PDA

View Full Version : Skadi Forum Orientation?



Thorburn
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 01:38 AM
I've been asked by an admin if I don't want to consider to enhance the potential target audience of Skadi once again.

In addition, there are several posters who miss a stronger focus on the Anglo-Saxon and British aspect (i. e. including non-Germanic Brits, in particular British Celts).

While a 'European' orientation is definitely out of the question, others are theoretically conceivable. We actually discussed this once in the Staff forum.

Including the Anglo-Saxons is the easiest, as they are already included. Anglo-Saxons are Germanic, but maybe one would need to emphasize their particular heritage and significance (about half of the Germanics identify with Anglo-Saxons) by mentioning them explicitly in the forum banner and forum mission statement. There seem to be quite a few people that confuse 'Germanic' with 'German.'

Adding British is also out of the question because it is not a meta-ethnic concept -- but adding Celtic is not, albeit it would (once again) really need a major restructuring, affecting the whole Staff. If it would be systematic, is another question, but I can understand the many people of Germanic heritage who also have Celtic roots. The two cultures are interwoven to a certain degree -- more so than any others.

Personally, I'm for leaving things as they are, or for emphasizing Anglo-Saxon. I haven't made up my mind. So I'd ask everyone to vote and to give his input.

Let the better argument triumph!

Theudiskaz
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 01:48 AM
Personally, I'm for leaving things as they are, or for emphasizing Anglo-Saxon. I haven't made up my mind. So I'd ask everyone to vote and to give his input.


In my opinion, Skadi must remain Germanic. I wouldn't mind seeing an Anglo-Saxon partner to Skadi, though. Just no Celtic stuff.

Vilay
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 01:55 AM
Maybe the discussion started because the thread by creating an other (an more british/anglo-saxon) Skadi forum?

In my opinion Skadi is for a huge community of people which are interesting in hundreds of different things. Including all kinds of germanic races, myths and history.

But instead to make another another anglo-saxonian Skadi or more british or whatever Skadi, we should try to be ONE big community and not splitting away into myriads of little platforms.

If Skadi needs a new subfora for especially this kind of Skadi users, I'm sure this would be the smallest problem for the admins.

Anglo-Saxonian people are welcome here and I have not a problem with them. More if they are splitting off the communiy.



Vilay

Thruthheim
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 02:05 AM
Being a homogenous Englishman, I acknowledge we Brits(incl. English) have alot of Celtic Heritage. This isn't so strong in England, but mainly in Scotland and Wales.

I don't see Celts as any less than us Germanics. They are largely N.European and i believe are significant in Britain, Ireland, Holland and Belgium.

Thruthheim
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 02:06 AM
Maybe the discussion started because the thread by creating an other (an more british/anglo-saxon) Skadi forum?

In my opinion Skadi is for a huge community of people which are interesting in hundreds of different things. Including all kinds of germanic races, myths and history.

But instead to make another another anglo-saxonian Skadi or more british or whatever Skadi, we should try to be ONE big community and not splitting away into myriads of little platforms.

If Skadi needs a new subfora for especially this kind of Skadi users, I'm sure this would be the smallest problem for the admins.

Anglo-Saxonian people are welcome here and I have not a problem with them. More if they are splitting off the communiy.



Vilay

I agree entirely with you Madame Vilay :thumbup

Waarnemer
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 02:48 AM
Being a homogenous Englishman, I acknowledge we Brits(incl. English) have alot of Celtic Heritage. This isn't so strong in England, but mainly in Scotland and Wales.

I don't see Celts as any less than us Germanics. They are largely N.European and i believe are significant in Britain, Ireland, Holland and Belgium.
educate yourself

btw skadi should be european again

Thruthheim
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 02:55 AM
educate yourself

How rude of you.

I have actually. Maybe they aren't culturally, but i have read sources which suggest a racial component. Please don't ask me to provide this source, I have never saved it to favourites, as i didn't think it was so questionable.

Waarnemer
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 02:57 AM
How rude of you.

I have actually. Maybe they aren't culturally, but i have read sources which suggest a racial component. Please don't ask me to provide this source, I have never saved it to favourites, as i didn't think it was so questionable.
Than you should educate yourself on the term keltic-nordic

Thruthheim
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 03:05 AM
Than you should educate yourself on the term keltic-nordic

I assumed this discussion was sufficiently overlapping as such.

Oswiu
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 03:24 AM
I'm half Irish by blood, near enough, but as I said on the "Who is part Irish here?" thread, it is "Cringingly Fashionable" to be Irish, or 'Celtic' in general. Sadly, the term Celtic is liable to attract all kinds of oddballs and New Age types, and would lower the tone of the forum.
I'm a Russophile, myself, and would like to see more involvement from our Slavonic comrades, in a broader European context, perhaps, but I accept that this would be at the expense of Skadi's very identity. It is good that there is a forum catering purely to Germanic matters, as these are often overlooked in our CeltoGermanic nations of the periphery of Germandom, due to the influences of the above fashion. The fact that the forum is so tightly focused really lets the member know what is expected of him or her, and maintains the clear character of the board.

As for more Anglo Saxon stuff, well, we've already got a fair few subfora anyroad. We don't need anything else. And keeping us in with the rest of yous might do a little to cure our insular parochial instincts!

Northern Paladin
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 03:45 AM
I guess it all depends on your aims. If it is to expand Skadi and make it more dynamic than adding Celtic would be advisable. If keeping Skadi a tight knit Germanic community is your main aim but you want to do something special to attract Germanics of Anglo-Saxon extraction than find a way to emphasize Anglo-Saxon culture.

I rest assured that Skadi is in good hands.:)

Siegfried
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 07:42 AM
Since the Anglo-Saxons are already Germanic, I think it would be odd to have a slogan like "Germanic and Anglo-Saxon Preservation". It would only add to the confusion around the Germanic concept. If the Anglo-Saxons here would like to see more attention to their ethnic sphere, I'm in favour of creating an Anglo-Saxon subforum similar to the Dutch and Scandinavian sections we have.

Aeternitas
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 09:20 AM
"Germanic and Anglo-Saxon preservation" is superfluous IMO, as Anglo-Saxons are Germanic. I do get the point about the English, and potentially other Germanic ethnicities not recognizing themselves in or identifying with the word "Germanic" though, eventhough it technically has a different meaning than the word "German" does. Some have suggested using its synonym "Teutonic", however this one could lead to the same confusion, perhaps even more. Some may confuse it for German, others for the Germanic tribe it is named after, or the prominent miltary/religious order. Other terms, such as Norse, would be only partial synonyms. Another potential issue with adding Anglo-Saxon to the title would be that other Germanic groups (the Scandinavian, the Netherlandic) could feel left out or even second-class.

People should eventually learn that we don't hold the belief that Germanic equals German and only so. There's a lot of material on this site to suggest otherwise, we have regional focums that include the English, etc., but if emphasizing diversity is further necessary, an idea could also be, IMO, to provide an addendum in our mission listing the largest Germanic factions we aim to include (Anglo-Saxon, German, Netherlandic, Scandinavian). Also, reflect this in our banners. Ideally a banner which encompasses symbols from these our main groups, but also individual banners dedicated to each of them and potentially their main subdivisions.

I disagree with expanding our orientation to Celto-Germanic. Although Celts and Germanics are pretty similar, perhaps even more so than any other two groups, adding another metaethnicity/cultural group could be a slippery slope towards pan-Europeanization. If we include the Celts in our mission, we could as well include the Celto-Romance or Celtiberians, for example. And if we include the French, Walloons, the North Italians, some of the Portuguese, etc, why not also the Finns or the Balts, since they are also somewhat similar to Germanics, some would argue perhaps even more so than the former. We'd have to draw a line somewhere, and we have already done it recently with Germanics.

