PDA

View Full Version : Who are the greater miscegenators, Meds or Nords?



Nordhammer
Saturday, November 8th, 2003, 08:37 PM
There has been some debate on whether Mediterraneans miscegenate more than Nords. I have pointed out that Mediterraneans who colonized Central and South America had very different results from Northern Europeans who colonized North America, Australia, New Zealand, etc. Northern European colonies have largely been a success, whereas Mediterranean colonies have been racial failures. Can it be purely circumstantial? Also considering that Southern Europeans have more nonwhite admixture than Northern Europeans, albeit arguably insignificant. And most of the "Pan-Aryans" who have a questionable standard of whiteness seem to be Mediterraneans. Others say that Nords mix more in today's Jewish-controlled world. So what do you think? Overall, all things considered, who mixes more, who is more innately liberal in terms of racial preservation, Meds or Nords, or is it about the same?

Gesta Bellica
Saturday, November 8th, 2003, 09:08 PM
I think it was different in the past and the mestizos that came out in south america prove that...
this happened because the local population was not so dark like africans or else?
I really don't know what to think but a certain fact that the same mediterraneans that are claimed to be race mixing did not the same in Africa or Asia and that's aproven fact as well..

I also wonder where all those afro-american with slighter skin (that are surely not 100% black) come from, if the nords are so pure and clean in the depth of their soul.. i mean they are almost the majority of the blacks there in the US!
i have seen really few blacks that can be taken for africans...
It's not that in the years of slavery a mongrel born from an interracial relationship was just destined to a life of slavery like the other? In the end the children of a mixed couple looks always really dark.
And moreover i have travelled a lot in Europe and i have never seen people more willing to mix like scandinavians or germans.. it was a pure Babylon there..
Wether we admit it or not everywhere we go raxemixing looks cool and exotic for at least the 95% of the population, maybe not with blacks but with mulattos or else...
I think we are both in dark water...

Scoob
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 09:32 AM
I think it was different in the past and the mestizos that came out in south america prove that...
this happened because the local population was not so dark like africans or else?
I really don't know what to think but a certain fact that the same mediterraneans that are claimed to be race mixing did not the same in Africa or Asia and that's aproven fact as well..

I also wonder where all those afro-american with slighter skin (that are surely not 100% black) come from, if the nords are so pure and clean in the depth of their soul.. i mean they are almost the majority of the blacks there in the US!
i have seen really few blacks that can be taken for africans...
It's not that in the years of slavery a mongrel born from an interracial relationship was just destined to a life of slavery like the other? In the end the children of a mixed couple looks always really dark.
And moreover i have travelled a lot in Europe and i have never seen people more willing to mix like scandinavians or germans.. it was a pure Babylon there..
Wether we admit it or not everywhere we go raxemixing looks cool and exotic for at least the 95% of the population, maybe not with blacks but with mulattos or else...
I think we are both in dark water...

Good point. I know that in the Americas, the British (Anglo-Celtic) mixed with blacks and Indians, but usually did not accept the child as "one of them" (especially part-black kids). But obviously there was a lot of jungle fever on the plantation, because Afro-Americans don't look quite like Africans in most cases.

French, Portuguese and Spanish mixed with the Indians and Blacks, and assimilated or partially assimilated the results into their own societies.

I also notice that, it seems (this is very subjective and based on limited experience) that the French were much more open to assimilating culture from the African, Asian, and Indian peoples they came in contact with. In contrast, the British in the USA tended to push mainly their own Anglo-Saxon culture to the exclusion of others. I think the Meds being from a geographical crossroads of Europe/Asia/Africa and civilizations, were more open to assimilating blacks and indians in the New World.

As for the failure of Med-derived New World governments to achieve prime status in geopolitics? Could be lack of ambition in the hot tropics (British-descended whites don't accomplish much in the "dirty south" of the USA either), could be their racial temperament, could be influence of non-European races in their societies.

As for true nordics? They didn't have huge empires in recent history. The Varangian Rus could be an example, but it's so long ago (and doesn't include contact with Indians or Blacks) that it's hard to say.

Loki
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 09:55 AM
As for true nordics? They didn't have huge empires in recent history. The Varangian Rus could be an example, but it's so long ago (and doesn't include contact with Indians or Blacks) that it's hard to say.

How about the Franks? The Ostrogoths? The Visigoths? The Danes? The Swedish Empire? Prussia? The British Empire? I could go on. Judging by their relatively small populations, Scandinavians have achieved an awful lot -- Vikings once held virtually the entire Europe at ransom, being only a fraction of the total population of Europe.

Necronomicom
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 10:32 AM
I have never seen a pure North American Indian, they all have white traits, in Latin America most Armerindians are pure with no white mix.


How about the Franks? The Ostrogoths? The Visigoths? The Danes? The Swedish Empire? Prussia? The British Empire? I could go on. Judging by their relatively small populations, Scandinavians have achieved an awful lot -- Vikings once held virtually the entire Europe at ransom, being only a fraction of the total population of Europe.

The British empire was great but IMO it wasn't better then the Portuguese and the Spanish Empire.

Also Britain does have a large med population, so obvious all the greatness in their Empire was due to its med population :D </sarcasm>

Evolved
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:44 AM
Meds and "Latins" in general. No contest.

Rather than point out the obvious Mediterranean/Latin interracial transgressions (of which there are endless examples), I'll have a go at describing some "Nordish" ones. :)

You can't count Australia as a regular "Nord population" because it population is descended from British convicts, and you know people in jail will have sex with anything - even another species of humanoid which more closely resemble a gorilla in a blond wig. :jk

Americans were spoiled by a land full of natural resources and used to getting what they wanted, and so became lazy and stupidly imported negroes. I don't think initially they were meant to be permanent parts of the landscape, in fact the colony of Liberia was formed as a place to repatriate negroes and Abraham Lincoln had already sent back thousands of them before he was assassinated by a radical Confederate loyalist and ardent supporter of slavery:


"This country was formed for the white not for the black man. And looking upon African slavery from the same stand-point, as held by those noble framers of our Constitution, I for one, have ever considered it, one of the greatest blessings (both for themselves and us) that God ever bestowed upon a favored nation." - John Wilkes Booth, November, 1864, in a letter to his brother-in-law.

