PDA

View Full Version : How Extreme Are You With Regard to Racial 'Purity'?



TechFin
Monday, October 18th, 2010, 10:51 AM
Depending on your belief, we either had fish-like ancestors in the past, or humans were created as they are, or some other view.

Let me ask: how extreme are you in regards to racial purity?

I always thought everyone had practical notions of race. Either you look like a race or not.

In your opinion, do your ancestors have to be German all the way back to the beginning of time, for someone to be German?

What do you think of European-descended Americans who had a Native American ancestor out of a possible 128, 256 or 512 ancestors? I am sure quite a bit of Americans would fit the latter group. Are they White, in your book?

How extreme are you in regards to racial purity and where do you draw the line?

flâneur
Monday, October 18th, 2010, 10:58 AM
In your opinion, do your ancestors have to be German all the way back to the beginning of time, for someone to be German?


Germany didnt exist at the begining of time....i think Germany as an actual nation state only came into being around 1870 or so.

þeudiskaz
Monday, October 18th, 2010, 11:14 AM
Germany didnt exist at the begining of time....i think Germany as an actual nation state only came into being around 1870 or so.

1871, so definitely not the beginning of time. If the op meant Germanic, though, then I would say that anyone who is at least mostly Germanic would qualify, so long as they care about their heritage. Those who would forsake our great culture, and history are less than traitors in my eyes, though welcome back to the flock anytime.

For myself I have heard (without evidence) that I do have some american indian heritage, however every surname in my family that I know is German, putting me somewhere in the 90's% Germanic, additionally, I feel literally no ties to any american indian culture, whether I share in a microscopic shred of it or not.

Wittmann
Monday, October 18th, 2010, 04:15 PM
Well it depends on what's impure. I mean if your 25% Polish, okay, fine. But not if your 2<t% Mexican. I am forgiving in Slavic genetics (excluding Russia).

SaxonCeorl
Tuesday, October 19th, 2010, 12:26 AM
I only care that they are European. So really, I'm no more extreme than the average person, except for the fact that I admit my criteria. As far as "quite a bit" of Americans having a Native American ancestor somewhere along the line, I think that's a greatly exaggerated assumption people have.

þeudiskaz
Tuesday, October 19th, 2010, 01:52 AM
I only care that they are European.

So you're more into white pride than Germanic pride?

Seems weird to me.

Tifa
Tuesday, October 19th, 2010, 01:55 AM
I am not much extreme about that. If someone has some ancestors that are not European he should have very little of it to be indentified as Germanic in my book. When it comes to European ancestors like Slavic and Mediterranean, I think you need to be only need to be half Germanic. Of course you also need to identify as Germanic and you need to respect that culture. I see you typed German and I think you meant Germanic. There are black people that identify themselves as Germans.

SaxonCeorl
Tuesday, October 19th, 2010, 02:13 AM
So you're more into white pride than Germanic pride?

Seems weird to me.

Well there aren't any intelligent European pride sites that I know of.

And how is it weird? What's weird is disassociating oneself from other Europeans who are equally castigated and discriminated against by non-Europeans. We're very much a minority in the world; why further fracture ourselves through over-reliance on minor differences?

I think I've made this rant before, so I'm not going to go further with it. I know I'm in the minority here on this issue.

Balders gate
Tuesday, October 19th, 2010, 02:33 AM
In europe there is probably many pure germanic people around. I'm not sure about europe but in america many people have mixed blood. Even if your say dutch, english,and norweigian, are you really pure. Now a lot of people in america claim indian blood but there were laws against marrying people of a different race in white america, but you know how that is. If you look on other side most indians did not want to interbreed with white eyes. I wonder if you could do a dna test if that would determine what you really were. How accurate are they? I don't know how to answer this question, germans 2000 years ago were made up of several tribes. Were they different from each other I don't really know. In the united states in the early 1900's northern european immigrants were well wanted in US, southern europeans not so much. My extreme is purity is difficult to figure out,but if any of your relatives are from western europe or northern europe you are okay.

Þoreiðar
Tuesday, October 19th, 2010, 03:26 AM
First of all, I do not like to mix the terms 'nationality' and 'sub-race' with each other. Two people might have exclusively "Danish" ancestry over 2000 years back and still have significant genetic or sub-racial differences.