I think Skadi's target audience is just fine the way it is. Skadi is unique and should remain as it is, IMO, a forum for Germanics, be them German, Anglo-Saxon, Danish, Swedish, Icelandic, and so on. :)

Mjölnir
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 09:27 AM
Skadi should be was it allways be and for the future will: A Light in the Dark of the WWW Zombie Consumer Sites and Phoras.

Germanic Cultural, Racial & Spiritual Preservation.

Anglo Sax has for me so much to du with Germanic Heritage like Milk and Water. Both need water but Milk has more Eiweiss.:)

But if the decision go other ways then i accept these. Hail the NSpF!;)

M.,

Dr. Solar Wolff
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 09:30 AM
According to the Kulturkreis theory, the climax German cultural center is Bavaria, Munich. It is defined by the number of elements uniquely Germanic. How can this be when Germanic culture originated in Sweden? The Germans moved south using river valleys and simply swamped the older inhabitants of Germany, Holland, France, Switzerland, Austria, and Poland. Who were these earlier inhabitants? They were Celts and the simple fact is that Germanics adopted a huge amount of culture from the Celts.

Germans today feel they have adopted more from Rome than from the Celts but this is entirely wrong. According to Coon in the Races of Europe, the war leader Odin and his culture, Iron Age Hallstatt, came from Austria. "Hall" meant salt in Illyrian. "Statt" hardly needs translation. Hallstatt meant salt city, and it is centered on Saltzburg, Austria. Odin and his Illyrian speaking Celts moved north, east and finally west into Sweden via Denmark. 1000 years later they emerged as Germans during the Volkswanderung Period.

My point is that in many ways the seperation between Celts and Germanics is temporal. Celts became Germans throughout Europe. In Westphalia this is particularly well documented as it is in parts of Belgium. Britain became Germanic is speech and culture. Ireland has and is losing Celtic language.

German culture is simpler and technically superior to Keltic culture. German language is much simpler in fact there is a theory that it was originally a trade language as Chinook or Swahili and used in Sweden to trade with the more culturally advanced Roman world. Germanic language was easy to adopt and their culture, especially farming techniques, were a big advantage for Europeans of those times.

Slavic, Romance, Turkish, these are all much different relationships but Celtic is a special situation in the history of the Germanic world and should be given preferential treatment in my mind. This is not a simple relationship. Skadi shouldn't be a Celtic forum but we should accept history and our history and embrace it.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 09:45 AM
The other question British oriented members must deal with is the increasing numbers of German speakers at Skadi. Do they consider this a plus or a minus? Not only that but who are the German members and what do they think? Fortunately, many can read and write English and just maybe we can lure more to post in the English section. I say this because if we are ever going to have understanding within our people we must bridge all divides of langugage and culture. The large German language section is one of Skadi's greatest assets in my mind. If we only had as large Dutch, Afrikaans, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and Islandic participation. We have a section devoted to the concerings of British members as we do for all included nationalities. If all that is requested is a section for Celtic Britain/Ireland, I don't think that is too much to ask but even Celts should realize and accept their relationship with the Germanic world whose language and culture they have adopted to a greater or lesser extent.

Sigurd Volsung
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 10:07 AM
Since the Anglo-Saxons are already Germanic, I think it would be odd to have a slogan like "Germanic and Anglo-Saxon Preservation". It would only add to the confusion around the Germanic concept. If the Anglo-Saxons here would like to see more attention to their ethnic sphere, I'm in favour of creating an Anglo-Saxon subforum similar to the Dutch and Scandinavian sections we have. I thoroughly agree with Siegfried on this matter; and although there are not many Anglo-Saxon - by this I mean English - people on Skadi, the creation of an Anglo-Saxon subforum might draw more into the discussion than there already is - new member, etc.


The other question British oriented members must deal with is the increasing numbers of German speakers at Skadi. Do they consider this a plus or a minus? Not only that but who are the German members and what do they think? Fortunately, many can read and write English and just maybe we can lure more to post in the English section. I say this because if we are ever going to have understanding within our people we must bridge all divides of langugage and culture. The large German language section is one of Skadi's greatest assets in my mind. If we only had as large Dutch, Afrikaans, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and Islandic participation. We have a section devoted to the concerings of British members as we do for all included nationalities ... I have no qualms about the rising number of German speakers at Skadi; they are, of course, Germanic and are dedicated to learning more about their heritage, so there is no problem.

Furthermore, I believe that the sections Skadi has for non-German nationalities is sufficient for the time being. However, I am in favour of creating additional subforums only if the masses speak for it - there would be no point in creating these forums if only a select few would participate in them.

Rhydderch
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 10:35 AM
Sadly, the term Celtic is liable to attract all kinds of oddballs and New Age types, and would lower the tone of the forum.I'm inclined to agree. Mind you, mixed with another term (Germanic) may make it less likely to attract such people.

Nordgau
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 11:50 AM
Shut down the drugs forum, and leave the rest as it is. :cig

Zyklop
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 04:24 PM
What about "nordvestrid"? :lightbulb

The Black Prince
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 04:59 PM
I voted for "Germanic preservation" :thumbup


Since the Anglo-Saxons are already Germanic, I think it would be odd to have a slogan like "Germanic and Anglo-Saxon Preservation". It would only add to the confusion around the Germanic concept. If the Anglo-Saxons here would like to see more attention to their ethnic sphere, I'm in favour of creating an Anglo-Saxon subforum similar to the Dutch and Scandinavian sections we have.
I agree with Siegfried, this would only create more confusion. While an extra subforum could be nice.


Including the Anglo-Saxons is the easiest, as they are already included. Anglo-Saxons are Germanic, but maybe one would need to emphasize their particular heritage and significance (about half of the Germanics identify with Anglo-Saxons) by mentioning them explicitly in the forum banner and forum mission statement. There seem to be quite a few people that confuse 'Germanic' with 'German.'
One could always include a little line beneath the Germanic preservation banner which mentions something like: Anglo-Saxons, Teutons and Vikings (alphabetically ordened).
Anglo-Saxon would include in that case the British who identify themself as Germanic and their descendants abroad.
Teutons would include the Germanics of Continental Europe, and their descendants oversea etc.. (roughly thus the Dutch and German speaking).
Vikings should be the people from the Scandinavian peninsula and Denmark (speaking a North-Germanic language).

With this done their will be no more confusion about the "German = Germanic but not Anglo-Saxon" thing, nor is their confusion about the fact that the Scandinavian (Northern-Germanic) are part of the Germanic world (which some people also still don't seem to get).

Prince Eugen
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 07:11 PM
Why not Germanic and European preservation?But i'll respect what ever you decide!

Thorburn
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 07:49 PM
Maybe the discussion started because the thread by creating an other (an more british/anglo-saxon) Skadi forum? No, I promise you, absolutely nothing. I actually think that there surely must be an audience large enough, sufficiently "British" in its self-conception, that would warrant the existence of such a forum. It's actually a very interesting idea.

I've lost count but there are by now between half a dozen and a dozen Skadi offshots, many of which we helped to create and all of which we offered some support at some stage (like they offered some support to us at some stage). We like them all, albeit it seems that this love is not always mutual. :fwink:

But we are definitely not bothered if somebody wants to create his own forum. We wouldn't even be bothered if somebody wanted to create a "better" Germanic forum. Same way Stormfront isn't bothered if somebody creates a "better" forum for white nationalists. If he can beat and top us and get the overwhelming support of the Germanics online, then he probably did something very right, while we did something wrong. The winners, however, would be the Germanics, because they would be better off. As you know, we don't earn any money if people come to Skadi. We just want to offer them resources and a home. If somebody can do it better, great thing -- we'd just have less work.

