PDA

View Full Version : What's the Point of "Racial Pride"?



Evolved
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 02:21 AM
I don't understand the idea of "racial pride." Belonging to a certain racial category is not an accomplishment and no one has a choice in what race they belong to. Does an individual with a Nordic phenotype deserve more respect than someone with a Mediterranean phenotype? Why? Did they have any choice in the matter? To find one person more attractive than the other, sure- that is natural! But I'm talking about respect. People come here and post their pics and get called "swarthy non-europeans" and other insulting things, while others are complimented as if their race is some kind of personal accomplishment. You don't see that as kind of stupid?

Another thing is pride in one's ancestors and ancestors as a measure of self. How do the accomplishments of your ancestors reflect on you at all? One of my ancestors was a French duchess. One of my ancestors was a first class passenger and survivor on the Titanic. One of my ancestors was a Flemish innovator whose family owns a great publishing dynasty. Does that mean I'm necessarily a great person as an individual?

Imagine a Greek hobo saying he's better than a hardworking German because the Greek had philosophers and emperors for ancestors and the German had barbarians.

I don't agree with racial shame or ancestor shame either. Just because someone doesn't advocate pride does not mean they are advocating shame. I'm basically ancestor neutral. I'm interested in what my family did, but I don't think having a few intelligent, cultured ancestors makes me better someone of totally peasant or barbarian stock. :D

Awar
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 02:36 AM
I fully agree with you.
Most ideologies based on 'pride' are just catering to it's potential supporters, as a way to lure them into feeling great about themselves simply because they were born as members of some race, or because they are firm believers of "insert name here" ideology or religion.

There was a nationalistic movement in Serbia, in the late 80's and early 90's which tried to invent almost any way for Serbs to feel good about themselves, or should I say 'better than others'.

This type of thinking has major flaws. It attracts mostly those who are in a great need for an ego-boost ( that requires absolutely no work on their part ). Stormfront is full of people who argue about which nation or ethnicity had greater achievments, as if these achievments somehow live 'through' all of Germans, Greeks, Russians etc.

Phlegethon
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 02:36 AM
All that has nothing to do with either ideology nor philosophy.

Apparently you have a wrong definition of pride.

Awar
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 02:57 AM
All that has nothing to do with either ideology nor philosophy.

Apparently you have a wrong definition of pride.

In a perfect world perhaps.

cosmocreator
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 03:56 AM
Pride can be an over-estimation or it can be simply a reflection of self-respect and self-esteem.

I think with respect to race it would be an over-estimation especially on boards like SF. But it is also natural to possess some esteem for one's family and extended family which is race.

A swarthy non-European is a swarthy non-European. A swarthy non-European can be proud to be a swarthy non-european. But I think a swarthy non-European who thinks he has a right to be in Europe is disrespectful to non-swarthy Europeans. :academic

Nihilist
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 09:20 AM
I agree with pretty much everything that has been said here.

I think the whole white power/supremacy movement has been more compromising to european preservation than any liberal/hippy egalitarian. Anyone that has to shave their head, cover themselves with nazi properganda and hail hitler every 5 seconds is not in anyway serious about the real issues and is only using the "movement" as a crutch for their own insecurities. If people saw more stable educated types, bringing logical well grounded arguements to the table, i think there would be a real possibility of changing societal ideals.

I truly believe science and common sense is on our side. The only way the equality police can denegrate our arguements atm is by bringing up the past and by cloking the matter by mirroring the undesirable element of post ww2 white nationalist movements; thus connoting all people that ascertain any form of differentiation or desire for preservation with irrational bigoted hatred.

Nordhammer
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 09:46 AM
I don't understand the idea of "racial pride." Belonging to a certain racial category is not an accomplishment and no one has a choice in what race they belong to.

I think this is all nonsense. :) But I suppose this line of thinking is the reason whites are in the condition we are now.

Honestly, you're not proud because you're white and not black? If you had a choice before you were born, you'd just flip a coin? :)

Jack
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 10:34 AM
You all do of course realise pride is nothing more than 'moral ambitiousness', right? Ever considered it's collective memory that makes you who you are, while blood makes you what you are? And it helps to fit in to the group physically before you join it psychologically? I don't need to put down racial foreigners to identify with the myth of Europe. Being proud of the identity you hold to has nothing to do with deserving any more respect than a person who holds to another identity. It is subjective. It might matter to someone who holds to the same identity you do. It probably won't for someone who doesn't. It's relative. :D

Evolved
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 10:49 AM
I didn't have a choice in my race, and neither did anyone else. So how can one be proud of one's race?

Someone's dignity, value and self-respect being predominantly or totally hinged on what racial category they were born into is rather pathetic ("Von Braun" comes to mind as a rather extreme example). To me it only indicates that they are lacking in other qualities, and overcompensating these other issues with racial pride. Race is with people forever, and unlike actual talents and accomplishments it can't be taken away and does not fade away. So it is an easy scapegoat for people who have little or nothing else going for them as far as their personality/spirit is concerned.

To find one's own race more attractive than others is normal and healthy, and I definitely feel that way. But too much pride breeds eventual self-hatred, in ourselves and others. This is one of the things causing so many interracial relationships in the first place. For example the Nordish beauty ideal being widespread among non-Nordish and non-white people, and the opposite is also true, i.e. hip hop/proud black "culture"/'wiggers' seeing blacks as superior.

