blue eyes, are characteristic of surprisingly many Livland Latvians, but less so of the Courland Latvians.

"Nordish presence in non-Germanic peoples doesn't mean they had to have Germanic ancestors in the past".

Agrippa could you please chime in here

Svartljos
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 08:25 PM
I wrote a really great post for this thread, but accidently deleted it. Anyway, I think the main message of it was: I agree with most things the OP is saying, but that we make a different value judgement out of it. Maybe tomorrow if I can be bothered, I will rewrite it.

Unregistered
Saturday, August 21st, 2010, 11:00 PM
I wrote a really great post for this thread, but accidently deleted it. Anyway, I think the main message of it was: I agree with most things the OP is saying, but that we make a different value judgement out of it. Maybe tomorrow if I can be bothered, I will rewrite it.

It would be great, if you could rewrite it! :)


They are mostly East-Nordid and they often do have some Germanic ancestry, for example the Swedish Finns.

What's wrong with East-Nordids? They are almost the same, as Skando-Nordids with only some minor differences (stronger Corded traits). Even "Nordish" concept you seem to embrace considers them to be "Central Nordish" type, so what's the problem with East-Nordids?

As for Finns, they are sort of exception. Finno-Ugrics obviously aren't Indo-Europeans and their racial past is suspicious. But modern inhabitants of Finland and Estonia (so called "Baltic-Finns") are something different, influenced by Germanics indeed. Again, you're showing rather extreme examples.


Germanics include many different sub races; Balts and Nordids are different sub races but a Balt can have Nordid admixture and vice versa.

Nordids aren't called by such name, because they're exclusively Germanic type. Baltids aren't called that name, because they're exclusively Baltid type. These names given to races come from geographical, not ethnic names. Nordids are called so, because they are present in biggest numbers in Nordic countries (but not only there). Baltids are called so, because they cluster close to the Baltic Sea. There's nothing ethnic with that.


Nordids are overwhelmingly Germanic full stop.

Early Indo-Europeans were Nordid (or Proto-Nordid). Today, descendants of them are most commonly seen in Germanic countries. But it doesn't mean that they cannot be seen in other places. And it also doesn't mean that those "non-Germanic Nordids" must be descendants of Germanics.


The northern region is inhabited by the Nordish racial group ("Nord" being the word for north in both French and German). The latter can be divided into two subgroups: an Inner or Central subgroup consisting of the Nordic, Borreby, Brünn, Fälish, Trønder and Anglo-Saxon subraces and subtypes of the British Isles, Scandinavia, northern Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium; and an Outer or Periphery subgroup, which includes the Atlantid subtypes of the British Isles, and the Noric, East Baltic and Neo-Danubian subtypes which predominate in northern France, southern Germany, Switzerland, Austria, the Czech Republic, Finland, the Baltic States, Poland and northwestern Russia. These last inhabit the racial clinal zone between the Central Nordish and Alpine racial groups, and are intermediate types resulting from hybridization or intermixture between these two groups, with the Nordish element being generally more numerous and predominant. The term Nordish is here used to refer to the indigenous peoples of northern Europe as a whole, including both Central and Periphery types, and also those peoples in North America, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and elsewhere whose ancestors were of Northern European racial origin.

Where you got that from? I guess that from Richard McCulloh's site, I've read it once and something similiar was there.

Look at the parts I bolded. McCulloh suggests that in these periphery types, Nordish element is predominant. Not only Germanic countries are listed there: Finland, France, Celtic countries, Baltic countries and West/East Slavic countries as well. And not all Polish "Nordish" types are peripherial, there are plenty of central as well for that matter.

If we're talking about this "Nordish" conception, then I disagree with it. There is no "Nordish race". What he calls "Nordish" is indeed Nordid + Cromagnid + Osteuropid. Quite wide spectrum, having different origins. Only similiarities I see is inhabited area (Northern Europe in veeeeery wide sense) and generally ligh pigmentation.