We are happy if people develop some initiative on their own, and we are actually somewhat proud that the idea of Skadi has influenced already so many people that they consider to create their "own" Skadi: whatever the orientation might be.

There are advantages to having many forums over having only one or two. A "British" Skadi, run by Brits, would be able to address issues of concern to Brits better. It would create an atmosphere in which Brits feel more at home and comfortable. A member of a British forum would, for example, not be bothered by views considered hostile, false, idiotic or rude by most Brits, while on Skadi the expression of such views will have to be protected, as long as it doesn't rise to the level of rule-incompliant incitement. We simply can't dump everything that's considered anti-German, anti-WASP, or false by someone. It makes a hell of difference if you discuss the war crimes of WW2 with 5 fellow nationalists from your own country or with 5 chauvinists coming from Germany, America, Britain, France and Russia.

The largest disadvantage to having many forums is that good information gets clustered all over the net, and that good contributors, too, spread out to a large extent. Who can be an active member of a dozen forums? Somebody might argue that one can use Google for searching, but that's not exactly the issue. Some forums are closed for guests and almost all (like Skadi) have private areas or areas for regulars that can't be spidered. However, the biggest problem is that many discussions do not even occur and that much information isn't even posted, simply because one of your favorite ex-posters now happens to hang around on another forum.

Thus, it's in general better if people support existing forums that are already large (Skadi above all :fwink:) than founding the 13th small forum offshot, be it then they target at an audience that, after having considered all reasonable compromises, cannot be accomodated within an existing large forum. This is surely the case when it comes to Brits and Skadi. Not all Brits are Germanic, and even some Germanic Brits don't feel Germanic (or European) but British foremost and above all.

So, to answer your question, Ma'm, it has not anything to do with the "British" Skadi, but everything with a (second) query of the German administrator addressing the issue. I'm probably significantly more happy with fact that Skadi is no longer "European" than he is. Great guys (like he (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=27454), too) think big, while I proudly am and will remain a reactionary all-Germanic sectarian til' death us part.

Nice avatar, by the way. ;)

Moody
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 08:02 PM
I voted for Germanic/Anglo-Saxon.

For a long time, the Saxons of the Continent, and the Saxons of England cherished their brotherhood.

The 20th century saw that poisoned and smashed with two deplorable brother's wars.

Surely one vital task for the post war generations is to repair that damage?

So Skadi could be used towards that essential task of English/German friendship.

Also, Leofric had some harsh words for those who have lost-sight of the large Germanic and Anglo-Saxon component of North America.

I do sympathise with him, and it also brings forth another long-term goal for us;

to restore America to its Germanic/Anglo-Saxon purpose!

For me there is no better standard to rally under than the Germanic/Anglo-Saxon one.

Hail to all our Brothers, whether in Angeln, England or New England and elsewhere in the Germano-English world!

Thorburn
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 10:53 PM
btw skadi should be european again
Why not Germanic and European preservation?I'd support a "European Skadi" all the way, and, as far as I can see, there surely would be a demand for it, but Skadi can't and won't turn European again. They say Never say never! but I really can't imagine it, even if I try. I can understand the nostalgia of some older members, in particular those who are not of Germanic heritage, but if the last 1½ years have demonstrated anything, then that the Germanic orientation is much more productive than the European. It strengthened, no, actually, verified my belief that meta-ethnicity, generously and inclusively defined as in the case of Skadi, is the largest cultural, spiritual and biological entity one can politically work with; for it's the largest group whose current collective consciousness of unity is sufficiently pronounced -- in a way that the socially attractive forces still outweigh the repulsive ones. In other words, Skadi, short of integrating the Celts maybe, most of whom have already been linguistically and culturally Germanicized, can't give itself a wider scope without scattering its community.

Let me give you some thoughts:

Skadi, both during its indo-European and European era, used to be a total battlefield. While there surely were highly interesting pieces of information to be found, only few people, very few people, were happy with Skadi. Very few people felt most of the time comfortable and at home. Skadi was allegedly too Nordnik, too swarthy, too pan-Slavist, too anti-Slavic, too liberal, too Nutzi, &c., all at the same time. Social happiness and Heimatsgefühl, however, are the primary indicators of a functioning social cohesion. These conflicts between members created, in addition, continual tensions between the Staff members that had to sort the former out. If the public Skadi was a battlefield, the Staff forum was the scene of massacres. It also resembled a pigeonry, with moderators constantly resigning and rejoining. I assume only the most active (ex-)Senior Staff during that time knows (and can imagine) how difficult it was to keep this community together, and how many foul compromises we all had to make, naturally at the same time deteriorating our own image, in order to keep it from rifting apart.

Today, the situation is very different. There has never been more unity amongst Staff and the latter has never been more stable. It's, almost at all times, a pleasure to log in, without having a dozen of PMs of Staff members virtually killing each other, asking me to take their side or they'd resign.

Short of, in comparison, rather occasional disputes where members lose their temper, traditionally limited to Europeans vs. Americans (on the English section) and National-Socialists vs. the anti-NS faction (on the German section), Skadi is pacified, people come along and manage to debate civilly, members feel at home. To a degree that is absolutely remarkable for a forum that size, I might add. Reason is that the sub-racial and meta-ethnic conflicts are almost totally gone; which proves that it's in fact tribe (Germanic) and not race (Europid) or sub-race (Nord vs. Med) that matters and always mattered.

This feeling of comfort also directly reflects upon funding support, both from members of the English and German sections. You might have noticed the increased number of pseudonyms in red of members who were willing to send an occasional dollar to keep us on the net. One would expect more contributions on a European forum than on a Germanic one, but the precise opposite holds true. That's also the reason why our server isn't crashing anymore all the time and why it's now blistering fast.

Needless to say, that's also a strong argument against returning to a European orientation. Although Skadi is still my property and I reserved the right to implement changes at my own discretion, all active funding members donated under the explicit premise of a Germanic orientation within the boundaries of civil free speech. While minor changes of the mission statement (such as mentioning Anglo-Saxons who are Germanics) would be rather unproblematic, a fundamental change back to European and letting all the trouble-makers that have been banned multiple times loose again, would be uncourteous to say the least.

Lastly, during the last 1½ years, our Staff has been gradually but totally restructured to contain only Germanics. We even parted from persons such as Johannes de Léon (Romance) and Milesian (Celtic) who, through their hard work, objectivity and dedication, have rendered inesteemable services to Skadi during its European era. We not only would have to rebuild the Staff once more to contain members of all European meta-ethnicities, but it would also be next to impossible to find replacements for them.

I hope the explanation above has given you (and some others) a few ideas why a return to a European orientation is totally out of question.

Aeternitas
Tuesday, April 4th, 2006, 01:01 AM
How could one fairly turn a forum that has been facing over a years' transition to Germanic preservation, and which affected the general policies, rules, outlook, staff and so on, back to European preservation anyway? A lot has already been said, and since Skadi is now a Germanic online community, I also think that quite a few here would remain biased in favour of Germanics, and then the discontent with and claims of not being pro this and pro that enough, or being too anti this or anti that would start dropping like bombs, once again. :P

Thorburn
Tuesday, April 4th, 2006, 03:07 AM
It is good that there is a forum catering purely to Germanic matters, as these are often overlooked in our CeltoGermanic nations of the periphery of Germandom, due to the influences of the above fashion. Very good point.


but you want to do something special to attract Germanics of Anglo-Saxon extraction than find a way to emphasize Anglo-Saxon culture. I currently tend to leave the banner "Germanic" but to elaborate on "Germanic" within the mission statement or the rules.