I just think it's best for people to not have a neurotic obsession with their racial affiliation, and just let it be a natural inclination toward their own race.

Phlegethon
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 11:15 AM
That neurotic fixation on race is only prevalent in the U.S. - basically because it was and still is an extremely racist country and a history of war an elimination of non-whites.

Fortunately Europeans don't have to deal with this baggage.

Nordhammer
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 11:16 AM
The definition of pride has a range, from position to negative, from simple self-worth to haughtiness.

So you need to clarify if you're arguing against all pride, or just the arrogant kind. It seems you began with all, but then you shift to the extreme definition while maintaining some self-worth is okay.

There is nothing wrong with having pride in one's ancestors, regardless of having a choice or not. The point is, you are what you are, you cannot change it, so to have no pride in what you are would be silly, although many whites indulge in this self-hate today.

The only thing breeding self-hatred has to do with who is in control of the media and politics, the endless propaganda and social climate we are influenced by... really has nothing to do with having pride in one's self or not. Pride comes in many forms, some delusional, like the white girl who says she's proud of her ancestors while having babies with a Negro.

I suppose in your relative thinking, if you had a half Asian or half black niece/nephew it would be okay since the child had no choice and you should just love it all the same?

Nordhammer
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 11:21 AM
A war to eliminate non-whites? To my knowledge only Germans had such a war of purification.

America is so racist, 40% of our country is nonwhite, and increasing. :)

Phlegethon
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 11:32 AM
A war to eliminate non-whites? To my knowledge only Germans had such a war of purification.

America is so racist, 40% of our country is nonwhite, and increasing. :)
Sorry, but it is just plain stupid to deny the racist nature of the U.S. No other country in the world mentions race in census forms or official statistics at all. Outside the big cities America is still racially divided. There were centuries of slavery and war against Mexico, the Philippines, Grenada, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Haiti, Vietnam, Korea etc. None of which actually attacked the U.S., by the way.

Loki
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 11:36 AM
That neurotic fixation on race is only prevalent in the U.S. - basically because it was and still is an extremely racist country and a history of war an elimination of non-whites.

Fortunately Europeans don't have to deal with this baggage.

You are probably right. And for this reason, I think the white race will survive for much longer in certain parts of America than in Europe....

In 100 years from now, Europe will probably have a higher percentage of non-whites than America. AND... I think miscegenation is more common in countries like Britain, France and Sweden - also more socially acceptable.

Loki
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 11:38 AM
Sorry, but it is just plain stupid to deny the racist nature of the U.S. No other country in the world mentions race in census forms or official statistics at all. Outside the big cities America is still racially divided. There were centuries of slavery and war against Mexico, the Philippines, Grenada, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Haiti, Vietnam, Korea etc. None of which actually attacked the U.S., by the way.

Your great-grandchildren will probably have some Turkish ancestry, if they are lucky. If unlucky, negroid.

Jack
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 11:45 AM
Belonging to a certain racial category is not an accomplishment and no one has a choice in what race they belong to.

If it's not an issue for you, why do you care if it is an issue for others?

Phlegethon
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 11:59 AM
Your great-grandchildren will probably have some Turkish ancestry, if they are lucky. If unlucky, negroid.
You're just plain paranoid, my friend. Happens a lot with race fetishists.

Nordhammer
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 12:02 PM
Sorry, but it is just plain stupid to deny the racist nature of the U.S. No other country in the world mentions race in census forms or official statistics at all. Outside the big cities America is still racially divided. There were centuries of slavery and war against Mexico, the Philippines, Grenada, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Haiti, Vietnam, Korea etc. None of which actually attacked the U.S., by the way.

Well, merely identifying race for statistical purposes can't really be called racist, anymore than recording gender can be called sexist.

Countries which have a large multiracial populace do record the race of the people, although the definitions may differ, such as what is considered white in Brazil.

For Europe it is not such a huge issue yet. For America, the racial problem has been with us from the beginning with so many black slaves and war with the Indians. A social divide was necessary to ensure our racial purity. For Europe it could be taken for granted because there was no threat there. But this is changing.

Those wars were not racially motivated. The only real war against a people was against the Indians, but it was property, expansion, not because of some irrational hatred for Indians. Your argument actually holds up better with the Spanish and Portugese who practically wiped out all traces of South American Indians. By contrast, North American Indians have much more of an identity and population.

Loki
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 12:07 PM
You're just plain paranoid, my friend. Happens a lot with race fetishists.

I am merely making estimations based on the hard facts and figures, and trends....

For starters, look at the German racial composition 50 years ago. Then 30 years ago. Then 10 years ago, and then current. Draw up some statistics and make realistic projections. You might be surprised...

Nordhammer
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 12:08 PM
You're just plain paranoid, my friend. Happens a lot with race fetishists.

In America if people mated randomly, indiscriminate of race, within 4 generations the whole population would be mongrelized I believe the math works out. Not even counting all this immigration.

So it's not unreasonable to predict admixture in future generations with people who don't practice some degree of "paranoid racial fetishism". :)

Phlegethon
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 12:21 PM
What you all fail to realize is that the more fixated you get on race as the only identifying factor the less likely you will succeed. It is my observation that the offspring of the most reknown race theoreticians and active racists have crossed the race line. Racism as a system of education does not work.