Also, McCulloh uses rather... moot concepts like "Neo-Danubian". There is no such race, really. Basing worldview on one book by one anthropologist (Coon in this case) isn't the best idea, if you ask me. Coon had a lot of moot and controversial ideas, some of them might be true but others were discredited over years, we must keep our knowledge updated.

By the way, McCulloh is typically Celtic surname. If I remember right he was Irish, maybe Scottish. Not really Germanic. :P


Germanic is in the blood as is European otherwise any Negroid can adopt European or Germanic culture and call themselves one of us.

But non-Germanic Europeans are generally composed of the same races, maybe in different proportions. That's what I'm trying to tell here.


“Swedish-looking Spaniards” there are not many!

“Spanish-looking Swedes” yeah with Mediterranid admixture

Because it's very extreme example. Use something less extreme, for example Irish and English. There are a lot of English, who "look Irish" and vice versa. ;)


“In Latvia there are many people, who could pass as Scandinavian for instance”.

Especially at first glimpse, but fair hair and eyes does not makes someone automatically Nordid; there is much admixture there and the epicanthic fold is quite common there. They are not as pure Nordids as the Scandinavian people, and most of the Nordid influence has been gained over centuries during Germanic and Scandinavian colonization and settlement.

You're talking about Osteuropid racial types. I agree, they're fair eyed/haired and are common in, say, Latvia. But there are also a lot of Nordids there as well, especially nearer to the Baltic coast.

I wouldn't say that epicanthic fold is that common. It's sometimes seen, mainly in people of East-Baltid subrace.

By the way, who are you after all? Nordicist, nordishist? Because if you're nordishist (which is very likely judging by your quotes of McCulloh), then most Balts and Estonians would be "Nordish" anyway, since it includes Osteuropids and Cromagnids.


In the former Baltic lands, the Estonians are very blond. They have ash-blond-hair and light blue-grey eyes, are mostly tall, and medium to moderately round-headed. For the most part, the Estonians are East-Baltid and Nordid in race, the former more in the east and the latter more in the west of the country. There are some weak, and certainly very ancient, Mongolid traits. These comprise the slanted and flat position of the eyes, coarse hair form, thick and dense skin, a higher frequency of blood type gene q (on the average about 18%) than all surrounding regions, and a surprisingly low frequency of blood type gene p. The Latvians resemble the Estonians in anthropological structure. However, they are somewhat more round-headed and also somewhat darker in pigmentation. The Latvians show some Dinarid and more East-Mediterranean strains. The latter are concentrated in a remarkable manner in western Courland. Very light, clear-blue eyes, rarely the East-Baltic gray-white-blue eyes, are characteristic of surprisingly many Livland Latvians, but less so of the Courland Latvians.

I generally agree with it. But it gives an impression of these "Mongolid traits" as being extremely common. I wouldn't say so. You can see such people in Estonia, all right, but they aren't majority or predominant element. They are mostly of East-Baltid affilation, id est very close to the "border" between Europoid and Mongoloid types.

Presence of such people in Estonia does not discredit the rest.


Without a forum like this, a young Germanic like myself would never have had the chance to express how he FEELS inside fully about such topics as (illegal) immigration, racial mixing, ect..., without being refuted and called a "hateful racist" by some multiculturalist idiotic family member or friend or peer or some random person. Without this forum everything I write would be kept on Word and no one would be allowed to see it because I would be too afraid of being persecuted for things I have felt naturally inclined towards since, well, I was a youngster. Without this forum, I would have little breath or a prayer in this multicultural hellhole I live in. Without a forum like this, I would never know anybody truly like-minded, because I live in a multicultural hellhole, where everyone think it is "normal" to race-mix. Look at a White father or a White mother cradling a chocolate skin baby with a chestnut colored fro (doesn't resemble them IN ANYWAY), and tell me, IS THAT NORMAL???? Ahem! Without this forum, no one would have seen my The Fall of the West story (one of my best works of art, I think). Without this forum, well, I wouldn't be telling you this right now.