Since the Anglo-Saxons are already Germanic, I think it would be odd to have a slogan like "Germanic and Anglo-Saxon Preservation". It would only add to the confusion around the Germanic concept. If the Anglo-Saxons here would like to see more attention to their ethnic sphere, I'm in favour of creating an Anglo-Saxon subforum similar to the Dutch and Scandinavian sections we have. Don't the Anglo-Saxons have already the largest portion of Skadi, namely the English language part? The German, Scandinavian and Aldiets sections offer certain forums (e. g. The Lounge, Anthropology, Politics) in major Germanic language branches (German, Diets, Northern Germanic) different from English. What would be the purpose of creating an Anglo-Saxon subforum where everything that exists already in English is repeated in English?


They were Celts and the simple fact is that Germanics adopted a huge amount of culture from the Celts.

[...]

Skadi shouldn't be a Celtic forum but we should accept history and our history and embrace it.

[...]

Celts should realize and accept their relationship with the Germanic world whose language and culture they have adopted to a greater or lesser extent. Nobody could have said it better. :thumbup


One could always include a little line beneath the Germanic preservation banner which mentions something like: Anglo-Saxons, Teutons and Vikings (alphabetically ordened). This is an excellent idea. Maybe one can graphically integrate the major Germanic cultures (Anglo-Saxon, German, Diets, Scandinavian) in the banner. I shall look into this.

Oh, by the way: Frans_Jozef, you wouldn't by mere chance have an idea who is all the time changing "Nederduits" and "Low German" to ever new versions such as "Diets" and "Netherlandic" in the description of the Aldiets Forum category? :D :P


[...] I'm glad you gave your input. I see it very similar.

Frans_Jozef
Tuesday, April 4th, 2006, 11:13 AM
Oh, by the way: Frans_Jozef, you wouldn't by mere chance have an idea who is all the time changing "Nederduits" and "Low German" to ever new versions such as "Diets" and "Netherlandic" in the description of the Aldiets Forum category? :D :P


Hm, a little profiling should point to a more or less creative mind (although his hey-days are over), bitter and disappointed, but despite every new set-back, he never cracks down when it's a matter of principle. ;)

Nice signature, but to quote Lao-tzu:
“A leader is most effective when people barely know he exists. When his work is done, his aim fulfilled, his troops will feel they did it themselves.”

Slå ring om Norge
Tuesday, April 4th, 2006, 11:48 AM
.

The work of Skadi and other forums have prepeared way
for the birth of more specialiced forums. Also has times have changed, so time is riper for spreading.

A great umbrella like Skadi, have not the same options to focus on local affairs and possibilities as more specialized forums.

Ideal, Skadi leads logical to a next step,
from a Germanic online community to establishing more distinct and spezialised cultural/geographical forums, that again can lead to the establishing of local physical groups, to continue the work in real life.

This can much better be done by limiting the forums to for example nations. There is no contradictions in this, but like an army, it has distinct branches for various concerns.

Skadi covers the whole germanic cultural circuit.

Nordfolk seems to have narrowed the geographical focus a little,( I am not sure)

The next step is giving birt to even more specialized forums, like
establishing a English forum, good initinative.

For taking the work down to earth,
am am convinced there must be forums on national level. Again, there is no contradictions in national forums, and metanational forums. We need both for various functions.

For the practical difficulties with posting in several forums,
I recommend the Opera browser, that allows one to have several groups up, side by side at hand, and opens in less than a second.

Frans_Jozef
Tuesday, April 4th, 2006, 02:03 PM
Don't the Anglo-Saxons have already the largest portion of Skadi, namely the English language part? The German, Scandinavian and Aldiets sections offer certain forums (e. g. The Lounge, Anthropology, Politics) in major Germanic language branches (German, Diets, Northern Germanic) different from English. What would be the purpose of creating an Anglo-Saxon subforum where everything that exists already in English is repeated in English?



English is the lingua franca as it's naturally and in origin grown into being the prime communication channel on Skadi. We can't expect that people take up courses in Folkspraak (http://www.langmaker.com/folksprk.htm), though alledgedly it's easy to learn and perhaps in the future we could make steps to popularize Folkspraak and adopt it as the main language in the non-regionally specific subforums.

In this respect, the Anglo-Saxons don't have the monopoly over the English language section of Skadi.

Besides, we already have various specialized boards for West, North and Colonial Germanics, where discussions are held about current affairs of specific tribal interests and historical-cultural subjects.
Since English posts are permitted in the Aldiets Forum and Skandinavisk Forum, more and more people from other tribal branches have taken an interest to involve themselves and contribute to either forum; while these boards are still distinct and particular in scope and modality, a greater fluidity between e.g. the Aldiets Forum and Dietse Volkeren can't be denied.

Zyklop
Tuesday, April 4th, 2006, 03:20 PM
One could always include a little line beneath the Germanic preservation banner which mentions something like: Anglo-Saxons, Teutons and Vikings (alphabetically ordened).Does anyone know why the the English use terms like "Teutons" for Germans like, for example, in "Teutonic Order"?

Nordgau
Tuesday, April 4th, 2006, 04:10 PM
Does anyone know why the the English use terms like "Teutons" for Germans like, for example, in "Teutonic Order"?

In the particular case of the Teutonic Order that comes without doubt from its Latin name Ordo Teutonicus. In medieval Latin, Teutonici, Teutones etc. was the standard ethnic designation for the Germans (besides designations like Germani or Alemanni). It came up in the whole era around 1000 A.D., when indeed a common German folk identity emerged, as neo-classical national name of the Germans because of its similar sound to the Germans' own lingual and ethnic designation deutsch (or diutisk etc., as the early forms of deutsch were) and replaced the less elegant theodiscus which had existed as Latinisation of deutsch for some time before.

The actually correct English translation of Ordo Teutonicus would be indeed "German Order", as it is called Deutscher Orden in German and as Teutonicus of medieval Latin sources is of course always deutsch in German medieval sources ...

As far as I know the English still used "Dutch" and "Dutchland" as their actual word deutsch for all Germans and Germany in early modern times, until it was limited to the Netherlanders, when they finally formed themselves out as a seperated national entity from the Germans. The Germans got then in English the Latin designation "German" as ersatz name.

The use of "Germanic" and "Teutonic" in English looks for me anyway a bit arbitrary, and I see both used for the (modern) Germans as well as for all (modern) Germanic peoples or the ancient Germanic tribes. (At least in older English texts, e.g. in the books of Madison Grant, I see "Teutonic" often used for "Germanic".) So if Skadi uses "Germanic" as all-inclusive term for Germans, Anglo-Saxons and the others and "Teutonic" one stage below for Germans and Netherlanders, an Anglo-Saxon might protest that he uses to think that only the Germans were "Germanic", but the Anglo-Saxons were "Teutons" ... :D

The German usage here is much clearer, with the Germans being Deutsche, the whole of the ancient and modern Germanic peoples Germanen, and Teutonen being called the specific ancient Germanic tribe of the Teutoni in Jütland who moved southwards and were defeated at Aquae Sextiae by the Romans. Though, of course, also here Germanen and Teutonen is sometimes used in a rather unserious-journalistic way as a synonym for the nowerday Germans (e. g. Teutonengrill for the German mass vacationer regions at the Adriatic coast).

symmakhos
Tuesday, April 4th, 2006, 07:14 PM
The Romans of classical times actually used "Germanici" for all Germans. Tacitus writes about the name in the beginning of Germania:

"The Germans themselves I should regard as aboriginal, and not mixed at all with other races through immigration or intercourse. For, in former times it was not by land but on shipboard that those who sought to emigrate would arrive; and the boundless and, so to speak, hostile ocean beyond us, is seldom entered by a sail from our world. And, beside the perils of rough and unknown seas, who would leave Asia, or Africa for Italy for Germany, with its wild country, its inclement skies, its sullen manners and aspect, unless indeed it were his home? In their ancient songs, their only way of remembering or recording the past they celebrate an earth-born god Tuisco, and his son Mannus, as the origin of their race, as their founders. To Mannus they assign three sons, from whose names, they say, the coast tribes are called Ingaevones; those of the interior, Herminones; all the rest, Istaevones. Some, with the freedom of conjecture permitted by antiquity, assert that the god had several descendants, and the nation several appellations, as Marsi, Gambrivii, Suevi, Vandilij, and that these are nine old names. The name Germany, on the other hand, they say is modern and newly introduced, from the fact that the tribes which first crossed the Rhine and drove out the Gauls, and are now called Tungrians, were then called Germans. Thus what was the name of a tribe, and not of a race, gradually prevailed, till all called themselves by this self-invented name of Germans, which the conquerors had first employed to inspire terror."