Looking at the racial composition of Germans I notice that it is still pretty much the same. Non-whites prefer to marry within their own cultural group, racial categories are certainly secondary. What has changed is that many immigrants have been granted a German passport. I just don't see that changing anything. A German passport does not make them marry ethic Germans.

Fortunately aliens here are still easy to identify and usually live in isolated environments. There has been no effort to assimilate them, which is a big difference to the practice in coutries like the U.K., France or the U.S. for example.

Apart from that it is extremely faulty logic to assume that more or less homogenic societies are more racist. Actually I think the opposite is true, and their homogenity has basically to do with being either geographically separated or economically uninteresting.

Loki
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 12:36 PM
Fortunately aliens here are still easy to identify and usually live in isolated environments. There has been no effort to assimilate them, which is a big difference to the practice in coutries like the U.K., France or the U.S. for example.


I hear what you're saying Phlegethon, and I am aware of the fact that Germany is far better off than Britain, Sweden, Holland and France. These mentioned countries have active efforts to assimilate the foreign nationals.

But... for how long will Germany remain the "odd one out" in Europe regarding this? Closer EU cooperation will ensure that even domestic policies are integrated into a main EU initiative and general direction. I cannot see Germany escaping this fate of forced assimilation... Germany may be 20 years behind Britain/Holland/Sweden in this, but will catch up quickly. It is unbelievable to you, because you don't see it in your environment yet. I see it every day of my life. I've heard that 20 years ago, London was primarily a white city. In 20 years, many things can change.... what will Germany look like in 100 years? I actually don't want to know....

Nihilist
Friday, October 24th, 2003, 12:39 PM
Phlegethon, just curious, what do you consider "racism"?

...For example, do you consider a person who values the idea of remaining chiefly homogeneous in both the cultural and racial sense a "racist"?

If so, I think pretty much everyone attending this board would qualify for that classification.

Evolved
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 05:57 AM
I'm not proud of belonging to a certain race, because I view it as asinine and pointless. Tell me when I've said anything indicating "self-hate." I'm not a white nationalist, either, since there is no "nation of whiteness". :anieyes

So, go ahead and slap some clichéd netnazi label on me, say I'm a "self-hating white", a "jew", a "lemming". Just label away whatever line of thinking you're uncomfortable with.

The terms "White power" and "white pride" were invented in the 1960's and 1970's as a response to "black power" and "black pride." Just a bullshit reactionary movement based on hatred and fear, not pride. Before this time, white pride wasn't even an issue because overwhelmingly whites were self-respecting people who had high moral standards. It was white people who allowed their government, media and cultures to be hijacked by Jews. It is white people who continue to do nothing about it, because their values have been destroyed.

"Oh, some 85 IQ Nigerian immigrant on welfare wants to marry my daughter! Hmm.. As long as I have the biggest S.U.V, plenty of credit cards and anal porn on cable TV!"

Tell me, how can someone honestly be proud to belong to a race of frightened, easily indoctrinated Jewish lapdogs? White people, especially white Americans, have become the most pathetic and laughable people on the planet. Why is there a third world immigration problem? Because all those people know that white people won't do anything about it, the minute they enter the country, regardless of legality of their entry, they start demanding their civil rights because they know we are so pathetic that we'll grant them every privilege they can dream of.

So please don't tell me I should be proud to be white.

cosmocreator
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 06:22 AM
I'm not proud of belonging to a certain race, because I view it as asinine and pointless. Tell me when I've said anything indicating "self-hate." I'm not a white nationalist, either, since there is no "nation of whiteness". :anieyes


Sounds like spiritual confusion. It is the mongrel that can't be proud of their race because they belong to none.

cosmocreator
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 06:26 AM
Your great-grandchildren will probably have some Turkish ancestry, if they are lucky. If unlucky, negroid.


Which reminds me of an advertisement for an investment fund I seen. It went something like

Planning for your
great great
great great
great great
great great grandchild

Then there was a picture of a brown kid.

cosmocreator
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 06:31 PM
Sorry, but it is just plain stupid to deny the racist nature of the U.S. No other country in the world mentions race in census forms or official statistics at all. Outside the big cities America is still racially divided. There were centuries of slavery and war against Mexico, the Philippines, Grenada, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Haiti, Vietnam, Korea etc. None of which actually attacked the U.S., by the way.


You sound like an anti-racist. India has been a racist country for 5000 years, probably longer than any other. Israel is also racist.

Phlegethon
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 06:49 PM
I despise both countries. Merely because of their invented tribalism both are socially and morally corrupt and repugnant.

Grimr
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 06:49 PM
I am proud of my race, how could you not be proud of the race that built many civilizations, created much artwork and produced many works of brilliant imagination spanning from the computer to motorcar?

How could you not be proud of the fact that even though many of our race are being brain washed from birth into hating themselves and betraying their people and yet there are those that carry on for filling the wishes of their ancestors?

It is clear to me now that the white race will not die out but will simply become stronger from going through a multi-racial melting pot, those that will betray us will merge with our enemies and our enemies will become weak from natural degeneracy and our social, economic and technological pampering!

Then once our people are free of the idiotic betrayers and liars, after many years of being lied to we shall arise as a true race of kings not simply the Aryan fairy tale but truly stronger.

Nordhammer
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 09:06 PM
What you all fail to realize is that the more fixated you get on race as the only identifying factor the less likely you will succeed. It is my observation that the offspring of the most reknown race theoreticians and active racists have crossed the race line. Racism as a system of education does not work.