And one cannot forget the persecution and forced assimilation of our Native peoples, the so-called 'Indians', mainly at the hands of Anglo-Germanic men, although the Spaniards had already beat them to it centuries earlier.

The Dutch East Indies, the colonies in Indonesia are another example of Nordid intrusion, but yet again Mediterraneans/Latins, the Portugese, beat them to it.


The sixteenth century marked the arrival of the Portuguese, the first Europeans in Indonesia. Although the Portuguese broke the Islamic hold on Indonesia, they were eventually displaced in turn by the Dutch, who named the area the Dutch East Indies. Although a revolt led by Javanese Prince Diponegoro in 1825 briefly threatened Holland's empire, Dutch rule continued until W.W.II and invasion by the Japanese.

Not much needs to be said about Dutch, Belgian and German intrusion into lower regions of Africa, it is well known. In fact I have relatives in the Belgian Congo who could tell me all about it. :)

Here (http://www.flags-by-swi.com/fotw/flags/de-colon.html) is a vexillological approach to German colonies, including a Reichskolonialbund in West Samoa.

The French, arguably on the border between Nordid and Mediterranean though definitely "Latins", had colonies in the Americas, Algeria, Cameroon, Morocco, Guinea, Polynesia.


In 1848, before the age of the 'new imperialism', France already claimed an overseas empire extending from the Americas to Africa and the Indian Ocean. The sole North American possession France retained were the islands of Saint-Pierre and Miguelon off the coast of Newfoundland. Far more important were the West Indian islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe (including several smaller islands, administrative dependencies of Guadeloupe) colonized in the early 1600s, and the vast territory of Guyane on the South American continent.

More on French colonies (http://www.ohiou.edu/~Chastain/dh/frenchco.htm)

Some lesser known colonies are those failed attempts of the English and Irish in Brazil. Another South American colony involving Elizabeth Nietzsche, who took a small group of "pure Aryans" and set sail to Paraguay (http://www.stanford.edu/group/wais/Paraguay/paraguay_NuevaGermanis(090803).html). There they attempted to set up Nuevo Germania, whose inhabitants suffer from several diseases due to inbreeding (they eventually gave up marrying their cousins and opened up the gene pool to Natives). Also the Irish colonies (http://www.tamu.edu/ccbn/dewitt/irishcolcon.htm) of predominantly Mexican Texas in the 1860's-70's.

I'm sure I'm forgetting several.

More info on miscegenation in colonies here (http://www.californianevada.com/african-american-history/jim-mestizo.html).
Brazilian colonial and slavery history here (http://www.brasilemb.org/brazil_usa_colonization.shtml).

Loki
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:50 AM
Also Britain does have a large med population,

No, this is untrue. Britain has a minority Med element (mainly northern Wales and some parts of inner western England), but almost nowhere found in a pure variety. Almost always mixed with Celtic and/or Germanic elements.

Nordgau
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:55 AM
In fact I have relatives in the Belgian Congo who could tell me all about it. :)


Not really a big difference to Detroit, eh? :P

Nordhammer
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 12:31 PM
I have never seen a pure North American Indian, they all have white traits, in Latin America most Armerindians are pure with no white mix.

That's because we call Indians with white admixture Indians, while you call them white. :D

Gesta Bellica
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 12:37 PM
Meds and "Latins" in general. No contest.

Rather than point out the obvious Mediterranean/Latin interracial transgressions (of which there are endless examples), I'll have a go at describing some "Nordish" ones. :)

You can't count Australia as a regular "Nord population" because it population is descended from British convicts, and you know people in jail will have sex with anything - even another species of humanoid which more closely resemble a gorilla in a blond wig. :jk

Americans were spoiled by a land full of natural resources and used to getting what they wanted, and so became lazy and stupidly imported negroes. I don't think initially they were meant to be permanent parts of the landscape, in fact the colony of Liberia was formed as a place to repatriate negroes and Abraham Lincoln had already sent back thousands of them before he was assassinated by a radical Confederate loyalist and ardent supporter of slavery:

For me the contest is all but over...
Interesting point about Australia.. but for the Spanyards South America was nothing but a place where to steal and dominate not surely the promised land or a place where to settle down and start a new life like it was for Anglo-saxons and French in North America.
As a matter of fact Spain sent to the New world pratically only the well known conquistadores (that represented the scum of the spanish socity) and bureaucrats, not surely a good example of spanish people either!!
The only nation that was hugely colonized by Spanyards and later by Italian (with many others) was Argentina (and partly Brazil).
Still if u look at a sample of the argentinian population u will see that the majority is definitely white.
And also all the pro-white nationalist thata re Southamericans all come out from these nations, i wouldn't call it a coincidence.

Med
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 01:02 PM
Nords, of course:

"The United Kingdom has one of the fastest growing mixed-race populations in the world, fuelled by the continuing rise of inter-ethnic relationships."

Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2002/race/changing_face_of_britain.stm

Loki
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 01:32 PM
Nords, of course:

"The United Kingdom has one of the fastest growing mixed-race populations in the world, fuelled by the continuing rise of inter-ethnic relationships."

Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2002/race/changing_face_of_britain.stm

Yes, in modern times I would agree with you on this: currently, northern European nations seem to embrace multiculturalism/mixed relationships the easiest. However, there is method behind the madness:

Psychologically, most northern European nations, including Britain, Germany and Scandinavia are constantly being fed with anti-racism propaganda, which can become very threatening even. I live in London, so I can tell you what is in the newspapers EVERY DAY. You must understand that people are highly influenceable. Only those who are most intelligent can resist such societal pressures, forced upon them against their wills. When even your own police force is branded "institutionally racist", then people start behaving unnaturally, to unconsciously shift the blame from themselves and "clear" the conscience. Race is so deeply embedded in the British psyche, that so many female (and male) weaklings mate across the colour line, just in order to appease what their media and political masters tell them (as well as their employers).