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/tacitus1.html

(Similarly the Hellenes came to be called "Greek" by the Romans, "Ionic" by the Persians, from the tribes of their respective first encounters.)

Slå ring om Norge
Wednesday, April 5th, 2006, 04:56 PM
.

Does anyone know why the the English use terms like "Teutons" for Germans like, for example, in "Teutonic Order"?

Teutonic may probably be derivated from an old name of the Tir, Tiwass, Tiur cult that has ancient traditions in Tyrol, Southern Germany and what is Austria today.

Of course Tirol are of the same source.


I may be wrong, and will not dispute on that. To recite a delicate female french spy from TV...

" I say this only once...";)

Flag-Soil
Thursday, April 6th, 2006, 01:59 AM
I voted Celto-Germanic because I am.

Oswiu
Thursday, April 6th, 2006, 02:09 AM
I voted Celto-Germanic because I am.

So am I, but I don't see the need to bend the forum around us lot. And it'd be good for the English to get more to grips with the Germanic side of ourselves anyway - it's been woefully neglected for a few decades.

Flag-Soil
Thursday, April 6th, 2006, 05:08 AM
I agree. I'm picking up a bit of German actually.

Thusnelda
Thursday, April 6th, 2006, 09:49 AM
I voted for "Germanic preservation." There´s a quite large majority who thinks "Skadi shouldnt change", and so do I.

RedJack
Saturday, April 8th, 2006, 11:23 PM
Germanic preservation includes Anglo-Saxon preservation, so I voted for no change. All the same I intend to start an Anglo-Saxon forum to cater to all the English speaking peoples. This is not intended as competition for Skadi. We need to promote and defend our heritage and another forum can only help in that regard. Oswiu mentioned wanting to overcome the insular attitude of the English. On the contrary, it is my earnest desire that England re-discover it's proud insular nature. :thumbup My forum will be called www.anglecynn.com (http://www.anglecynn.com). This is an OE word meaning the English people, and by it I mean all the English people around the world, including those in America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Rhodesia, Kenya and South Africa. All Anglophiles will also be welcome to join. Anglophobes will not.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Sunday, April 9th, 2006, 05:09 AM
If Skadi is a Germanic forum, then this includes Anglo-Saxons as much as any other German tribes. If modern Anglo-Saxon stumble across Skadi and don't instantly realize it includes them, our question to ourselves is: do we really want this person as a member and what can he or she possibly bring to the discussion if they don't even know their own basic history.

But, we could translated the Skadi logo and definition of Skadi, the "Gottin der Unabhaenigkeit" into English, Dutch, Swedish, and all the other living Germanic languages. This might make people feel more welcome and restate in an in-your-face way the cultural unity of the Germanics.

Leofric
Sunday, April 9th, 2006, 05:33 AM
I voted for Germanic preservation.

I see myself and my fellow Anglo-Saxons as being Germanic, and so I wouldn't want to be considered distinct from my fellow Germanics.

I think that Celts are really quite different from Germanics, even though linguistic assimilation is close to entire in the islands of the North Sea (though not on the Brythonic portion of the continent, of course, where the Celts have been assimilated into the great Roman giant). Additionally, those Celts who are the most aware of their ethnicity and their distinctiveness tend to be rather strongly anti-English, and thus anti-Germanic.

And I am most definitely not indifferent about Germanic preservation. :D






Don't the Anglo-Saxons have already the largest portion of Skadi, namely the English language part? The German, Scandinavian and Aldiets sections offer certain forums (e. g. The Lounge, Anthropology, Politics) in major Germanic language branches (German, Diets, Northern Germanic) different from English. What would be the purpose of creating an Anglo-Saxon subforum where everything that exists already in English is repeated in English?
English is the lingua franca as it's naturally and in origin grown into being the prime communication channel on Skadi. We can't expect that people take up courses in Folkspraak (http://www.langmaker.com/folksprk.htm), though alledgedly it's easy to learn and perhaps in the future we could make steps to popularize Folkspraak and adopt it as the main language in the non-regionally specific subforums.

In this respect, the Anglo-Saxons don't have the monopoly over the English language section of Skadi.

Frans is spot on here. The English-language section is decidedly not Anglo-Saxon, but rather a lingua franca area. There are many reasons why that section should not be considered a home for Anglo-Saxons, as the Scandinavian, Dutch, and German sections are for their respective ethnic groups.

I would very much like to see a subsection specifically for Anglo-Saxons. Back when Americans, Canadians, Australians & New Zealanders, and South Africans were all put under English Folk, there was such a forum. But there were many problems with that grouping, and it was very appropriately changed. However, that leaves us Anglo-Saxons (who have spread around the whole globe) with no place to get together with our fellow Anglo-Saxons for just Anglo-Saxon discussion. I think that's a sad thing.

I think it's fine for our various countries to continue to have separate fora, but a large subforum (here on Skadi of course) for all of us together would be very nice.

Oswiu
Sunday, April 9th, 2006, 04:29 PM
I see myself and my fellow Anglo-Saxons as being Germanic, and so I wouldn't want to be considered distinct from my fellow Germanics.
Hear hear!

I think that Celts are really quite different from Germanics, even though linguistic assimilation is close to entire in the islands of the North Sea (though not on the Brythonic portion of the continent, of course, where the Celts have been assimilated into the great Roman giant). Additionally, those Celts who are the most aware of their ethnicity and their distinctiveness tend to be rather strongly anti-English, and thus anti-Germanic.
On my island we have to live with them, so a modus vivendi and mutual understanding is required for this, most naturally to be based on the recognition of the ties between German and Celt in this contact zone. Celts cannot be dismissed [though I'm not saying you're advocating this], for the position of England balanced between these two worlds needs to be examined and appreciated by all Englishmen. If I were to construct the school curriculum for history in England I would never overemphasise the Germanic over the British to the extent that the latter became a mere footnote. In an ideal world, and Englishman should be able to reel off a good score of Anglo Saxon Kings as well as a dozen British figures of note.
Such a balance is of great personal interest to me, I must admit, for I cannot very well cut myself in half! And there's no need to. There are innumerable instances of contact on many levels between our two superfamilies. My very screen name was chosen as a good reflection of this; King Oswiu [reigned 642 - 671] had several marriages and other 'liaisons' resulting in the births of several monarchs of great talent and ability, with blood ties to all the British races. He was a fluent Gaelic speaker who begat with a princess of the O'Neills the great poet-king and scholar Aldfrith, known in Erin as Flann Fina Mac Ossu [reigned 685 - 704]. With his Deiran wife Eanflaed he begat Ecgfrith [reigned 671 - 685], cementing the two subkingdoms of Northumbria, and giving us a vigorous warrior king. He also wed Riemmelth [Rhiainfelt] of Rheged, thereby uniting this Welsh Kingdom within his own, and possibly producing Alhfrith [ - 676], another royal heir, and his sister Alhflaed who wed Peada of Mercia, facilitating alliance with the midland Kingdom. In addition to these, both his nephew and great nephew were Kings of the Picts. None of this negates the 'Germantum' of England, but rather augments it.
The envisageing of ethnic entities as though branches in a tree does cripple us somewhat in our understanding of our history. A better model would be twisting brambles or networks of fungal growths...
What this should imply for the forum I don't dare to suggest, but I advocate leaving it largely as it is. The fact that Englanders are a bit of a special case shouldn't prevent us from posting on here. I'm quite comfortable. :)