I don't think anyone thinks the physical race is the only factor in life or success, but it is a crucial one. I've never met anyone who was so obsessed with race that it hindered their development or success in life, other than modern politics and those in power working against such people. People's nature and proclivities don't change just because they value race. In fact, for myself, I have come a long way and developed a lot more since I "woke up" and broke off from the hive mind. And my "racism" has introduced me to good friends and interesting people like some on this forum.



Looking at the racial composition of Germans I notice that it is still pretty much the same. Non-whites prefer to marry within their own cultural group, racial categories are certainly secondary. What has changed is that many immigrants have been granted a German passport. I just don't see that changing anything. A German passport does not make them marry ethic Germans.

That is basically the same everywhere too, but it IS getting worse. If the change were so abrupt and massive, people would notice, but since it is slow and gradual, then everyone thinks they are safe. I believe the statistics in America are something like 2-4% of white people racially intermarry. Very small, but this does not take into account nonmartial relationships and casual sex, which has a much higher incidence of interracial activity. Also, while the percentage may be small, the actual number of people doing it is quite high, as 2% of 196 million is about 3.9 million people. The important thing to ask is: Is Germany getting any better? No white nation is getting any better racially, but getting worse... at what point do we stop and take notice? If it happened to your family, I bet it would matter to you then.



Fortunately aliens here are still easy to identify and usually live in isolated environments. There has been no effort to assimilate them, which is a big difference to the practice in coutries like the U.K., France or the U.S. for example.

That's good, but you certainly understand why in the nations you mentioned a greater awareness of race is necessary.



Apart from that it is extremely faulty logic to assume that more or less homogenic societies are more racist. Actually I think the opposite is true, and their homogenity has basically to do with being either geographically separated or economically uninteresting.

In a multiracial environment, homogeny is maintained by racism, i.e., awareness of and discrimination by race. You don't maintain homogeny by mating at random.

Awar
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 09:13 PM
Of course, if one does not believe eugenics, one could say that the white race cannot die out genetically, just culturally ;)

The reason I think Europe is in much less trouble than USA is because Europe is culturally strong, with deeper cultural roots than white USA. US culture is mostly artificial, expendable, consumerist.

Of course, that's IMO.

Nordhammer
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 09:33 PM
Of course, if one does not believe eugenics, one could say that the white race cannot die out genetically, just culturally ;)

The reason I think Europe is in much less trouble than USA is because Europe is culturally strong, with deeper cultural roots than white USA. US culture is mostly artificial, expendable, consumerist.

Of course, that's IMO.

This has nothing to do with anything. The white race will die by miscegenation, regardless of whether eugenics is practiced or culture is maintained. A mulatto who speaks English and knows European history is still not white. Hello.

Awar
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 11:10 PM
miscegenation only exists for those who actually believe in eugenics. I don't.

Nordhammer
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 11:27 PM
miscegenation only exists for those who actually believe in eugenics. I don't.

Besides the question of why someone who doesn't oppose miscegenation is a moderator of a forum about the "preservation of European race", miscegenation and eugenics are not dependent on one another.

eugenics

n : the study of methods of improving genetic qualities by selective breeding (especially as applied to human mating)


mis·ceg·e·na·tion
n.
The interbreeding of different races or of persons of different racial backgrounds.

Eugenic or dysgenic breeding can happen intraracially or interracially, depending on what one is breeding for. Obviously to maintain race, then it is dysgenic to miscegenate.

Awar
Sunday, October 26th, 2003, 11:36 PM
Oh! Forgive me for not subscribing to every single US-racist point of view.

Should I state it more clearly: I do not believe that (average) non-white DNA can down-grade white DNA.
Of course, if we are not talking about genetics, there are quite a lot of ways that European culture can be and IS BEING down-graded.

Evolved
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 04:13 AM
I'm opposed to any society which encourages interracial marriage. But I also don't think it should be outlawed. If you outlaw it you'll just increase the desire, such as with Prohibition. The government and media should be totally neutral in regards to race in relationships.

People should get themselves and their families involved with their ethnic heritage in some way, although not in a haughty, hyperethnocentric sense. I'm sure a lot of parents who constantly force racism on their children end up with anti-racist teenagers and adults. In the same way there were this brother and sister I knew whose parents were strict evangelical Christians who beat them over the head with dogma, they went to church 4 times a week - and the girl turned into a total whore by junior high and the boy ended up going to juvenile detention for stealing musical instruments from the highschool and trying to sell them on Ebay. While I, the "satanic" child of atheist parents only stole once in my life and remained virginal until age 20. :D

For those of you who believe "racial pride" is such an essential part of your character, do you suppose if you happened to be born into another race you would feel the same about that race?

Nordhammer, if you woke up one day as "Afrospear", would you be a Black Panther? :mistert :jk

Awar
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 04:37 AM
Anything rigid will cause a negative reaction after some time. A rigid racist ideology would stay in power for a limited time, and then it would cause a reaction.

I think that the multi-cult way of thinking is very cleverly devised, as it constantly changes, similar to a virus. It somehow manages to always stay 'trendy', affecting the sub-consciouss. This is exactly why I'm against it.

It's extremist and negative to attempt to only replace the current multi-cult trend of brainwashing with a racist-cult trend of brainwashing.

People have done quite well so far without any form of media brainwashing, separate races have existed for hundreds of thousands of years before either racism or multi-culturalism were ever invented.