If the race problem was never "addressed" by politicians and the media, I doubt that many Britons would be mixing at all. It is almost accepted here, that racism is a natural unwanted desire that needs to be suppressed. Almost like killing the "evil" part of your inner being; your "dark side".

Nordhammer
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 01:52 PM
It's not merely about intelligence either, I know lots of people who are very gifted, high IQs, that race mix. Most of the time it's Nordish guys with Asians. Although a former friend of mine with a 140 IQ married a Negress with a 95 IQ. He could do calculus but couldn't figure that problem out. :D

Most of the time I think it's about convenience and desperation. Guys who are more introverted and don't go after girls, just take what comes to them. Asian and Hispanic girls approach Nordish guys much more often than Nordish girls.

It's a combination of general intelligence with genetic predispositions, instincts, and experiences.

Loki
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 02:01 PM
It's not merely about intelligence either, I know lots of people who are very gifted, high IQs, that race mix. Most of the time it's Nordish guys with Asians. Although a former friend of mine with a 140 IQ married a Negress with a 95 IQ. He could do calculus but couldn't figure that problem out. :D
.

Well, obviously they can't be that intelligent then. Intelligence is not only measured on IQ tests. There are other, deeper aspects to it too...

Loki
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 02:08 PM
The ultimate purpose of life is, quite simply, seeking a mate and procreate for the perpetuation of their/his/her own kind. If some miss that insight, then they are either deluded, or have some sort of mental deficiency. Or their thought processes/natural instincts have been hindered/influenced by the ills of society and the current ruling classes. The most intelligent people will not lose sight of their ultimate purpose in life, even in the face of the fiercest opposition. That is survival of the fittest.

Let's face it -- we were basically born to have sex and make children. :) This is the same for every species on earth, basically.

Gesta Bellica
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 02:13 PM
The ultimate purpose of life is, quite simply, seeking a mate and procreate for the perpetuation of their/his/her own kind. If some miss that insight, then they are either deluded, or have some sort of mental deficiency. Or their thought processes/natural instincts have been hindered/influenced by the ills of society and the current ruling classes. The most intelligent people will not lose sight of their ultimate purpose in life, even in the face of the fiercest opposition. That is survival of the fittest.

Let's face it -- we were basically born to have sex and make children. :) This is the same for every species on earth, basically.

yes and is not the pure "intelligence" that made us like we are.. it's the heritage of our forefathers, both genetically and culturally.
These are 2 components equally important, if we will lose one of them we won't be ourselves anymore.

Sigrun Christianson
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 05:37 PM
I have never seen a pure North American Indian, they all have white traits, in Latin America most Armerindians are pure with no white mix.
I have, lots of 'em, unless you mean from the States or Canada only. There are quite a few little Indians from Mexico that travel to the Southwestern States for work. I mean pure Indians, not Mestizos. They are the smallest people I've ever seen and they look very different from the usual Mestizo clogging my arteries.

Nordhammer
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 05:59 PM
We rounded up most of our Injuns and put them into reservations. :) They stay within their private communties and most people don't see Indians at all. Too bad the blacks aren't the same way.

Sigrun Christianson
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 06:04 PM
I would vote in your Poll, Nordhammer, but since I have little to no dealings with the Med types, I can't say for sure. I stick to my own. ;)

Nordhammer
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 06:47 PM
I would vote in your Poll, Nordhammer, but since I have little to no dealings with the Med types, I can't say for sure. I stick to my own. ;)

Even better. :)

Dienekes_Pontikos
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 08:15 PM
Psychologically, most northern European nations, including Britain, Germany and Scandinavia are constantly being fed with anti-racism propaganda, which can become very threatening even.


"Propaganda" cannot explain the higher incidence of interracial relationships in northern Europe, since the type of "propaganda" you are referring to exists both in northern and southern Europe.

Loki
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 08:21 PM
"Propaganda" cannot explain the higher incidence of interracial relationships in northern Europe, since the type of "propaganda" you are referring to exists both in northern and southern Europe.

It can explain the higher incidence. For starters, said propaganda (or even further than that -- legislation and accepted behaviour) is much deeper entrenched in northern European countries. Secondly, the politer Nordic character likes to please more easily, and comforms thus to "standards" set by the masters more diligently.

If you have lived in Britain for any length of time, you would know what I mean. There is immense pressure here to comform with race-mixing. It is considered criminal not to do that, actually...

Nordhammer
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 08:24 PM
Are there any interracial marriage statistics available from any European countries?

Dienekes_Pontikos
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 10:31 PM
It can explain the higher incidence. For starters, said propaganda (or even further than that -- legislation and accepted behaviour) is much deeper entrenched in northern European countries.


You are in no position to judge unless you've lived in a southern European country. The rhetoric is the same in both places.


Secondly, the politer Nordic character likes to please more easily, and comforms thus to "standards" set by the masters more diligently.


Indeed, Northern Europeans are more inclined to "accept the rhetoric" than Southern Europeans because of "their character".


=It is considered criminal not to do that, actually...

No one is compelled to marry anyone in free western societies. If Northern Europeans are more willing to accept interracial marriage, then that's due to the fact that, well, they are more willing to accept interracial marriage.

Gesta Bellica
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 10:33 PM
Are there any interracial marriage statistics available from any European countries?

Hmm is still marriage a considerable statistic when in countries like Italy or Spain people are more willing to see it as a value and in Northern Europe there are more couples "de facto" without any legislative link?

Sigrun Christianson
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 10:38 PM
Hmm is still marriage a considerable statistic when in countries like Italy or Spain people are more willing to see it as a value and in Northern Europe there are more couples "de facto" without any legislative link?
I had to read that one a few times before I comprehended it. ;)

Good point. I don't know if Northern Europe has common-law marriages or not. That would make a difference, I suppose.

Tore
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 10:54 PM
I voted 'about the same.'

In my opinion, Meds have historically been more williing to procreate with foreign populations (South America etc.).

Today, it seems that Northern Europeans are more willing to 'race-mix' than their Southern European counterparts.