I think it's fine for our various countries to continue to have separate fora, but a large subforum (here on Skadi of course) for all of us together would be very nice.
Is it not possible to have a situation where the fora themselves are not so rigidly stuck in such a 'tree' structure as I mentioned above for ethnolinguistic phenomena? I see on Stirpes they have a 'related threads' thing at the bottom of the page. It doesn't work very well, but could have potential in an attempt to strengthen the broader unity of the forum as a whole. I don't understand website building very well, but it might be a good idea to make things low into each other through the intelligent positioning of links here and there. Or would that be a nightmare of work for the Moderators?!

Thruthheim
Sunday, April 9th, 2006, 05:32 PM
On my island we have to live with them, so a modus vivendi and mutual understanding is required for this, most naturally to be based on the recognition of the ties between German and Celt in this contact zone. Celts cannot be dismissed [though I'm not saying you're advocating this], for the position of England balanced between these two worlds needs to be examined and appreciated by all Englishmen.

From my perspective, in England, there is no "us" and "them" where Celts are concerned. The English, I think are majoritly Germanic, But with a significant Celtic undertone, BUT, I don't think on the whole, we identify ourselves as Germanic, just due to sheer ignorance and lack of education. The English certainly don't recognise anything Celtic about their culture, we see the "Irish" as typifying what a Celt is, and to a lesser extent, the Scottish.
I have to explain the term Germanic to most i talk to. It's almost as if meta-ethnicity and our roots have been whiped out, we seem to see ourselves as British/English etc, that's often as far as it goes. Only those racially aware folk like myself have any incling as to what we are culturally/racially etc.

There is some overlap with Celts and Germanics anyway, maybe only confined to Britain, US, Australia, New Zealand etc. But what i think we neglect when talking about population, is the sheer amount of celts who have moved to England from Ireland over hundreds of years, which doesn't seem to count as a wave of immigration, but is certainly numerous.
I don't know whether to say sadly or not, but it seems most English have 1 relative(grandfather, great grandmother etc) who hails from a different corner of Britain. I think this is a natural occurence within all regions.

Cole Nidray
Sunday, April 9th, 2006, 07:32 PM
Please, no change. They have the Irish-Nationalism forum.

Does anyone really want to see threads on "the troubles" of Northern Ireland here? :fviolin:

Oswiu
Tuesday, April 11th, 2006, 12:51 AM
From my perspective, in England, there is no "us" and "them" where Celts are concerned. The English, I think are majoritly Germanic, But with a significant Celtic undertone, BUT, I don't think on the whole, we identify ourselves as Germanic, just due to sheer ignorance and lack of education. The English certainly don't recognise anything Celtic about their culture, we see the "Irish" as typifying what a Celt is, and to a lesser extent, the Scottish.
I have to explain the term Germanic to most i talk to. It's almost as if meta-ethnicity and our roots have been whiped out, we seem to see ourselves as British/English etc, that's often as far as it goes. Only those racially aware folk like myself have any incling as to what we are culturally/racially etc.
Good and true points all, though wouldn't perhaps the Welsh figure higher in the English layman's perception of Celticness? Maybe this is a regional thing - living where I do, Welsh holidays took up a great deal of my school holidays.

There is some overlap with Celts and Germanics anyway, maybe only confined to Britain, US, Australia, New Zealand etc. But what i think we neglect when talking about population, is the sheer amount of celts who have moved to England from Ireland over hundreds of years, which doesn't seem to count as a wave of immigration, but is certainly numerous.
I don't know whether to say sadly or not, but it seems most English have 1 relative(grandfather, great grandmother etc) who hails from a different corner of Britain. I think this is a natural occurence within all regions.
Bit late for 'sadly' but I know what you mean. Perhaps I can get away with it more, being the product of said immigration. ;) Objectively, I think I can say that some harm has been done to the English identity through such Hibernification. It is a little harder to justify some necessary aspects of nationalism when you bear certain surnames. A little hard to throw yourself heart and soul into something that only represents a portion of your self. Or perhaps not. I've got over this hurdle. It was only a problem on a national scale because it coincided with a historical period in which English culture ceased to be promulgated in official channels, schools and so on.
I'd love to see some statistics for this. Failing that, here's a bit of anecdotal evidence. I started working recently in a place in Manchester, where unlike most of my previous work life I am immersed in a completely working class environment. Almost all the surnames of my colleagues are Irish. Quite striking. And yet there is no Irish feeling amongst them. Unfortunately, for the most part, I am hard pressed to discern much Englishness among them either. It's very easy to create a nationless mush of a population when mixing of nationalities [never mind races] is accompanied by an absence of cultural indoctrination.

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 02:29 AM
I have to explain the term Germanic to most i talk to. It's almost as if meta-ethnicity and our roots have been whiped out, we seem to see ourselves as British/English etc, that's often as far as it goes.I think that's as far as it has always gone through most of English history. The impression I get is that the English have never felt themselves part of a wider "meta-ethnicity", but rather as a people in their own right. I don't think it's insignificant that a concept of belonging to a wider "Germanic world" has never really been part of English identity; I'm not so sure that it's been "wiped out".

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 02:36 AM
It's very easy to create a nationless mush of a population when mixing of nationalities [never mind races] is accompanied by an absence of cultural indoctrination.Definitely. I think that's what is behind the modern push for immigration.

Concerning the Irish migrants to England, I suppose one would come across people with such ancestry a lot more in large cities.

Theudiskaz
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 03:08 AM
I have to explain the term Germanic to most i talk to. It's almost as if meta-ethnicity and our roots have been whiped out, we seem to see ourselves as British/English etc, that's often as far as it goes.
I think that's as far as it has always gone through most of English history. The impression I get is that the English have never felt themselves part of a wider "meta-ethnicity", but rather as a people in their own right. I don't think it's insignificant that a concept of belonging to a wider "Germanic world" has never really been part of English identity; I'm not so sure that it's been "wiped out".

Pan-germanic identity has not been common among the average Englishman (at least since the time of Canute). However the educated in England have promoted this Pangermanic consciousness as far back as the formation of the Anglican church. Here's what Charles E. McClelland had to say in his book regarding the historical English and German sense of kinship "The German Historians and England: A Study In Nineteenth-Century Views", "Until the mid-nineteenth century, such terms as 'English', 'Anglo-Saxon', 'Saxon', and 'German' [Germane, not Deutscher] were virtually interchangeable in references to England. "

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 03:35 AM
Pan-germanic identity has not been common among the average Englishman (at least since the time of Canute). However the educated in England have promoted this Pangermanic consciousness as far back as the formation of the Anglican church. Here's what Charles E. McClelland had to say in his book regarding the historical English and German sense of kinship "The German Historians and England: A Study In Nineteenth-Century Views", "Until the mid-nineteenth century, such terms as 'English', 'Anglo-Saxon', 'Saxon', and 'German' [Germane, not Deutscher] were virtually interchangeable in references to England. "Some educated admirers of Germany have promoted the idea all through, which isn't surprising, given that the name, language and foundation of the kingdom of England trace their origin to Anglo-Saxons, who were from Germany. But a deeper sense of kinship has never really been part of English identity as a whole, which is not an insignificant fact.