A race is vital only as long as it produces healthy individuals who themselves come to the conclusions of what is right or wrong. What they should be proud of.

cosmocreator
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 06:28 AM
I'm opposed to any society which encourages interracial marriage. But I also don't think it should be outlawed. If you outlaw it you'll just increase the desire, such as with Prohibition. The government and media should be totally neutral in regards to race in relationships.


Why outlaw anything? Without laws, outlaws wouldn't be outlaws. They'd just be people with a different point of view.

Nihilist
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 07:08 AM
Oh! Forgive me for not subscribing to every single US-racist point of view.

Should I state it more clearly: I do not believe that (average) non-white DNA can down-grade white DNA.
Of course, if we are not talking about genetics, there are quite a lot of ways that European culture can be and IS BEING down-graded.

On an individual by individual basis, perhaps not. But when considering DNA as an aggregate of a population, I think it definitely does.
The fact that low IQs generally correlate with the poorest countries in the world (Ie sub-sahara africa) and high IQs chiefly correlate with the richest countries in the world (NE Asia/northern europe) indicates that in any given niche, certain traits will possess compartively higher value over others.

Considering that propergation of genes seems to be the most significant driving force of all life on this planet. The most congruent method of achieving this in future generations: through a homogeneousness population, is of major consequence.
Passing genes onto those that are relatively similar to oneself, guarantees a greater probability of survival of the individual, and the community abroad. Miscegenation on the other hand causes loss of diversity, and suppression to both self and collective expression. This is Particularly the case for newer populations further from human origins (IE Europeans) whos genes are predominantly recessive.

Thus it is ridiculous to argue that Miscegenation has no detrimental affect on a homogeneous community. I'm honestly bemused that there are people here (of all places) that would believe otherwise.

Awar
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 10:14 AM
On an individual by individual basis, perhaps not. But when considering DNA as an aggregate of a population, I think it definitely does.
The fact that low IQs generally correlate with the poorest countries in the world (Ie sub-sahara africa) and high IQs chiefly correlate with the richest countries in the world (NE Asia/northern europe) indicates that in any given niche, certain traits will possess compartively higher value over others.

I wish there was a seriously conducted, non-biased research of human intelligence in all populations. Vast majority of sub-saharans have never seen a pen, let alone solved IQ tests with one.


Considering that propergation of genes seems to be the most significant driving force of all life on this planet. The most congruent method of achieving this in future generations: through a homogeneousness population, is of major consequence.
Passing genes onto those that are relatively similar to oneself, guarantees a greater probability of survival of the individual, and the community abroad. Miscegenation on the other hand causes loss of diversity, and suppression to both self and collective expression. This is Particularly the case for newer populations further from human origins (IE Europeans) whos genes are predominantly recessive.

Ok... agreed there.


Thus it is ridiculous to argue that Miscegenation has no detrimental affect on a homogeneous community. I'm honestly bemused that there are people here (of all places) that would believe otherwise.

I believe otherwise, which is not something un-changeable. I still haven't heard or read anything that convinced me that 'miscegenation' is something that can damage an entire race. There haven't been any convincing proofs of this happening in history, at least. This of course doesn't mean that I can't change my opinion if I do become convinced of such theories being true. I have an open mind.

I wonder what would happen if ALL members of a forum had the exact same opinions and beliefs... that would be a boring forum.

Awar
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 10:22 AM
I'd add that I believe that major-scale race-mixing is damaging culturally, but again, there are exceptions.

I see no rules carved in stone that can apply to such issues as race, history, culture.

Nihilist
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 01:47 PM
I believe otherwise, which is not something un-changeable. I still haven't heard or read anything that convinced me that 'miscegenation' is something that can damage an entire race. There haven't been any convincing proofs of this happening in history, at least. This of course doesn't mean that I can't change my opinion if I do become convinced of such theories being true. I have an open mind.

I wonder what would happen if ALL members of a forum had the exact same opinions and beliefs... that would be a boring forum.

If you accept miscegenation causes loss of diversity/suppression of expression and acknowledge that recessive genes are generally negated out of existence or atleast severely bereaved when faced with the inundation of foreign dominant genes, then the obvious inferrence is that miscegenation induces the destruction of racial integrity/independence.

Even if your conception of race is as superficial as hair/eye/skin colour (which considering all the evidence is pretty naive imo), such micegenation does denote destruction.

Moody
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 04:59 PM
[QUOTE=ladygoeth33 on 'Pride'; "I'm basically ancestor neutral".

Moody Lawless replies; 'Pride' is a worthy emotion, provided it be justified.
One can have pride in one's own achievements, one's own talents - sure.
One can also have pride in one's family and their achievements.
Therefore, by the same token, one can have pride in one's race.

Having pride does NOT mean that one immediately casts shame on others.
One can have racial pride without denigrating others.

Whites have plenty to be proud of.

Politically-correct Leftist propaganda wants to destroy racial pride.
Even more, it wants Whites in particular to have 'racial shame'!
By being 'neutral', you are halfway there - shame on you.

Nordgau
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 05:47 PM
@ Phlegethon: I think you take the racial threat in Germany too easy. Where I live there are just as in other big towns in Germany cetain areas where the foreigners are concentrated motre than in others, but it would be wrong to speak really of an "isolation". There are also more than enough non-Germens in quarters where they don't concentrate.
I guess separation is here on a lower niveau than in America. I also notice that the foreigners are social "separated" if they don't speak German or keep to their own culture, but that they are fast accepted by the Germans when they behave "Western" and speak perfectly German. I see here all day not too less Turkish-German, Negro-German or whatever else young couples walking around, and I also see more than enough "Mongrel" childs.