I have nothing truly against other Europeans. I have many Italian and Irish-American friends, but, I live in a multicultural society, where to speak my mind means I'm a hateful racist bastard who deserves to die just because I feel naturally inclined to preserve my race and shun those who don't. This forum gives me space to breath. If anybody is hateful, it is the race-mixers and non-white races. They are the progenitors of hatred. They are the pawns of darkness. They are the true wicked children of Satan and whatever devil.

As for my emphasis on being Germanic. It is my identity. My culture. My race. My Pride. My People. It what makes me, ME. I know where I have come from. I know where I fit in. It makes me feel like I'm not an alien to this world.

I understand you. I am also "evil, vile racist" in the eyes of others. I am against race-mixing and support your view in 100%.

***

@Sigurd:

I think territorial disputes are the least important problem right now. Arguing with other nations about some territories isn't the best idea, when we're endangered as a whole.

Grey
Sunday, August 22nd, 2010, 01:34 AM
I agree, for the most part, with this guest. Meta-Ethnicity is a pretty hard thing to label in many cases, and seems a bit foolish to be prejudiced about. Does a "Pure Germanic" have more in common with a Germanized Celt from South Germany, or a Romanized Frank from France?

I personally don't see Skadi's Germanics-only policy as inherently bad, for that which is Germanic is a unique and valuable fragment of European culture. However, the repeated statements of Germanic superiority over others is trying. The (non-Germanic) Neolithic peoples created amazing monuments for their own time, the Celtic invasions are largely associated with an introduction of superior technology, and no one can doubt the greatness of the Hellenes or the Romans (which led to terrible things, but only after degradation).

nordfrisk
Sunday, August 22nd, 2010, 04:26 AM
we put emphasis on being "germanic" because that is how we connect best. if you are trying to communicate to people best you have to reach into there identity and we are all here for the most part germanic. we relate more to each other and understand each other more. its just common sense.

The Aesthete
Sunday, August 22nd, 2010, 08:41 AM
Finland and the Baltic States = 50% East Baltic, 15% Hallstatt Nordic (most common in the Swedish-settled areas of Finland), 30% Neo-Danubian (most common in southeast Lithuania and northeast Finland), 5% Ladogan = 95% Nordish (15% central and 80% periphery types)

Compare

Sweden = 70% Hallstatt Nordic (Carleton Coon described Sweden as a refuge area for the classic Nordic race), 10% Borreby (most common in the southwest coastal region), 10% Fälish (most common in Dalarna [Kopparberg] and the southwest coastal region), 5% Trønder (most common near the central Norwegian border), 5% East Baltic = 100% Nordish (95% central and 5% periphery types)

The main points of morphological departure from the Hallstatt Nordic involve the usually higher vault and forehead, and often more prominent (and sometimes convex) nasal skeleton, of the East-Nordid

The Hallstatt Nordic is the 'classic' Nordid type and most progressive

The Hallstatt Nordid type is found in its greatest concentration on the southern Swedish plain and in the adjacent long valleys and lowlands of southeastern Norway. Outside of this kernel, which Carleton Coon described as "a refuge of the classic Nordic race", non-Nordid (mostly Cro-Magnoid) admixture increases rapidly, and no true predominantly Hallstatt Nordid population may be found. The type has blended with broader-featured, more robust Cro-Magnids in Denmark, northern Germany and the Be-Ne-Lux countries (Dalo-Falid, Borreby), and is present at lower levels in the British Isles, where the related Keltic type is more common. The type is inseparably tied to the ancient Germanic migrations.

This thread may interest you:

http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=133407


Proportions are very important! The proportions are very different again Sweden and Spain.