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 03:50 AM
Some educated admirers of Germany have promoted the idea all through, which isn't surprising, given that the name, language and foundation of the kingdom of England trace their origin to Anglo-Saxons, who were from Germany. But a deeper sense of kinship has never really been part of English identity as a whole, which is not an insignificant fact.

If the English want to assume the Germanic identity, then so be it, We are eligible. England, although foreign policy and economy has been very outward looking, the English individual has always been quite inward facing! When we speak of Europeans, we mean those on the continent, but we are just as European as them. It's the Island mentality.
That's as simple as i can explain it. Im English, Germanic, Nordic. And im Happy. :)

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 04:40 AM
If the English want to assume the Germanic identity, then so be it, We are eligible.Well, as you know, I don't think the English really are eligible, besides the concept being, if anything, rather un-English historically. However, the former isn't the point I was making; I was only referring to your implying that England has lost it's identity through ignorance and lack of education.


although foreign policy and economy has been very outward looking, the English individual has always been quite inward facing! When we speak of Europeans, we mean those on the continent, but we are just as European as them. It's the Island mentality.One might argue that the island mentality (long may it live :D ) is all there is to it. No doubt that is a significant factor.


That's as simple as i can explain it. Im English, Germanic, Nordic. And im Happy. :)Well, as long as you're satisfied ;) :D

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 04:53 AM
I don't know if you have stated it yet or not, but you claim the English aren't Germanic. Please enlighten me to what we are then ;)

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 05:00 AM
I don't know if you have stated it yet or not, but you claim the English aren't Germanic. Please enlighten me to what we are then ;)English, first and foremost, and I think that, as with many nations, there's no need to try and fit into "boxes". I just don't think it's always possible; of course, I do think it's important not to forget the Germanic influence. I would say France is in a similar position.

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 05:21 AM
English, first and foremost, and I think that, as with many nations, there's no need to try and fit into "boxes". I just don't think it's always possible; of course, I do think it's important not to forget the Germanic influence. I would say France is in a similar position.

The only possible compramise i could come to you with on this, is that i think England isn't as "solidly" Germanic as Scandinavia etc.. But i would still say England is majoritly Germanic. I think France is in a whole different ball park. I would say the Germanic component to France is barely present. That's just my personal opinion.

"English, first and foremost", Anglo Saxon then? ;) :D

I also don't think nations such as Norway have ever felt a big allegiance to Germanicism as a meta-ethnicity.

England is in a slightly different situation, Being geographically slightly isolated to the rest of the Germanic nations. Also, taking influences from it's Celtic component. I know you may cite Iceland as an example to the contrary.. But even still, i think that's a different case, being of a smaller population and not facing multiple invasions and geographically neighbouring culturally different nations(ie, England-France).


Here's a link for you, I think you have great potential:
http://www.standup.com.au/
:D

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 06:11 AM
The only possible compramise i could come to you with on this, is that i think England isn't as "solidly" Germanic as Scandinavia etc.. But i would still say England is majoritly Germanic. I think France is in a whole different ball park. I would say the Germanic component to France is barely present. That's just my personal opinion.Apart from the French language, I think there is just as much Germanic cultural influence present in France (the Northern half at least).

However, I was referring more particularly to the fact that I think France is in a similar position in that one can't fit it into a box, rather than having a similar degree of Germanic influence.


"English, first and foremost", Anglo Saxon then? ;) :D In so much as France is Franco-Burgundian ;)


I also don't think nations such as Norway have ever felt a big allegiance to Germanicism as a meta-ethnicity.Perhaps. But to my perception at least, they seem very similar to their Germanic neighbours, and regarless of a "big allegiance", I suspect an awareness of the close similarity has probably always existed. But either way, this is beside the point; I was questioning the idea that England has "lost" a Germanic identity.


Here's a link for you, I think you have great potential:
http://www.standup.com.au/
:DI do indeed ;) But of course it's not so much due to an inherent personal ability, as to an opportunity arising from the presence of the humourously inaccurate idea of a "Teutonic England" :D ;)

Dr. Solar Wolff
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 06:23 AM
Pan-germanic identity has not been common among the average Englishman (at least since the time of Canute). However the educated in England have promoted this Pangermanic consciousness as far back as the formation of the Anglican church. Here's what Charles E. McClelland had to say in his book regarding the historical English and German sense of kinship "The German Historians and England: A Study In Nineteenth-Century Views", "Until the mid-nineteenth century, such terms as 'English', 'Anglo-Saxon', 'Saxon', and 'German' [Germane, not Deutscher] were virtually interchangeable in references to England. "

As far as I can tell, thiedischer, you are absolutely right about this. You took the words right out of my mouth (actually better than I can do). English upper crust has always considered themselves Germanic right down to today in which we see Royals sending their children away to be educated just as was done in olden times as in the case of Siegfried. The English have mannerisms of speech which seem to be from an older, more Germanic from of English. Their manners are more reserved as befits a warrior society. For an American, this is easy to see in the English.

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 06:31 AM
I do indeed ;) But of course it's not so much due to an inherent personal ability, as to an opportunity arising from the presence of the humourously inaccurate idea of a "Teutonic England" :D ;)

I think your "English aren't Germanic" routine will go down a treat downunder, maybe you could even bring it here and get just as many laughs ;) :D

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 06:38 AM
I think your "English aren't Germanic" routine will go down a treat downunder,You think so do you?


maybe you could even bring it here and get just as many laughs ;) :DAs you said, most of the modern English don't consider themselves Germanic :D

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 06:41 AM
You think so do you?

As you said, most of the modern English don't consider themselves Germanic :D

Good point ;) .. But not considering oneself Germanic does not mean they aren't Germanic. I know Whites who think they are Black, but they are still obviously White.

We haven't discussed our racial and cultural origins here in England for over 60 years.. So why on earth would people be expected to know what Germanic is ;) I didn't until i became a Nationalist. :)

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 06:47 AM
Is the issue here, not cultural, but actually racial?

I think anyway, The Germanic nations are now culturally "Western". Remnants of the old Germanic way of life have been watered down in all of the Nations that are generally accepted as Germanic.

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:02 AM
Good point ;) .. But not considering oneself Germanic does not mean they aren't Germanic.I agree, but that's not my point. I thought you were implying that my view would go down as a joke in England, because it's so obviously false. Apparently you weren't.


We haven't discussed our racial and cultural origins here in England for over 60 years.. So why on earth would people be expected to know what Germanic is ;) I didn't until i became a Nationalist. :)Well, a sense of kinship needn't have a name (such as Germanic) in order to exist. I somehow doubt that the Germans and Dutch, even in this modernistic age, have forgotten their kinship.


Is the issue here, not cultural, but actually racial?It's an issue of nations as they have existed through history. So racial (in the sense of ancestry) and also traditional cultural traits.

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:08 AM
A sense of kinship needn't have a name (such as Germanic) in order to exist. I somehow doubt that the Germans and Dutch, even in this modernistic age, have forgotten their kinship.

With regard to the English in this sense, like i said before, "inward facing" ;)

We could also point to many other factors. The British empire, the union of the 4 nations of Britain! This gave a new identity. To me, it doesn't negate being Germanic enough to constitute ditching the identity. It is riddled in us through ancestry.