Second, I make a very clear distinction between pairing with someone, and simply seeing someone as a comrade in terms of European unity. I see pretty much every Europeid who's supporting the preservation of their own European cultural and genetic heritage as my comrade, but that doesn't necessarily mean I would want to pair up with someone of every European ethnicity. I want the multitude of European sub-races to live on, and that won't happen by ignoring the differences within the European spectrum.

So some Europeids I may consider racially "pure" (/similar to myself) enough to consider them a part of my race, whilst not being racially "pure" enough for me to accept them as a part of my nation (/folk).

nauthiz
Wednesday, October 20th, 2010, 10:04 PM
I'm so tired of the American has Indian blood in them. Bologne! Few do and it isn't me. I know that much. My family was always very small and thankfully for that, it's easier to come up with the tree and see who was with whom and such. We/they were new England based and stuck with their own kind. I can thank them for their steadfastness on the subject.

Caledonian
Thursday, October 21st, 2010, 05:51 PM
Depending on your belief, we either had fish-like ancestors in the past, or humans were created as they are, or some other view.

Let me ask: how extreme are you in regards to racial purity?

I always thought everyone had practical notions of race. Either you look like a race or not.

In your opinion, do your ancestors have to be German all the way back to the beginning of time, for someone to be German?

What do you think of European-descended Americans who had a Native American ancestor out of a possible 128, 256 or 512 ancestors? I am sure quite a bit of Americans would fit the latter group. Are they White, in your book?

How extreme are you in regards to racial purity and where do you draw the line?

For me if it looks Europid where it can have Europid children it's Europid.

Or put in a Germanic context...........

If it looks Germanic where it can have Germanic children it's Germanic.

Let's use a Norwegian living in Greenland for a example.

[I'm not sure if this is a realistic example given historical context but still I am going to use it anyway.]

If that Norwegian had one or two eskimo ancestors in his blood like somewhere out of 20 generations (2-20) of Norwegians would that make him less Norwegian?

Sedtrogen
Tuesday, October 26th, 2010, 03:48 AM
I'm going to assume that you meant "Germanic" and not "German".

To me, it's all about looks when it comes to defining race. For example I wouldn't have a problem marrying a woman that has racial features similar to my own, and of course comes from a culture similar to mine (not necessarily the culture of my own Sweonic tribe, but some form of Germanic culture, and maybe even a culture similar to the Germanic, such as the Celtic culture). Being more picky than that would just be splitting hairs.

Exia
Tuesday, March 1st, 2011, 11:43 PM
As long as they are white, they are somewhat accepatable. Being Germanic is a huge plus in my book though. Southern Europeans I find hard to classify as white sometimes though. I think Slavs are white (mostly anyways).

Gareth Lee Hunter
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 05:25 PM
I realize this is a Germanic site, but to me, White is White regardless of what nation a White person originates from. I'm an American of English/German descent. My wife is an American of English/Irish descent. We're White people... And yes, I capitalize White out of respect for our race, because our unsurpassed race is being treated so disrespectfully these days it's sickening.

My deranged maternal grandmother claimed there was an injun princess lurking in our ancestral closet. But as I've stated, she was literally deranged. And I have about as much injun blood in me as Adolf Hitler did. :D

All these Americans who chatter about their injun blood are nothing more than dimwitted attention whores. They seem to think this form of genetic contamination is something to be proud of; which, of course, it isn't.

Elessar
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 05:29 PM
We're White people... And yes, I capitalize White out of respect for our race, because our unsurpassed race is being treated so disrespectfully these days it's sickening.

“Under close scrutiny, the division into races according to the colour of skin turns out to be quite the crudest and most obvious method, since there are noticeably inheritable characteristic racial differences among people of identically coloured skins.” – Alfred Rosenberg

Gareth Lee Hunter
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 06:19 PM
“Under close scrutiny, the division into races according to the colour of skin turns out to be quite the crudest and most obvious method, since there are noticeably inheritable characteristic racial differences among people of identically coloured skins.” – Alfred Rosenberg

I recognize three distinct races: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. A cross between any of them is not White, but either Mongoloid, or Negroid.