I have never seen a pure North American Indian, they all have white traits, in Latin America most Armerindians are pure with no white mix.

South American 'Meztizo' population is significantly larger than North American 'Metis' population.

Loki
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:09 PM
You are in no position to judge unless you've lived in a southern European country. The rhetoric is the same in both places.

Then you are also not in a good position to judge northern Europe, living in Greece...

Still I doubt the rhetoric is the same.


No one is compelled to marry anyone in free western societies. If Northern Europeans are more willing to accept interracial marriage, then that's due to the fact that, well, they are more willing to accept interracial marriage.

You are simplifying the whole matter, in order to win the argument. In reality, social complexities are much more tedious to debate. Suffice to say for now that I have good reason to believe that social/governmental pressures towards miscegenation are far worse in England than in Greece. And that I say after having talked to Greek people over here in England...

Phlegethon
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:10 PM
Good point. I don't know if Northern Europe has common-law marriages or not. That would make a difference, I suppose.
Only Texas and a few other backwards U.S. states know a thing called common law marriage. In normal countries you are either married or you are not. Those who are not either live with a partner or they don't. That's it.

Loki
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:13 PM
Only Texas and a few other backwards U.S. states know a thing called common law marriage. In normal countries you are either married or you are not. Those who are not either live with a partner or they don't. That's it.

Common law marriage is actually a legally recognised term in England, and such partners could even claim certain benefits because of that status.

Phlegethon
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:20 PM
States That Recognize Common Law Marriage

Alabama
Colorado
District of Columbia
Georgia (if created before 1/97)
Idaho (if created before 1/96)
Iowa
Kansas
Montana
New Hampshire (for inheritance purposes only)
Ohio (if created before 10/91)
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania (if created before 9/03)
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Utah

Phlegethon
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:26 PM
Common law marriage is actually a legally recognised term in England, and such partners could even claim certain benefits because of that status.
Medieval English legal mumbo-jumbo that is very unlikely to fly in nowadays courts.

Sigrun Christianson
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:30 PM
Only Texas and a few other backwards U.S. states know a thing called common law marriage. In normal countries you are either married or you are not. Those who are not either live with a partner or they don't. That's it.I don't know your definition of 'backwards', but only a few of the states you listed would make my 'backwards' list. And did you notice that the states you listed are some of the most "Christian" states in the union, Herr Arbitor-of-Backwards? ;)

Sigrun Christianson
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:35 PM
Medieval English legal mumbo-jumbo that is very unlikely to fly in nowadays courts.
Legal partnerships, whether called common law or not, are recognised in many nations in terms of finances, health coverage, and child support.

Phlegethon
Sunday, November 9th, 2003, 11:57 PM
The only form of legal partnerships in normal countries is marriage, If you're not married you can forget all of the above in Europe.

Dienekes_Pontikos
Monday, November 10th, 2003, 12:57 AM
Then you are also not in a good position to judge northern Europe, living in Greece...

Still I doubt the rhetoric is the same.


Incorrect. I live in the US at the moment. I doubt that northern Europe is different from the US in the respect of "rhetoric"; indeed, the US is the biggest exporter of the "race doesn't exist/multi-culturalism" rhetoric.

Even if we assume that there is more "pressure" in northern European societies, that is also indicative of the attitude gap between northern and southern Europeans. After all, politicians are themselves part of the European population.


You are simplifying the whole matter, in order to win the argument. In reality, social complexities are much more tedious to debate. Suffice to say for now that I have good reason to believe that social/governmental pressures towards miscegenation are far worse in England than in Greece. And that I say after having talked to Greek people over here in England...

I repeat that you have no way of asserting that, since you have no knowledge of Greek reality. Irrespective, how exactly does the goverment/society "pressure" people to "miscegenate"? Provide some actual examples.

Nordhammer
Monday, November 10th, 2003, 09:31 AM
Hmm is still marriage a considerable statistic when in countries like Italy or Spain people are more willing to see it as a value and in Northern Europe there are more couples "de facto" without any legislative link?

I'm just trying to get some statistics on interracial pairings, usually this only exists for marriage.

Nordhammer
Monday, November 10th, 2003, 09:37 AM
Then you are also not in a good position to judge northern Europe, living in Greece...

Still I doubt the rhetoric is the same.



You are simplifying the whole matter, in order to win the argument. In reality, social complexities are much more tedious to debate. Suffice to say for now that I have good reason to believe that social/governmental pressures towards miscegenation are far worse in England than in Greece. And that I say after having talked to Greek people over here in England...

There certainly is a difference with the USA in that regard. Most of the rhetoric originates from here, even the Holocaust crap, which is funny considering it didn't even happen in America. Of course it's because we have the largest population of Jews in the world. Let's dump all the Jews into Greece and see what happens.


@Dienekes

What's the matter, Dienekes, Greece not prosperous enough for you? You don't like being with your own people? How's California life treating you?

Nordhammer
Monday, November 10th, 2003, 09:43 AM
I don't know your definition of 'backwards', but only a few of the states you listed would make my 'backwards' list. And did you notice that the states you listed are some of the most "Christian" states in the union, Herr Arbitor-of-Backwards? ;)

What is your definition of backwards?

One of mine would certainly be a nonwhite majority. :)

Gesta Bellica
Monday, November 10th, 2003, 09:59 AM
I had to read that one a few times before I comprehended it. ;)

Good point. I don't know if Northern Europe has common-law marriages or not. That would make a difference, I suppose.

yeah sorry my english is not certainly perfect..
anyway i wanted just to grab your attention to the different meaning that Marriage have in SE and in NE.
I just don't think that statistics about marriage will reflects the inclination to race-mixing

Loki
Monday, November 10th, 2003, 10:01 PM
Incorrect. I live in the US at the moment. I doubt that northern Europe is different from the US in the respect of "rhetoric"; indeed, the US is the biggest exporter of the "race doesn't exist/multi-culturalism" rhetoric.

It is amazing how only these three lines have completely destroyed any credibility your argument must have had. Firstly, being American even disqualifies you from having any sense of objectivity regarding Europe. And I don't think this statement of mine is awfully extreme. Secondly, there is a VAST difference between northern Europe and America. I don't even know where to start...