English(British), having had the largest empire in the world, why would they see themselves as part of anything which consolidates their importance and individual greatness? This again, was a moment in time, that is no longer a part of us, but still has consequences on the national conscience.

And with regard to the Germans and the Dutch kinship, they are neighbours, most neighbourly countries have a sense of kinship.

Slå ring om Norge
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:13 AM
I also don't think nations such as Norway have ever felt a big allegiance to Germanicism as a meta-ethnicity.



Quite new to me, but what do I know?

The great spirits of Norway, me, Hamsun, Ibsen, Much, Nansen, Amundsen, and several others, of some I have happend to meet personal, have all had their spirits eagle eye directed on Germany and german culture.

I do not think I know one single great norwegian spirit confessed to be Anglia-oriented. We are much closer to German culture and language than to the English version thereof.

Also when it comes to cooking....Muscial England has contributed to modern culture maybe more than anybody else, you are also very good at entertainment.

But. I consider there to be a class difference between english and german cultures, exept of spirits like Bacon, Swinburne, Turner, Dee, and some others that are lofty enough to could have been Germans.

Also Norway and England has a long history of England backstabbing Norway and breeding suffering on civilians here. And English troops and forces operations in Norway under WW2 are highly condemnable. British troops practising in Norway are also the most unpopular according to their lack of manners and civil conduct. Even more unpopular as US forces.

Were it up to me, it would be as difficult for Englishmen to cross our border as for Albanians. ( Joking here.:D) With allies like England, we do not need enemies. I join Knut Hamsun in his admiration of German culture, and also in his sceptics for the English version thereof.

When also England laytely has served as Israels servile dog, it does not contribute to build up respect for a nation that sorely could need it.

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:19 AM
Quite new to me, but what do I know?

The great spirits of Norway, me, Hamsun, Ibsen, Much, Nansen, Amundsen, and several others, of some I have happend to meet personal, have all had their spirits eagle eye directed on Germany and german culture.

I do not think I know one single great norwegian spirit confessed to be Anglia-oriented. We are much closer to German culture and language than to the English version thereof. Thank you God.

Also when it comes to cooking....Muscial England has contributed to modern culture maybe more than anybody else, you are also very good at entertainment.

But. I consider there to be a class difference between english and german cultures, exept of spirits like Bacon, Swinburne, Turner, Dee, and some others that are lofty enough to could have been Germans.

Also Norway and England has a long history of England backstabbing Norway and breeding suffering on civilians here. Also English troops and forces operations in Norway under WW2 are highly condemnabel. British troops practising in Norway are also the most unpopular according to their lack of manners and civil conduct. Even more unpopular as US forces.

Were it up to me, it would be as difficult for Englishmen to cross our border as for Albanians. ( Joking here.:D) With allies like England, we do not need enemies. I join Knut Hamsun in his admiration of German culture, and also in his sceptics for the English version thereof.

When also England laytely has served as Israels servile dog, it does not contribute to build up respect for a nation that sorely could need it.
Sounds like a fashionable anti-English rant ;) Maybe you and Rhydderch can exchange hotmail accounts?

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:28 AM
Maybe you and Rhydderch can exchange hotmail accounts?mmm....so now I'm "anti-English". Am I anti-Spanish if I claim they're not Germanic? You've got to be more objective about things ;) :D

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:30 AM
mmm....so now I'm "anti-English". Am I anti-Spanish if I claim they're not Germanic? You've got to be more objective about things ;) :D

Quote me where i said YOU were "anti-English"! ;)

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:41 AM
With regard to the English in this sense, like i said before, "inward facing" ;)

We could also point to many other factors. The British empire, the union of the 4 nations of Britain! This gave a new identity. To me, it doesn't negate being Germanic enough to constitute ditching the identity. It is riddled in us through ancestry.

English(British), having had the largest empire in the world, why would they see themselves as part of anything which consolidates their importance and individual greatness? This again, was a moment in time, that is no longer a part of us, but still has consequences on the national conscience.

And with regard to the Germans and the Dutch kinship, they are neighbours, most neighbourly countries have a sense of kinship.Again, this is beside the point. The point was that a sense of kinship can exist without having a term to describe it. In other words, if people don't know what "Germanic" means, it doesn't follow that they will be unaware of kinship.

Besides, it's certainly not a particularly common characteristic for neighbouring countries to feel kinship.

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:43 AM
Quote me where i said YOU were "anti-English"! ;)There's more to language than explicit statements ;)

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:45 AM
Any sense of kinship has been altered by so many factors, there can't be a clear answer. Things have changed since the Germanic Folkwanderung,
England was invaded by the Normans, We, in a Union under a new flag, Had the biggest empire the world has ever seen, we have also had consecutive world wars with a Germanic nation on the continent.

What is Australia culturally, just out of curiosity?

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:46 AM
There's more to language than explicit statements ;)

2+2=5 ;)

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:50 AM
2+2=5 ;)If I misunderstood you, then good :D

Rhydderch
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 07:53 AM
What is Australia culturally, just out of curiosity?Thorburnoughly Teutonic :D

Theudiskaz
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 08:02 AM
Thorburnoughly Teutonic :D
Well I'm glad you've finally come to your senses! I thought maybe you were a lost cause!:D:thumbup

Northern Paladin
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 08:55 AM
Thorburnoughly Teutonic :D

Are you just being Saracastic?:D
I've just finished a study of Australia in history class and thoroughly Teutonic she is not.;)

Thruthheim
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 08:58 AM
Are you just being Saracastic?:D
I've just finished a study of Australia in history class and thoroughly Teutonic she is not.;)

Yes i think he probably was, Please don't draw this affair out any longer. :)

Northern Paladin
Thursday, April 13th, 2006, 09:06 AM
Yes i think he probably was, Please don't draw this affair out any longer. :)

Well exuse me for antagonizing.:( It's one of the few things I'm good at.:D

The Black Prince
Friday, April 14th, 2006, 12:24 AM
Great discussion gentlemen.:)

Concerning Germanic-ness

Some maps of: De Germanen, (1979) by C. F Jung.

http://i2.tinypic.com/veoh1i.jpg
Althoug its Dutch written it should be obvious that "Germaans" means Germanic. And that 750 v. C. is 750 BC.(begin Iron-Age)

http://i2.tinypic.com/veohlw.jpg
Here I colored the parts to be easilier distinguishable. The light-green is the expansion until Caesar's time, the pink/purple is the Roman Empire around the 2th century BC.

As one easily can observe the roots of the Germanics (without Keltic confusions) lies centered around Denmark in 750 BC.
Please read Capelli et. al and Dupuy et al. for further genetic researches readings. But all concluding that NW-Germany, Denmark, the Northern Netherlands, the Southern half of Sweden and the southern half of Norway are almost identical in genetical make-up.

The later part (during the Iron age) are expansions in Keltic territories or other peoples their territories (rest of the Lowlands, middle-Germany, Poland, etc). this is also confirmed by genetical research (f.i. Passarino et al.).

During the "Age of Migration" the Germanics settled in other parts of Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Eastern-England. this can also be genetically evidenced although they became mixed with the local population (Weale et al. Passarino et al., Dupuy et al.). While the conquests in f.i. France, Italy and Spain are minimal qua immigration (the elite got replaced and mixed, thats all). In the North the Gothics and Norse immigrated more towards the Northern parts (Trondheim, Svealand, etc..).

During the "Dark ages" while Western England was conquered by East-English Germanics. A later immigration/invasion of Northern Germanics (Danes and Norwegians) took place in Scotland, Northern England, and some parts of Wales and Ireland, btw not too forget Normandy(Fa) and especially the Faroer + Iceland.