Elessar
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 06:29 PM
I recognize three distinct races: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. A cross between any of them is not White, but either Mongoloid, or Negroid.

While technically that is true, that's as if you were to say "I only recognize 3 colors: Red, Yellow, and Blue, because they make up all the other colors." when in reality there's an entire spectrum of nuance and specialty which constitutes our world.

Unquestioning acceptance of current racial divisions is the greatest obstacle to proper racial understanding. Happily splitting his species into three colours, or three geographical continents, modern man has produced an ignorantly convenient picture of ‘races’, self-identification along which has created more problems than it has ever solved. We can persist through this dirty mess of racial identity, or wash away the remnants of a bygone era and pursue racial idealism. I prefer the latter.

Gareth Lee Hunter
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 06:39 PM
While technically that is true, that's as if you were to say "I only recognize 3 colors: Red, Yellow, and Blue, because they make up all the other colors." when in reality there's an entire spectrum of nuance and specialty which constitutes our world.

Unquestioning acceptance of current racial divisions is the greatest obstacle to proper racial understanding. Happily splitting his species into three colours, or three geographical continents, modern man has produced an ignorantly convenient picture of ‘races’, self-identification along which has created more problems than it has ever solved. We can persist through this dirty mess of racial identity, or wash away the remnants of a bygone era and pursue racial idealism. I prefer the latter.

Needlessly complicating the simple matter of racial identity has made it possible for nonwhites to take a disrespectful walk up our backsides. Our White nations are being inundated with nonwhites while politically correct intellectuals standby debating racial academics... I prefer to keep it simple and just say NO! to the parasitical deluge of nonwhite interlopers.

Hamar Fox
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 06:40 PM
I recognize three distinct races: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. A cross between any of them is not White, but either Mongoloid, or Negroid.

There's Australoids, Amerindians and Pacific Islanders too (though you may want to classify the latter two as Mongoloid and Australoid respectively). I suppose the biggest problem with 'Caucasoid' isn't its scientific basis, but that it subsumes racial undesirables such as Turks, Arabs, Berbers, South Asians, who, even without admixture with non-Caucasoids, aren't to be considered racial equals, and certainly not to be considered fit for intermarriage with us.

Elessar
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 06:49 PM
Needlessly complicating the simple matter of racial identity has made it possible for nonwhites to take a disrespectful walk up our backsides.
How is that so?


while politically correct intellectuals standby debating racial academics...
I wouldn't call them intellectuals who are at the forefront of Racial science. More along the lines of agent provocateurs who's intent it is to oversimplify and proclaim from the highest mountain that we're all the same and should miscegenate because those of "mixed race are healthier people" and we share 99% of genes, thus nullifying any real progress on the study of race, since because the "intellectuals" say it doesn't exist, it's tethered to a pseudo-science.

Gareth Lee Hunter
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 07:24 PM
How is that so?

To me, the ethnic hatred being displayed by various White European nations is senseless. Maybe I don't fully comprehend the mindset behind this confusing and seemingly unnecessary animosity among White brethren because I'm an American. But I'd really like to see racial unity being practiced for a change, rather than self-destruction being wrought due to inane differences in culture.

Æmeric
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 09:43 PM
I recognize three distinct races: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. A cross between any of them is not White, but either Mongoloid, or Negroid.

Caucosoid, Mongoloid & Negroid is too simplistic. You seem to go by the old standard that Caucasoid = White. But that would lump the Nordish race together with the Semitic & Armenoid races.

The racial term "White" originated in the New World, specifically the US
(and perhaps independently in South Africa) because of the presence of non-Europoids, firstly native Indians but mainly Africans. The term "White"referred to Northwestern Europeans. For a long time Italians & Jews were not accepted as socially White (even if they fit the official description of Caucasoid/White as layed down by the US government), where as someone like Will Rogers was, regardless of how much he made of his Cherokee heritage.

InvaderNat
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 10:23 PM
Preferably I stick to my own ethnic group (Germanic) when dating, however someone from the same race (European) is also acceptable.
Most Europeans in NZ are of Anglo/Celtic stock anyway.