Early indo Europeans were proto Nordid


Those names are given to ethnicities associated with a particular geographical region


If Europe was a place where the various peoples e.g. Dinarids moved freely and mixed with the local populations there would be virtually no Nordids left, this is just one reason I am no fan of the EU. Yes we should work together as we did against the Ottoman empire etc but still maintain our own identities.


Where are you from?


You are correct we are endangered as a whole.


Hopefully Agrippa will see this thread and can clear things up a bit

UnregisteredGuest
Sunday, August 22nd, 2010, 01:48 PM
Finland and the Baltic States = 50% East Baltic, 15% Hallstatt Nordic (most common in the Swedish-settled areas of Finland), 30% Neo-Danubian (most common in southeast Lithuania and northeast Finland), 5% Ladogan = 95% Nordish (15% central and 80% periphery types)

Compare

Sweden = 70% Hallstatt Nordic (Carleton Coon described Sweden as a refuge area for the classic Nordic race), 10% Borreby (most common in the southwest coastal region), 10% Fälish (most common in Dalarna [Kopparberg] and the southwest coastal region), 5% Trønder (most common near the central Norwegian border), 5% East Baltic = 100% Nordish (95% central and 5% periphery types)

But it doesn't change the fact that Finns and Balts are generally of good stock.

By the way: I wouldn't rely so much on these statistics, I wonder where are these from. There's a lot of misinformation here, it's very general and these percentage distribution data should be taken with certain distance.


The main points of morphological departure from the Hallstatt Nordic involve the usually higher vault and forehead, and often more prominent (and sometimes convex) nasal skeleton, of the East-Nordid

The Hallstatt Nordic is the 'classic' Nordid type and most progressive

And what about that? East-Nordids are automatically inferior and primitive because they have more prominent noses and higher forehead? They're still the second purest Nordid type and closest to the "classic" one from them all. Difference in "progressiveness" between East-Nordid and Skando-Nordid is veeeery slight.

Nordid is Nordid after all.


The Hallstatt Nordid type is found in its greatest concentration on the southern Swedish plain and in the adjacent long valleys and lowlands of southeastern Norway. Outside of this kernel, which Carleton Coon described as "a refuge of the classic Nordic race", non-Nordid (mostly Cro-Magnoid) admixture increases rapidly, and no true predominantly Hallstatt Nordid population may be found. The type has blended with broader-featured, more robust Cro-Magnids in Denmark, northern Germany and the Be-Ne-Lux countries (Dalo-Falid, Borreby), and is present at lower levels in the British Isles, where the related Keltic type is more common. The type is inseparably tied to the ancient Germanic migrations.

Yes, that's right. But Keltic-Nordid for instance were also Skando-Nordid-like in the beginning if they hadn't absorbed some of Dinarid blood.


This thread may interest you:

http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=133407

Thank you.


Proportions are very important! The proportions are very different again Sweden and Spain.

I support the stance of Lothrop Stoddard. I believe that all "White" people, id est native to Europe and associated with European civilization, are essentially of good stock. So I don't consider any of European races to be unworthy. However, just like Stoddard was saying, Nordid and generally progressive traits should be propagated via eugenics.


Early indo Europeans were proto Nordid

These Proto-Nordids were more East-Nordid-like than Skando-Nordid-like (stronger Corded element in the former).

Germanics haven't been only carriers of Nordid race. Of course, they were one of the most active ones, but Nordids were seen among Indo-Europeans in general. Good example is Patrician ruling class in ancient Rome which was descended from Indo-European Italics. They were Keltic-Nordid-like.


If Europe was a place where the various peoples e.g. Dinarids moved freely and mixed with the local populations there would be virtually no Nordids left, this is just one reason I am no fan of the EU. Yes we should work together as we did against the Ottoman empire etc but still maintain our own identities.

As for the Dinarid part, that's exactly, why I am into eugenics. If it would be invented, then there would be no fear of dissapearing of Nordids. Oh, and I don't want violent eugenics but for example financial encouragement, etc.