Even if we assume that there is more "pressure" in northern European societies, that is also indicative of the attitude gap between northern and southern Europeans. After all, politicians are themselves part of the European population.

To limit the north-south differences to an "attitude gap" is getting off lightly. There is not only an attitude gap, but a wealth gap, a stability gap, a civilization gap and even a literacy gap.


I repeat that you have no way of asserting that, since you have no knowledge of Greek reality. .

And I repeat that you have even less way of asserting your claims. I live in Europe -- you live in America.


Irrespective, how exactly does the goverment/society "pressure" people to "miscegenate"? Provide some actual examples

I have plenty of examples I can give you. But it might take a while to dig all out, and I am in a hurry. Just wished I had the time to type out all rubbish that appears on the daily newspapers here. You might be shocked.

friedrich braun
Monday, November 10th, 2003, 10:42 PM
You would have to provide a source for the fact that Elizabeth Forster-Nietzsche's colony suffered because folks married their "cousins". I'm skeptical that this happened to a great extent in so short a time-span. It's sounds like Jew propaganda to me (her husband was a notorious anti-Semite). The colony collapsed very early on because it lacked money. Period. And not because of endogamy. The Hassidic Jews marry their cousins as a matter of fact and they've done so for centuries; while they do have some health problems (see Tay Sachs disease) at a greater rate than the general population -- they've never been tempted by exogamy as a solution to that particular "problem", and they continue to thrive as a highly successful community.


Meds and "Latins" in general. No contest.

Rather than point out the obvious Mediterranean/Latin interracial transgressions (of which there are endless examples), I'll have a go at describing some "Nordish" ones. :)

You can't count Australia as a regular "Nord population" because it population is descended from British convicts, and you know people in jail will have sex with anything - even another species of humanoid which more closely resemble a gorilla in a blond wig. :jk

Americans were spoiled by a land full of natural resources and used to getting what they wanted, and so became lazy and stupidly imported negroes. I don't think initially they were meant to be permanent parts of the landscape, in fact the colony of Liberia was formed as a place to repatriate negroes and Abraham Lincoln had already sent back thousands of them before he was assassinated by a radical Confederate loyalist and ardent supporter of slavery:


"This country was formed for the white not for the black man. And looking upon African slavery from the same stand-point, as held by those noble framers of our Constitution, I for one, have ever considered it, one of the greatest blessings (both for themselves and us) that God ever bestowed upon a favored nation." - John Wilkes Booth, November, 1864, in a letter to his brother-in-law.

And one cannot forget the persecution and forced assimilation of our Native peoples, the so-called 'Indians', mainly at the hands of Anglo-Germanic men, although the Spaniards had already beat them to it centuries earlier.

The Dutch East Indies, the colonies in Indonesia are another example of Nordid intrusion, but yet again Mediterraneans/Latins, the Portugese, beat them to it.


The sixteenth century marked the arrival of the Portuguese, the first Europeans in Indonesia. Although the Portuguese broke the Islamic hold on Indonesia, they were eventually displaced in turn by the Dutch, who named the area the Dutch East Indies. Although a revolt led by Javanese Prince Diponegoro in 1825 briefly threatened Holland's empire, Dutch rule continued until W.W.II and invasion by the Japanese.

Not much needs to be said about Dutch, Belgian and German intrusion into lower regions of Africa, it is well known. In fact I have relatives in the Belgian Congo who could tell me all about it. :)

Here (http://www.flags-by-swi.com/fotw/flags/de-colon.html) is a vexillological approach to German colonies, including a Reichskolonialbund in West Samoa.

The French, arguably on the border between Nordid and Mediterranean though definitely "Latins", had colonies in the Americas, Algeria, Cameroon, Morocco, Guinea, Polynesia.


In 1848, before the age of the 'new imperialism', France already claimed an overseas empire extending from the Americas to Africa and the Indian Ocean. The sole North American possession France retained were the islands of Saint-Pierre and Miguelon off the coast of Newfoundland. Far more important were the West Indian islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe (including several smaller islands, administrative dependencies of Guadeloupe) colonized in the early 1600s, and the vast territory of Guyane on the South American continent.

More on French colonies (http://www.ohiou.edu/~Chastain/dh/frenchco.htm)

Some lesser known colonies are those failed attempts of the English and Irish in Brazil. Another South American colony involving Elizabeth Nietzsche, who took a small group of "pure Aryans" and set sail to Paraguay (http://www.stanford.edu/group/wais/Paraguay/paraguay_NuevaGermanis(090803).html). There they attempted to set up Nuevo Germania, whose inhabitants suffer from several diseases due to inbreeding (they eventually gave up marrying their cousins and opened up the gene pool to Natives). Also the Irish colonies (http://www.tamu.edu/ccbn/dewitt/irishcolcon.htm) of predominantly Mexican Texas in the 1860's-70's.

I'm sure I'm forgetting several.

More info on miscegenation in colonies here (http://www.californianevada.com/african-american-history/jim-mestizo.html).
Brazilian colonial and slavery history here (http://www.brasilemb.org/brazil_usa_colonization.shtml).

friedrich braun
Monday, November 10th, 2003, 11:23 PM
Nords, of course:

"The United Kingdom has one of the fastest growing mixed-race populations in the world, fuelled by the continuing rise of inter-ethnic relationships."

Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2002/race/changing_face_of_britain.stm

Usually, the author of such an anti-British article is East Indian. Well, I don't see why the author of the article makes a point of saying that Britain cannot any longer be a "Whites only" nation (and why not?). ENGLAND FOR THE ENGLISH!!! England was virtually all White before WW II and it didn't do too badly. The sun never set on the British Empire, and a handful of sturdy and beef-eating Englishmen dominated/subjugated hundreds of millions of Hindus and Muslims inhabiting the Indian sub-continent. All it takes is for Whites to stop actively and cheerfully participating in their own self-destruction. Mass repartitions and deportations are a distinct possibility if there's the political will on the part of the White majority (for how much longer?) to implement such a policy of racial self-preservation. If Hindus and other racial parasites and invaders find the English fight for survival "repugnant", then I would strongly advocate their speedy emigration to their paradisiacal countries of origin. After all, the PJB openly propagandizes for the removal of all non-Hindus from India (especially Muslims). The Hindus et al. can do whatever the hell they want on their own land (wasn't that the whole point of de-colonization?); ergo, the English should be entitled to do the same in England, no? Seems fair and reasonable to me. The Hindus and other Asiatic and other "minorites" are racial aliens and "guests" (although, the designation of "invaders" is more apt and accurate), and should act accordingly. Nevertheless, the real problem resides of course in the White majority's pusillanimity and its apparent acquiescence in its own racial death. All those “anti-racist” laws and boards and committees, etc. ad infinitum and ad nauseam, are in fact used my the invading Third World riff raff fleeing failed polities (such as the chaotic and anarchic cesspool of India, for e.g.) to their advantage, and to the detriment of the indigenous population. Unless the English wake up to the situation and take appropriate measures, i.e., massive expulsions, England will cease to be England. England’s heart pumps English blood, and only a naïve bleeding heart fool would think that if you replace old-stock Englishmen by the Bangladeshi (for e.g.) you’ll still have the England in any meaningful way. There are commentators and authors, here and in Europe, who actually think that Whites have a real death wish, since Whites are the only people in the world who seem to be happily sauntering toward the racial guillotine and ultimate oblivion – and out of sheer misplaced “altruism” and “guilt” (obviously the role of the Jews in the West has been decisive and instrumental in fostering and promoting these psychological pathologies amongst Whites, this has been well documented by many writers and thinkers and I won’t get into it now, see Prof. Kevin MacDonald's trilogy on the Jews: http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/books.htm). But I don’t know. Maybe. Probably. The jury is still out (not for much longer, though) if Whites' death march is indeed irreversible.

Jews are the biggest advocates of immigartion and miscegenation.

NO WAY OUT BUT THROUGH THE JEW!

Dienekes_Pontikos
Tuesday, November 11th, 2003, 01:07 AM
Firstly, being American even disqualifies you from having any sense of objectivity regarding Europe. And I don't think this statement of mine is awfully extreme. Secondly, there is a VAST difference between northern Europe and America. I don't even know where to start...


I'm not American. I just happen to have knowledge of both the US and Europe, unlike you, having lived in both continents for years.

Start wherever you want, but make sure to indicate how the differences are relevant to the issue at hand.


To limit the north-south differences to an "attitude gap" is getting off lightly. There is not only an attitude gap, but a wealth gap, a stability gap, a civilization gap and even a literacy gap.


There are lots of gaps, but your list says nothing about the issue at hand.


I have plenty of examples I can give you. But it might take a while to dig all out, and I am in a hurry. Just wished I had the time to type out all rubbish that appears on the daily newspapers here. You might be shocked.

Ok, I can wait.

Loki
Tuesday, November 11th, 2003, 07:54 AM
I'm not American. I just happen to have knowledge of both the US and Europe, unlike you, having lived in both continents for years.

Have you ever lived in northern Europe?


Ok, I can wait.

Thank you. I am sure to get back to you - perhaps this weekend.

Sigrun Christianson
Tuesday, November 11th, 2003, 01:30 PM
Have you ever lived in northern Europe?
Have you ever lived in America?

Louky
Tuesday, November 11th, 2003, 02:38 PM
I voted "Nords" because the northern Euros are like the profligate rich who throw their money (genes) away after trifles and to look trendy. Hopefully our "lemmings" will wake up before we're all in the genetic poorhouse.

Loki
Tuesday, November 11th, 2003, 07:13 PM
Have you ever lived in America?

No, but it is irrelevant to the conversation whether I lived in America or not. The question here is northern Europe VS southern Europe.

Loki
Tuesday, November 11th, 2003, 07:16 PM
Hello Dienekes,

I have one article already to back up my claims, but I am sorry to say that it is not a positive one from a preservationist point of view. I fear Greece is now going to receive exactly the same "anti-racism" measures that northern Europe has had for a while now... :(

http://www.guardian.co.uk/farright/story/0,11981,1082337,00.html

Greece tackles its image as a state of racists

Poll underlines urgency of anti-discrimination bill

Helena Smith in Athens
Tuesday November 11, 2003
The Guardian

Greeks found guilty of discriminating against religious or ethnic groups will face up to a year in prison under legislation presented by the Athens government in attempts to quash a rise in racist incidents.
The measure, included in a new anti-discrimination law, follows a rash of confrontations with the growing immigrant population. One attack prompted a protest by Pakistani migrants in Athens.

"This is a law whose aim is to try to guarantee the equal treatment of all people," said the justice minister, Philippos Petsalnikos. "More work needs to be done to ensure the smooth integration of immigrant communities."

The bill, which aims to bring Greece in line with EU anti-discrimination standards, is expected to be approved by the Socialist-dominated parliament before the end of the year.

Coming on the day in which the Simon Wiesenthal Centre issued a travel advisory to Jews thinking of visiting Greece in the wake of a spate of anti-semitic incidents, the poll revealed evidence of Greeks being the most xenophobic people in Europe.

The poll, commissioned by the European Social Survey, showed most Greeks believed immigrants caused unemployment. More than 79% said they should be deported if caught committing a crime. By contrast, only 41% of Britons held the same views.

More than 10% of Greece's 11 million-strong population are thought to be immigrants. Although the vast majority are Albanians, increasing numbers have begun to arrive, illegally, from the developing world.

With Greece's proximity to the Middle East, most say they see the country as the easiest backdoor entrance to Fortress Europe.

But human rights activists say "institutionalised intolerance" is such that the state has failed to assimilate the immigrants adequately, despite pledges to give many of them work and residence permits.

The new law follows a rash of embarrassing incidents over the treatment of immigrants, including the refusal of state-run hospitals to offer them healthcare. While the media, politicians and church leaders regularly indulge in racist invective, classified ads in Athens frequently state "no foreigners" for home rentals.