I will admit that I have 1/128th Maori blood from the NZ colonial age (1800's) where often the only available women were natives. But I hardly consider something so watered down to be relevant, after all would anyone consider Obama white or even part-white even though he's 50% European - No (even he doesn't on his census forms apparently).

Norrøn
Monday, March 7th, 2011, 11:24 PM
Prefarably Hallstatt, Faelid or Borreby from Norway, Sweden or Denmark. Never been with a girl who isnt, and dont think that will change.

Plantagenet
Tuesday, March 8th, 2011, 04:49 AM
In regards to myself and others, I would have what I consider a hierarchy of sorts. However, racial purity is but one aspect of the hierarchy. I think finding a spouse/mate that is of high intellectual ability, free from any inheritable diseases, and shares your own value system in regards to race, family, and political outlook to be ideal. Of course, in a world such as our own, this may a bit difficult to come by, but ideally one should fulfill these values even if it as at the expense of breeding within your own European ethnic group. One must also consider the most basic criteria of finding a mate--whether or not you are compatible. Creating a home environment filled with conflict or ending up with a divorce and thus a broken home will not be ideal for the rearing of a healthy white child.

In any case, my ideal hierarchy, with all criteria above being fulfilled, would be--

1. A member of your own ethnic group, or if you are of mixed ethnic heritage, a member of one of your own ethnic groups. Preferably one that matches your phenotype, but this is not necessary.

2. A member of your general cultural group. A Germanic with a fellow Germanic, a Slavic with a fellow Slavic, and so on and so forth.

3. A member that shares your placement on the Northern European to Southern European divide. Ideally I would rather see an Englishman breed with a Pole, Russian, or Finn that shares his phenotype than with a more swarthy Italian, Greek, Spaniard, or Portuguese. Of course there will be times when you may find a swarthy individual in Northern Europe and a fair individual in Southern Europe, so this category would be a bit more flexible. This category can also be iffy because one must take into consideration cultural differences--though you may find a Russian that fits the bill for a Northern European phenotype, you still may have more in common culturally with a Northern Italian for example.

4. If none of the above categories can be satisfactorily filled, I would recommend at the very minimum of breeding with a fellow European. Although I definitely would not wish for it, I would rather see the fairest of Norwegians, English, or Dutch breed with an Italian, Greek, or Spaniard than a person totally alien to the European cultural or racial group.

5. Finally, although I do not advocate it, if a European were able to find another Indo-European that fulfilled what would be consider a European racial phenotype from places like Iran or India, that would still be preferable than breeding with a Negro, Asian, or other racial groups. I would also include European Jews in this category, but the primary issue with this category is even if your child came out looking like a Nazi's Aryan ideal, there would be the cultural issue of breeding with someone outside of the European cultural group and having that influence in the rearing of the child.

Hilderinc
Tuesday, March 8th, 2011, 05:20 AM
Most things regarding 'racial purity' are a bunch of mathematical ideas (one drop rule), that do not have a real basis in genetics.


On my views of 'racial purity', if the person has any genetic material of another race (unless it is useless 'junk-DNA'), then it is unacceptable to reproduce with them, no matter how close to 0% it may be.

The real question should be on 'sub-racial purity.' For this matter it is highly preferable that one reproduce with someone of their own sub-race, even if it means a Germanic Nordid reproduce with a non-Germanic East-Nordid. 'Highly prefered' of course meaning complete strictness should not occur; it would be silly to deny your potential soul-mate just because they are of a slightly different phenotype than you. It would also be silly to make any sort of laws or even unofficial regulations regarding sub-racial mixture, as there are few 100% sub-racially pure people. And also, to clarify on what I said above in East-Nordid example, in the absence of phenotypically similar Germanics, one should not actively seek out phenotypically compatible non-Germanics. Only if they are 'in supply' should you resort to such a thing.

But we should also realistic, and take into account how well you get along with the other person, how open they are about Germanic culture, etc.

Stanley
Tuesday, March 8th, 2011, 06:10 AM
Being an American makes this question a whole lot different than it would be if I were European proper.

Any person who identifies as a descendent of their ancestral nation/s and not as an American is viewed as unassimilated by mainstream standards. Heritage to a lot of Americans is a rather meaningless curiosity, and the extent of their knowledge of racial matters probably stops at white, black, yellow, and red.