And I wouldn't fear Dinarids that much. ;) They're quite progressive after all!

As for your last sentence, I couldn't say it any better. I support your view here in 100%!


Where are you from?

I live in Poland. I have Polish, German and highlander ancestry. Also, possibly in Denmark but it isn't sure.


You are correct we are endangered as a whole.

That's why we should work together and keep our culture - like you said before.

I'm glad I "provoked" an intelligent discussion, I see that level of this forum is quite high!

Siebenbürgerin
Sunday, August 22nd, 2010, 03:27 PM
In my view peoples who are white nationalist shouldn't take so much offense with the existence of Germanic forums. Because it's a narrowed down and specifically made forum to talk about the topics. Please guest think about the existence of Slavic or Romance forums which focus on Eastern Europe or the Mediterranean region. There are other forums which are for Germans only, for Scandinavians only. Why should it be an offensive thing, please? :shrug

Ocko
Sunday, August 22nd, 2010, 03:54 PM
Why Do You Put So Much Emphasis on Being "Germanic"?



Why is that a question?

Fyrgenholt
Sunday, August 22nd, 2010, 05:31 PM
I put emphasis on being Germanic for I live in a country of Germanic roots, of which it's natives speak a Germanic language and partake in a Germanic culture.

I don't speak a Romance language, nor do my friends or family, my next door neighbour or the bloke who runs the shop. I'm not even sure I know what Romance culture looks like. How could I preserve a thing I do not understand? The same goes for Slavic culture and language, and even Celtic culture and language - although I understand that with the Celts this is to a much lesser degree in regards to myself. The people who can preserve Slavic, Celtic and Romance cultures are the people who are of that affinity, and more power to them, I say!

I'm all for the preservation of Europe and it's rich history of language, of culture, of food and drink, of art, music, warfare. However, I am English and the old man who farms vegetables on the hill and sells you them at 10:30 on a Saturday morning, or the poor little lad who lives on the corner and knows nothing of what he has been so fortunate to have inherited in his being of English descent, comes first, always. Because England is dying, and I will do all I can to preserve her so that my children and theirs and theirs too can love the country that I love.

It isn't just England though. It's Germany, it's Denmark, it's Norway and the other countries of Germanic heritage. To me, those countries come before France or Italy or Poland or whatever else because I feel as though I understand those countries on a much greater level than I understand, for example, Spain. Their landscape is like mine, it suits me. Their culture, too. Their language. The people. I feel as though I can play a part in preserving not only England, but Germania and the rest of Northern and North Western Europe, but not as though I can play any role in preserving the South West, or the South East, those places are to be preserved by their people.

The nation must be preserved by the people whom call it their home. The cultural and linguistic branch must be preserved by the peoples who come under it. The integrity of the continent by those people who are native to it. Baring that in mind, I'm fine with cooperation, but I am English, and the English are Germanic, and to me, England, and Germania, come before Italy and Romance folk and I would like to think Italy and Romance folk put Italy and Romance folk before England and Germania, too, else they may aswell press self-destruct now.

We're a dying breed, my friend.

UnregisteredGuest
Sunday, August 22nd, 2010, 11:25 PM
I'm directing this posts, to people, who wrote three last posts, namely Cenwulf, Ocko and Siebenbürgerin.

I don't see anything wrong and offensive in the existence of forum like Skadi. I just asked a question and it has been answered. I'd like to thank you for your intelligent and informative posts.

However, there was a "secondary discussion" going in the meantime. We are discussing ideological issues, not only forum issues. I asked about opinions of users here about general European/White preservation, not only Germanic.

I am aware that Skadi as a forum doesn't have any specific ideology. Skadi member can subscribe to virtually every ideology as long, as it's pro-Germanic. So there's quite big diversity here when it comes to beliefs.

But there must be some general opinion, general "trend" here. While I am 100% into Germanic preservation, I believe all Europeans are of good stock. We should propagate progressive elements by eugenics. I'm sure many of you agree with me on many points.