An Albanian boy, whose top grades had earned him the right to carry the Greek flag at a national parade, was prevented from doing so after nationalist protests.

At least 25% of pupils in Greek schools are believed to be the children of immigrants, according to polls.

Last week the Pakistani owner of a video store was badly beaten, along with a Pakistani bystander, by about 20 youths on motorcycles outside his Athens shop.

The xenophobic attitudes have been increasingly blamed on the absence of a civil society in Greece and the lack of an anti-racist education in a country where children are still taught to take immense pride in their "ethnic purity".

"It's not that Greeks are implicitly racist, they have just never been taught anything different," said Panayote Dimitras of the the Greek Helsinki Monitor.

"Greece is at the point where most democratic European countries were before the second world war."

While human rights groups welcomed the anti-discrimination bill, they questioned whether the country's ultraconservative judges and prosecutors would be prepared to implement it. "It's an important step but by itself it means nothing if the courts don't change their mentality and are allowed to ignore it with impunity," Mr Dimitras said.

Immigrants under siege

· Many villages impose night-time curfews on immigrants' movements, with some communities setting up vigilante groups to enforce the restrictions. There have also been incidents of border guards shooting at Albanians trying to enter the country

· Greek newspapers often carry anti-semitic, anti-Albanian and anti-immigrant letters and headlines. Jewish cemeteries have been desecrated. Greece's 120,000-strong Turkish Muslim minority often complains of discrimination

· Courts invariably refuse to prosecute cases involving racial hatred or incitement to violence

· Hospitals regularly refuse to treat immigrants

· Immigrant school children - accounting for 25% of pupils across Greece - are not allowed to take lead roles in national parades

Louky
Tuesday, November 11th, 2003, 10:32 PM
:worried :sad :worried

friedrich braun
Wednesday, November 12th, 2003, 01:17 AM
It seems that the Greeks might get the untold benefits of "re-education" promoting multiculturalism, multiracialism, miscegenation, self-loathing, mass immigration and so on and so forth. Of course, Northern countries have been subjected to this Orwellian brainwashing hate-fest for about 60 years. Let's see how Greece will look in a couple of decades.


Hello Dienekes,

I have one article already to back up my claims, but I am sorry to say that it is not a positive one from a preservationist point of view. I fear Greece is now going to receive exactly the same "anti-racism" measures that northern Europe has had for a while now... :(

http://www.guardian.co.uk/farright/story/0,11981,1082337,00.html

Greece tackles its image as a state of racists

Poll underlines urgency of anti-discrimination bill

Helena Smith in Athens
Tuesday November 11, 2003
The Guardian

Greeks found guilty of discriminating against religious or ethnic groups will face up to a year in prison under legislation presented by the Athens government in attempts to quash a rise in racist incidents.
The measure, included in a new anti-discrimination law, follows a rash of confrontations with the growing immigrant population. One attack prompted a protest by Pakistani migrants in Athens.

"This is a law whose aim is to try to guarantee the equal treatment of all people," said the justice minister, Philippos Petsalnikos. "More work needs to be done to ensure the smooth integration of immigrant communities."

The bill, which aims to bring Greece in line with EU anti-discrimination standards, is expected to be approved by the Socialist-dominated parliament before the end of the year.

Coming on the day in which the Simon Wiesenthal Centre issued a travel advisory to Jews thinking of visiting Greece in the wake of a spate of anti-semitic incidents, the poll revealed evidence of Greeks being the most xenophobic people in Europe.

The poll, commissioned by the European Social Survey, showed most Greeks believed immigrants caused unemployment. More than 79% said they should be deported if caught committing a crime. By contrast, only 41% of Britons held the same views.

More than 10% of Greece's 11 million-strong population are thought to be immigrants. Although the vast majority are Albanians, increasing numbers have begun to arrive, illegally, from the developing world.

With Greece's proximity to the Middle East, most say they see the country as the easiest backdoor entrance to Fortress Europe.

But human rights activists say "institutionalised intolerance" is such that the state has failed to assimilate the immigrants adequately, despite pledges to give many of them work and residence permits.

The new law follows a rash of embarrassing incidents over the treatment of immigrants, including the refusal of state-run hospitals to offer them healthcare. While the media, politicians and church leaders regularly indulge in racist invective, classified ads in Athens frequently state "no foreigners" for home rentals.

An Albanian boy, whose top grades had earned him the right to carry the Greek flag at a national parade, was prevented from doing so after nationalist protests.

At least 25% of pupils in Greek schools are believed to be the children of immigrants, according to polls.

Last week the Pakistani owner of a video store was badly beaten, along with a Pakistani bystander, by about 20 youths on motorcycles outside his Athens shop.

The xenophobic attitudes have been increasingly blamed on the absence of a civil society in Greece and the lack of an anti-racist education in a country where children are still taught to take immense pride in their "ethnic purity".

"It's not that Greeks are implicitly racist, they have just never been taught anything different," said Panayote Dimitras of the the Greek Helsinki Monitor.

"Greece is at the point where most democratic European countries were before the second world war."

While human rights groups welcomed the anti-discrimination bill, they questioned whether the country's ultraconservative judges and prosecutors would be prepared to implement it. "It's an important step but by itself it means nothing if the courts don't change their mentality and are allowed to ignore it with impunity," Mr Dimitras said.

Immigrants under siege

· Many villages impose night-time curfews on immigrants' movements, with some communities setting up vigilante groups to enforce the restrictions. There have also been incidents of border guards shooting at Albanians trying to enter the country

· Greek newspapers often carry anti-semitic, anti-Albanian and anti-immigrant letters and headlines. Jewish cemeteries have been desecrated. Greece's 120,000-strong Turkish Muslim minority often complains of discrimination

· Courts invariably refuse to prosecute cases involving racial hatred or incitement to violence

· Hospitals regularly refuse to treat immigrants

· Immigrant school children - accounting for 25% of pupils across Greece - are not allowed to take lead roles in national parades

Evolved
Wednesday, November 12th, 2003, 07:41 AM
Let's see how Greece will look in a couple of decades.