Given that, I doubt a conversation about ancestry would (comfortably and not awkwardly:D) come up between a love interest and myself until I'm already far too invested and attached. So the only screening I can really do is based on phenotype. If a girl looks Northern European, that's good enough for me, unless I discover something truly unappealing about her ancestry.

alexross
Thursday, March 10th, 2011, 04:07 AM
My ancestors came to America in the sameway that a lot of Americans did, by boat from England. At first, when my ancestors tried to establish English dominance, they did so by expelling the French to the West and scalped the Indians and set a lot of them off too. My ancestors probably were the first white man on Nova Scotia.

I might be 1/2100 non-white (Putting me at 99.9% white). I can't see anything past that generation of ancestors, but most of them are just completely from England.
And theres the myth that we are all related to Augustine Bearse and Mary Hyanno, a Gypsy and an Indian, but I think that is just so people can claim Indian status around here, just to get unfair benefits.

But I also believe in the power of Genetic soap. After people have been breed for their better traits, the traits that are unwanted, disappear.
So it wouldn't really matter if I were a small bit non-white, my ancestors breed for the genetic benefit.

Æmeric
Thursday, March 10th, 2011, 03:22 PM
But I also believe in the power of Genetic soap. After people have been breed for their better traits, the traits that are unwanted, disappear.
So it wouldn't really matter if I were a small bit non-white, my ancestors breed for the genetic benefit.Most people do not breed to pass along their better traits, they just breed. Before the advent of the welfare state there was a high degree of self responsibility in taking care of ones own offspring - the state wasn't going to do it for you. This helped to keep those with lesser traits from overbreeding, to encourage what you call "Genetic Soap". But now with welfare benefits to guaranty minimal living standards we have seen a huge increase of anti-social types with inferior traits. The Negro underclass in the US has been created by our welfare policies, along with the explosive growth in the Hispanic population - Mexican immigrants to the US have more children then Mexican women who stay in Mexico! Even among White populations there has been a decrease in quality. European housing estates & US trailor parks are notorius for breeding "less beneficial" members of society, though how much is genetic & how much is enviroment is debatable.

Sigurd
Thursday, March 10th, 2011, 04:42 PM
Prefarably Hallstatt, Faelid or Borreby from Norway, Sweden or Denmark. Never been with a girl who isnt, and dont think that will change.

You would be opposed to a girl from Iceland? ;)

alexross
Thursday, March 10th, 2011, 08:01 PM
Most people do not breed to pass along their better traits, they just breed. Before the advent of the welfare state there was a high degree of self responsibility in taking care of ones own offspring - the state wasn't going to do it for you. This helped to keep those with lesser traits from overbreeding, to encourage what you call "Genetic Soap". But now with welfare benefits to guaranty minimal living standards we have seen a huge increase of anti-social types with inferior traits. The Negro underclass in the US has been created by our welfare policies, along with the explosive growth in the Hispanic population - Mexican immigrants to the US have more children then Mexican women who stay in Mexico! Even among White populations there has been a decrease in quality. European housing estates & US trailor parks are notorius for breeding "less beneficial" members of society, though how much is genetic & how much is enviroment is debatable.

My ancestors were war heros, captains, officers, church leaders, and they could definitely survive on their own.
When I was born, I was naturally superior than my other classmates. I could do 100+ pushups when I was 7.

It was important in my ancestral family that their children had genetically fit spouses.
They didn't know it was called breeding, at the time.

Sybren
Thursday, March 10th, 2011, 09:00 PM
The real question should be on 'sub-racial purity.' For this matter it is highly preferable that one reproduce with someone of their own sub-race, even if it means a Germanic Nordid reproduce with a non-Germanic East-Nordid. 'Highly prefered' of course meaning complete strictness should not occur; it would be silly to deny your potential soul-mate just because they are of a slightly different phenotype than you. It would also be silly to make any sort of laws or even unofficial regulations regarding sub-racial mixture, as there are few 100% sub-racially pure people. And also, to clarify on what I said above in East-Nordid example, in the absence of phenotypically similar Germanics, one should not actively seek out phenotypically compatible non-Germanics. Only if they are 'in supply' should you resort to such a thing
I'm curious, do you have an extended knowledge about your own ancestry? Do you know the subracial phenotypes of a significant number of your ancestors? And were they all, or even the majority of them Nordid in the strict sense of the word, like you?