I'd like to clarify one thing. I am not white nationalist. I agree at many points with them just, as I agree with you. But I am not into melting Whites into one, bigger "White nation" or something like that. I am also not that egalitarian (inside White group), as WNs are.

By the way: some are suggesting that I should join pro-European or pro-Slavic forum. As for pan-slavism, I see it as one of the most evil ideologies in the world and I will not suscribe into that. Pan-slavists actually thought that Poles are "traitors of Slavs" and that they aren't welcome in their ranks. They thought that Poles are "too germanized" and "too pro-Western". Also, Slavs are divided by religion: some belong to the Western civilization and were christianized from the West: mainly West Slavs; some had christianity from Byzantium. This hardens our relations.
Pan-slavists are very closed for the West, very open for the East, namely mongoloids. It's a racial suicide, I will NEVER support it.

In the World War II, the biggest threat for White civilization was judeo-bolshevism. Waffen SS was participating in pan-European crusade against communism, there were not only Germanics in their ranks, also Romanics, Balts, Finns or Slavs (including Poles and Russians). There were also numerous volunteers helping in the Wehrmacht. I know history between our folks wasn't always the best but why should we carry it to the future?
Today, the biggest threat for White civilization is demo-liberalism, islamization and mass-immigration. Enemy's the same, their methods are different. We must rally and deal with this problem and we have the biggest chance united. I don't want all Europeans to mix, I don't want them to abandon their culture. I just want to preserve the Nature's finest before they fade to black in non-European masses.

I hope you know, what I mean.

Blod og Jord
Monday, August 23rd, 2010, 01:51 AM
I would like to ask, why people on this forum put so much emphasis on being "Germanic".
I think the answer is simple. The audience of the forum, the founders, the owners, the staff are of Germanic or predominantly Germanic heritage and they want to cherish it. Hence the existence of the goal and the emphasis on being Germanic.
But I'm curious why do you use the inverted commas? Do you think Germanic is not really a legitimate word?


But Europe and European-derived people worldwide face a great danger - coming from multi-culturalism, "tolerance". In the year of 2100, so called "White" people might permanently dissapear from this planet.
That's a danger but the danger in Germanic lands doesn't come only from non-European-derived people. Non-Northerners in Scandinavia cause problems too.
So what should we do about the cultural, physical and other differences? Ignore them?


As I stated before, I totally support pride from one's nation, culture. But shoudln't we concentrate on ethnic, racial and cultural preservation of ALL European peoples, whether Germanic, Celtic or Slavic for that matter?
I wish them all the best but my priority is Scandinavia and the related Germanic lands. My fuss is not in Italy or Greece.


I think we don't have that much freedom of choice today to pick among Europeans: "who is more worth preserving".
The governments and establishments don't allow us officially to preserve because it's supposed to be racist but we have the freedom within ourselves to focus on whoever we want. It starts with our closest family and the neighborhood and the region. Then the country and more.

The Aesthete
Sunday, August 29th, 2010, 09:36 AM
The more corded East Nordids have a slightly eastern look to them whereas the Hallstatt Nordids have a more Northern look to them.

“I have Polish, German and highlander ancestry. Also, possibly in Denmark but it isn't sure”.

You have Germanic ancestry so why don’t you join as a member?

Although I hear there is a substantial number of Vietnamese there I don’t think you guys are experiencing decadence on the same scale as is happening in the Germanic countries. All the Germanic countries are experiencing mass immigration that will submerge their racial identities. In my lifetime if present trends continue I will see my folk become a minority in virtually every Germanic country.
In a way the Slavic countries seem to care more about what really matters.

However all Europeans are facing a declining birth rates; Poland’s recent sharp drop in the birth rate has put it well below replacement level.
I think you will find that most forum members here have a high opinion of the Poles, I know I certainly do.