Also even when the first don't mix with Germans the fact that they become more and more and that they have got higher birth-rates than the Germans is already a great threat, as this is the first step that comes before the real decline and interbreeding.
It's no secret that the Turks are already a factor of inner policy and that there is a great pressure of all kinds of Turkish interests to policy.
I read somewhere that already one third of all school beginners in Germany were people "with migration background". Even if you put away Aussiedler or other whites, it's horrible enough. In Cologne, I read, the number of "people with migration background" is 35% higher than the official number of "non-Germans".
"Ausländer raus!" is a good and wise fundamental sentence for future politics. The faster, the better.

cosmocreator
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 07:23 PM
I believe otherwise, which is not something un-changeable. I still haven't heard or read anything that convinced me that 'miscegenation' is something that can damage an entire race.


There is a lot of evidence, you just haven't seen it because you are isolated in Europe. In almost all Latin American countries, the Meds mated with the American Indians and Negro slaves. Where are the descendants of those Med conquerors? Into 3rd world slums.

Nordhammer
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 10:44 PM
There is a lot of evidence, you just haven't seen it because you are isolated in Europe.

Hopefully it will stay that way. :D


In almost all Latin American countries, the Meds mated with the American Indians and Negro slaves. Where are the descendants of those Med conquerors? Into 3rd world slums.

Meds have a very carefree attitude towards racemixing in general. Some examples are Dienekes saying if the 3 major racial groups mixed a Mediterranean would result, and from Diablo that 1/16th nonwhite admixture limit is too strick and even 1/2 or 1/4 nonwhite ancestry is acceptable, and Italians claiming obvious quadroons such as Vin Diesel. The most horrific example being the miscegenated disaster that the Spanish and Portugese created in South and Central America, who now invade North America calling themselves "Latins/Latinos."

Nords may be more aware of their destruction due to more recessive genes.

Awar
Monday, October 27th, 2003, 11:04 PM
Hopefully it will stay that way. :D

Yep... I guess I should keep my mulatto behind firmly in Europe. I don't want to pollute good ol' Jawjuh. :D




Meds have a very carefree attitude towards racemixing in general.

In fact, according to Kemp, Nordics are the ones who race-mixed the most, thus effectively erasing their presence from all the civilizations they allegedly created.


Some examples are Dienekes saying if the 3 major racial groups mixed a Mediterranean would result

Source?


and from Diablo that 1/16th nonwhite admixture limit is too strick and even 1/2 or 1/4 nonwhite ancestry is acceptable, and Italians claiming obvious quadroons such as Vin Diesel.

Do you always base your knowledge of other European sub-types by visiting various internet forums?

Of course, not all humans are racists, if one Italian claims Vin Diesel, the other doesn't. You are as much a US citizen as OJ Simpson, if I'm not mistaken. ;)


The most horrific example being the miscegenated disaster that the Spanish and Portugese created in South and Central America, who now invade North America calling themselves "Latins/Latinos."

Of course, colonists in N.America have never ever ever mixed with Indians and Black slaves. I suppose that's just propaganda.


Nords may be more aware of their destruction due to more recessive genes.

Would you say that Nords are born as fully trained genetics experts, while other Europeans are simply born as babies? :D

Nordhammer
Tuesday, October 28th, 2003, 12:19 AM
Yep... I guess I should keep my mulatto behind firmly in Europe. I don't want to pollute good ol' Jawjuh. :D

Thank ya kindly.




In fact, according to Kemp, Nordics are the ones who race-mixed the most, thus effectively erasing their presence from all the civilizations they allegedly created.

I don't think he claims that. He may claim that the "elites" of many ancient civilizations were Nordics, but that doesn't mean Nordics mix most.




Source?

I don't record what other people say, it was in an old forum of his. He admits he said something similar to it, but denies he meant it that way. I saw the post for myself so I know better.




Do you always base your knowledge of other European sub-types by visiting various internet forums?

Of course, not all humans are racists, if one Italian claims Vin Diesel, the other doesn't. You are as much a US citizen as OJ Simpson, if I'm not mistaken. ;)

I'm basing my conclusion on history, comments from people on the internet and in real life. Blacks don't even consider Meds to be really "white", at least in the same sense as Northern Europeans. An Italian who's a black-dance choreographer has a show on MTV, and he refers to Nordish guys as "white boys", but not himself.




Of course, colonists in N.America have never ever ever mixed with Indians and Black slaves. I suppose that's just propaganda.

Surely a Mensa member can tell the difference between 1% and 100%. :)




Would you say that Nords are born as fully trained genetics experts, while other Europeans are simply born as babies? :D

People are aware of things without having a ph.d. Vin Diesel and Jennifer Beals stick out more among Nords than among Meds.

Awar
Tuesday, October 28th, 2003, 12:59 AM
Thank ya kindly.

Don't mention it! :D



I don't think he claims that. He may claim that the "elites" of many ancient civilizations were Nordics, but that doesn't mean Nordics mix most.

So, what did this elites do to disappear so abruptly? They moved to Sweden?!