I have a great number of photographs of my ancestors, and i can tell you that they didn't belong to one subracial phenotype. Not because they hailed from very different areas, since they were all Germanics, living in a very limited area for ages where non-Germanic influence is only a thing of the recent past. It is because Germanics are diverse on their own. A Dalofaelid for example can give birth to a Nordid type and vice versa. It's much more useful to look at it like a genepool, where sometimes the one phenotype shows itself on the surface and another time the other phenotype. That is also why the Anthropological Taxonomy section on this website should be taken with a grain of salt. I think it is a lot of fun to classify people based on their phenotype and see classifications of others, but i know that is not all there is to it when speaking about true subraces.

I think it is taking it too far to only look for a partner of the same subracial phenotype, because there is always a huge part that you don't see. Just make sure that someone is fully Germanic and you're allright :thumbup

Hilderinc
Thursday, March 10th, 2011, 09:38 PM
I'm curious, do you have an extended knowledge about your own ancestry? Do you know the subracial phenotypes of a significant number of your ancestors? And were they all, or even the majority of them Nordid in the strict sense of the word, like you?

I have a great number of photographs of my ancestors, and i can tell you that they didn't belong to one subracial phenotype. Not because they hailed from very different areas, since they were all Germanics, living in a very limited area for ages where non-Germanic influence is only a thing of the recent past. It is because Germanics are diverse on their own. A Dalofaelid for example can give birth to a Nordid type and vice versa. It's much more useful to look at it like a genepool, where sometimes the one phenotype shows itself on the surface and another time the other phenotype. That is also why the Anthropological Taxonomy section on this website should be taken with a grain of salt. I think it is a lot of fun to classify people based on their phenotype and see classifications of others, but i know that is not all there is to it when speaking about true subraces.

I think it is taking it too far to only look for a partner of the same subracial phenotype, because there is always a huge part that you don't see. Just make sure that someone is fully Germanic and you're allright :thumbup


'Highly prefered' of course meaning complete strictness should not occur; It would also be silly to make any sort of laws or even unofficial regulations regarding sub-racial mixture, as there are few 100% sub-racially pure people.

But we should also realistic, and take into account how well you get along with the other person, how open they are about Germanic culture, etc.

;)


I'm speaking strictly in 'an ideal world', like most posters seem to have done. Of course, some inter-sub-racial admixture can be beneficial, but large amounts of it tend to be bad for both groups as it destroys any features which they have separately evolved over time.

Again, all this being said in "an ideal world". "In the real world", we should definitely not have any bad feelings towards Germanic couples of different sub-races.

Atavist
Thursday, March 10th, 2011, 09:44 PM
Depending on your belief, we either had fish-like ancestors in the past, or humans were created as they are, or some other view.

Let me ask: how extreme are you in regards to racial purity?

I always thought everyone had practical notions of race. Either you look like a race or not.

In your opinion, do your ancestors have to be German all the way back to the beginning of time, for someone to be German?

What do you think of European-descended Americans who had a Native American ancestor out of a possible 128, 256 or 512 ancestors? I am sure quite a bit of Americans would fit the latter group. Are they White, in your book?

How extreme are you in regards to racial purity and where do you draw the line?
There's a couple of errors in your post
First of: The fact that we have the same ancestors as fish is not a believe.
Second: As we share ancestors with fish, monkeys, grass and corn, we also share ancestors with Negroes. We are not derived from Negroes as we aren't derived from corn or monkeys.
Thirdly: When we aren't derived from Negroes, there is no such thing as racial extremism.

Sybren
Thursday, March 10th, 2011, 11:14 PM
;)


I'm speaking strictly in 'an ideal world', like most posters seem to have done. Of course, some inter-sub-racial admixture can be beneficial, but large amounts of it tend to be bad for both groups as it destroys any features which they have separately evolved over time.

Again, all this being said in "an ideal world". "In the real world", we should definitely not have any bad feelings towards Germanic couples of different sub-races.
Ok, maybe i overlooked that a bit ;)

But still, a phenotype doesn't always display a genotype correctly.