I don't record what other people say, it was in an old forum of his. He admits he said something similar to it, but denies he meant it that way. I saw the post for myself so I know better.

It seems you base your opinion on some very vague references...





I'm basing my conclusion on history, comments from people on the internet and in real life. Blacks don't even consider Meds to be really "white", at least in the same sense as Northern Europeans. An Italian who's a black-dance choreographer has a show on MTV, and he refers to Nordish guys as "white boys", but not himself.

Ah! I see, so you equate a lemming with an intelligent mediterranean European.
So...I have done a search for pictures of Nordic type Europeans on the google, and I got a lot of results linking to gay dating sites, and a couple of pictures of Black men... So what?! Should I base my opinion on such 'evidence'.





Surely a Mensa member can tell the difference between 1% and 100%. :)

Are you sure ALL US citizens mixed with Blacks and Indians? It doesn't seem so to me ! :-O





People are aware of things without having a ph.d. Vin Diesel and Jennifer Beals stick out more among Nords than among Meds.

It seems that many mediterraneans who live in bordering areas of the white race HAVE mixed with non-whites, the same process is currently happening to Nordish people who live in close vicinity of non-white people. I don't see any great difference, or should I say the difference is in the patriarchality of the state we're talking about. There is far less race-mixing going on in Greece than it is in Germany, Sweden, Netherlands etc.

Nordhammer
Tuesday, October 28th, 2003, 02:38 AM
It seems you base your opinion on some very vague references...

Maybe you aren't paying attention. I'm basing my opinion on the fact that he wrote it.





Ah! I see, so you equate a lemming with an intelligent mediterranean European.
So...I have done a search for pictures of Nordic type Europeans on the google, and I got a lot of results linking to gay dating sites, and a couple of pictures of Black men... So what?! Should I base my opinion on such 'evidence'.

For you no amount of examples is enough. The colonies that Meds established had very different outcomes than the ones Nords established. Are you trying to say that North America had as much racemixing as South America?

You advocate a nonchalant attitude about racemixing, yourself being an example of the Mediterranean tolerance for racemixing, saying a little is no problem. So I don't know what you're arguing about.

friedrich braun
Tuesday, October 28th, 2003, 06:24 AM
Very frightening indeed.

(I was born in the "old country", but I grew in France and Canada.)

What is the general view in Germany today of miscegenation ? Do you have any statistics on the percentage of Germans miscegenating themselves out of existence? Are there any public figures in Germany speaking up against miscegenation? Are people concerned about the biological survival of Germans?

I agree with you: as long as you'll have immigration and close racial proximity, miscegenation is bound to occur. Hence, the only viable solution is mass expulsions (I'd be willing to talk financial compensation to those deserving of such compensation); either the racial invaders will leave quitely, taking with them their filthy mongrels, or they will be deported at gun point.


@ Phlegethon: I think you take the racial threat in Germany too easy. Where I live there are just as in other big towns in Germany cetain areas where the foreigners are concentrated motre than in others, but it would be wrong to speak really of an "isolation". There are also more than enough non-Germens in quarters where they don't concentrate.
I guess separation is here on a lower niveau than in America. I also notice that the foreigners are social "separated" if they don't speak German or keep to their own culture, but that they are fast accepted by the Germans when they behave "Western" and speak perfectly German. I see here all day not too less Turkish-German, Negro-German or whatever else young couples walking around, and I also see more than enough "Mongrel" childs.

Also even when the first don't mix with Germans the fact that they become more and more and that they have got higher birth-rates than the Germans is already a great threat, as this is the first step that comes before the real decline and interbreeding.
It's no secret that the Turks are already a factor of inner policy and that there is a great pressure of all kinds of Turkish interests to policy.
I read somewhere that already one third of all school beginners in Germany were people "with migration background". Even if you put away Aussiedler or other whites, it's horrible enough. In Cologne, I read, the number of "people with migration background" is 35% higher than the official number of "non-Germans".
"Ausländer raus!" is a good and wise fundamental sentence for future politics. The faster, the better.

cosmocreator
Tuesday, October 28th, 2003, 06:43 AM
Oh! Forgive me for not subscribing to every single US-racist point of view.

Should I state it more clearly: I do not believe that (average) non-white DNA can down-grade white DNA.
Of course, if we are not talking about genetics, there are quite a lot of ways that European culture can be and IS BEING down-graded.


Take a lesson from Haiti.

http://www.natvan.com/free-speech/fs9712c.html
http://www.natvan.com/national-vanguard/114/haiti.html

cosmocreator
Tuesday, October 28th, 2003, 06:49 AM
Of course, colonists in N.America have never ever ever mixed with Indians and Black slaves. I suppose that's just propaganda.


Mixing on a large is recent. Indians were put on reserves but there are some places where they did mix but not in large numbers. In the US there were laws against mixing until about the 1960s. In Canada, we never had many Negroes until recently. Canada was 95% white until 30 years ago.

Awar
Tuesday, October 28th, 2003, 01:05 PM
It may be recent, but again, it proves that in the looooong run, average people mix with other races. This has nothing to do with being Med or Nord.

Also, I think you misinterpret me. I believe that immigrants of another race or ethnicity are destructive for a nation ( or ethnicity ). I don't believe that Turks have anything to do in Germany for example, but I also can't say that turks are non-white, because it isn't true.

Racism and prejudice are natural reactions to 'different' people. I think that we shouldn't repress these natural reactions, because it can just cause a negative build-up ( just like political correctness is causing today ).

I don't think Blacks are any worse than Whites, but I do believe that they are destructive in our society, just like we'd be destructive in theirs.

Nordhammer
Wednesday, October 29th, 2003, 02:24 AM
I don't think Blacks are any worse than Whites

You're very ignorant of blacks then. :D

friedrich braun
Wednesday, October 29th, 2003, 06:03 AM
It's not a question of "superior" race, "inferior" race. I oppose miscegenation because I believe that genotypes are responsible for culture creation.

If genotypes create various, specific cultures (see the work of Rushton, Lynn, Murray, Jensen, amongst others), it seems very likely that there *is* a relationship between a people’s genetic makeup and their respective social arrangements. Cultures didn't just fall from the sky, like Manna for the wandering Jewish tribe. For e.g., the differences in genotype between Northern Europeans and the Australian aborigines would account for the divergent socio-political arrangements that these racial groups have constructed for themselves.

I want Germany to remain German in blood and spirit.

21wqre2
Wednesday, October 29th, 2003, 10:57 AM
Sounds like spiritual confusion. It is the mongrel that can't be proud of their race because they belong to none.

By 'mongrel' i guess you mean multiracial. I see multiracial people as 'neo-ethnic', they can be proud of either side.

Iconöclast
Wednesday, November 3rd, 2004, 03:25 AM
Tell me, how can someone honestly be proud to belong to a race of frightened, easily indoctrinated Jewish lapdogs? White people, especially white Americans, have become the most pathetic and laughable people on the planet. Why is there a third world immigration problem? Because all those people know that white people won't do anything about it, the minute they enter the country, regardless of legality of their entry, they start demanding their civil rights because they know we are so pathetic that we'll grant them every privilege they can dream of.

You aren't necessarily a part of a race; you are a function of it, much as a cell in your body is a function of you. Pride should also be taken in potential, as the white race has the highest potential of all races to achieve greater things, in addition to it's past accomplishements. The current problem with the jew worship is primarily due to the ills of democracy, as democracy puts natural order in chaos and those adept to leading society no longer can do so for being outnumbered by the commonplace.

Falla
Wednesday, September 7th, 2005, 09:29 PM
That neurotic fixation on race is only prevalent in the U.S. - basically because it was and still is an extremely racist country and a history of war an elimination of non-whites.

Fortunately Europeans don't have to deal with this baggage.
And Germany did not??

Falla
Wednesday, September 7th, 2005, 09:33 PM
I'm not proud of belonging to a certain race, because I view it as asinine and pointless. Tell me when I've said anything indicating "self-hate." I'm not a white nationalist, either, since there is no "nation of whiteness". :anieyes

So, go ahead and slap some clichéd netnazi label on me, say I'm a "self-hating white", a "jew", a "lemming". Just label away whatever line of thinking you're uncomfortable with.

The terms "White power" and "white pride" were invented in the 1960's and 1970's as a response to "black power" and "black pride." Just a bullshit reactionary movement based on hatred and fear, not pride. Before this time, white pride wasn't even an issue because overwhelmingly whites were self-respecting people who had high moral standards. It was white people who allowed their government, media and cultures to be hijacked by Jews. It is white people who continue to do nothing about it, because their values have been destroyed.

"Oh, some 85 IQ Nigerian immigrant on welfare wants to marry my daughter! Hmm.. As long as I have the biggest S.U.V, plenty of credit cards and anal porn on cable TV!"

Tell me, how can someone honestly be proud to belong to a race of frightened, easily indoctrinated Jewish lapdogs? White people, especially white Americans, have become the most pathetic and laughable people on the planet. Why is there a third world immigration problem? Because all those people know that white people won't do anything about it, the minute they enter the country, regardless of legality of their entry, they start demanding their civil rights because they know we are so pathetic that we'll grant them every privilege they can dream of.

So please don't tell me I should be proud to be white.

You want to "preserve diversity." If you see the banner at top, it says "Forum.Skadi.net" and underneath it it says, "Germanic Cultural, Racial, and Spiritual Preservation."

So let me ask, you do not believe in this?

Rhydderch
Thursday, September 8th, 2005, 06:15 AM
Pride (in the sense of feeling, or striving to be, superior to others) itself is pathetic. If somebody has made great achievements, is it not because he was simply born with the inherent capacity, had the right circumstances etc.?

Rhydderch
Thursday, September 8th, 2005, 01:48 PM
The fact that low IQs generally correlate with the poorest countries in the world (Ie sub-sahara africa) and high IQs chiefly correlate with the richest countries in the world (NE Asia/northern europe) indicates that in any given niche, certain traits will possess compartively higher value over others.I think that, if anything, it indicates that intelligence is very hard to measure, and is strongly affected by educational/training factors and knowledge (something which in any case I have often thought, especially having seen the questions on IQ tests).

If a handful of unemployed, uneducated men were tested for IQ, and compared with another handful of (hypothetically) genetically identical men with a good education etc, I'd bet that the IQ of the latter would emerge considerably higher.

Also, some people are naturally less academic, and more 'hands on'. I think it's hard to say that such people are necessarily less intelligent, it could well be that they just show it in a different way.
Of course, IQ is probably a bit like strength; some have a genetic tendency to greater physical strength, but if they don't exercise, they could be weaker than some who actually have less genetic capacity for strength.