Assimilating Pakis into Greece racially? Looks and sounds easy enough.. :D

Let's take four of the most important features in terms of appearance: hair colour, eye colour, eye shape, skin colour. Hair colour = by averaging out, we would get a dark brown colour. Eye colour = dark brown colour. Eye shape = Negrids and Europids have similar eye shapes and they would dominate over the Mongolids. Skin colour = Europids and Mongolids are light-coloured, Negrids are dark-coloured. True blacks are not that many. Therefore, by averaging out, we would get a Mediterranean, olive colour. Thus, you see that the average human is indeed Mediterranean-looking. - Dienekes Pontikos

galvez
Wednesday, November 12th, 2003, 08:45 AM
Nords, of course:

"The United Kingdom has one of the fastest growing mixed-race populations in the world, fuelled by the continuing rise of inter-ethnic relationships."

Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2002/race/changing_face_of_britain.stm

I agree. Virtually all of the interracial daters I have known have been Nordics rather than Meds. A neighbor of mine is a Germanic-looking fellow with an Asian wife and children.

Look at Nicole Kidman, who is dating the mulatto Lenny Kravitz. While the Nordniks harp on the mixing by the Spanish and Portuguese colonists, Kidman is probably getting slammed by that mongrel as they type away. Of course attacking Meds won't change the fact that tens of thousands of blonde girls are dating Blacks and mestizos in America.

friedrich braun
Wednesday, November 12th, 2003, 09:16 AM
Virtually all of the interracial daters I have known have been Nordics rather than Meds. A neighbor of mine is a Germanic-looking fellow with an Asian wife and children.


Well, that's, like, really compelling evidence right there, dude!

An anecdote here, a celebrity there....

"Data" is not the plural of little vignettes.

But anyway, what do you care what happens to Nords? Another instance of crocodile tears from a Med?

Evolved
Wednesday, November 12th, 2003, 09:24 AM
Kidman is probably getting slammed by that mongrel as they type away.

It sounds like you're gloating over this fact, or even enjoying the thought. Why don't you keep your filth to yourself?

galvez
Wednesday, November 12th, 2003, 09:35 AM
Well, that's, like, really compelling evidence right there, dude!

An anecdote here, a celebrity there....

"Data" is not the plural of little vignettes.

But anyway, what do you care what happens to Nords? Another instance of crocodile tears from a Med?

I see I have ruffled some Nordnik feathers.

I do care about what happens to Nords -- they should STOP racemixing with non-Whites. But -- and this is likely to go right past you -- bashing Meds will only serve to alienate potential allies. If it were up to me the Lenny Kravitzes would be sterilized.

Also, yes, I am guilty of depending on my life experience and intuition to form my beliefs. But they can be backed up with evidence -- like the link Medhammer provided.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2002/race/changing_face_of_britain.stm

I will defend Slavs and Nords even when they bash my group. I see you folks as a tiny minority among racialists anyway.

Nordhammer
Wednesday, November 12th, 2003, 11:01 AM
I see I have ruffled some Nordnik feathers.

I do care about what happens to Nords -- they should STOP racemixing with non-Whites. But -- and this is likely to go right past you -- bashing Meds will only serve to alienate potential allies. If it were up to me the Lenny Kravitzes would be sterilized.

Any kind of discrimination will alienate the person, but this is part of the goal afterall. We want to alienate certain types of people from others.

I think your comments have become overly vulgar and you should really keep such things to yourself.



Also, yes, I am guilty of depending on my life experience and intuition to form my beliefs. But they can be backed up with evidence -- like the link Medhammer provided.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2002/race/changing_face_of_britain.stm

I will defend Slavs and Nords even when they bash my group. I see you folks as a tiny minority among racialists anyway.

Well, I have yet to see that. You have already said Nords are not your ingroup.

You might be surprised, more people are sympathetic to the Nordish concept than you think. But, like racialism as a whole, it's controversial and people avoid it.

Louky
Wednesday, November 12th, 2003, 11:51 AM
You might be surprised, more people are sympathetic to the Nordish concept than you think.

I see now that separation is necessary for peace as well as preservation, even among White groups.

Dienekes_Pontikos
Wednesday, November 12th, 2003, 12:02 PM
I fear Greece is now going to receive exactly the same "anti-racism" measures that northern Europe has had for a while now... :(


Thanks for your concern, but fear not for our future. This is truly small change compared to the other crises that we've faced in the >3,500-long history of continuous occupation of our part of the world.

Loki
Wednesday, November 12th, 2003, 12:58 PM
Thanks for your concern, but fear not for our future. This is truly small change compared to the other crises that we've faced in the >3,500-long history of continuous occupation of our part of the world.

I hope you are right.

galvez
Thursday, November 13th, 2003, 12:16 AM
Well, I have yet to see that. You have already said Nords are not your ingroup.

I believe all Euro groups should be preserved. I also think that Euros who choose to mix with one another in a pan-European state can do so as well; and I imagine that it will be very vibrant. I like the ideas proposed by MX Rienzi of Legion Europa. To recap:

1. Nords can stay with Nords.
2. Meds can stay with Meds.
3. Other Euros can stay within their own groups.
4. Those who wish to be a part of a pan-Euro state are free to do so, providing that they qualify.

It is still too early to tell if the Euro nations can be preserved as in the past. It may be that for many -- due to liberalism and mass immigration/miscegenation -- for pragmatic reasons no. 4 will be the only solution. Still, those Nords who wish to preserve the Nordic phenotype are free to do so.

I am open on no. 4. If I am to live in a pan-Euro state -- out of some necessity -- I will then consider other Euros a part of my in-group.

FadeTheButcher
Friday, December 19th, 2003, 06:45 AM
The amount of race-mixing that went on during antiquity and the Middle Ages is NOTHING compared to the amount of race-mixing that goes on today in places like Germany, Great Britain, and the United States. Furthermore, as has been pointed out in this thread, North Americans are hardly innocent with regards to race-mixing either, just consider for a moment the sheer amount of white admixture into the Negro population in America. Then again, in North America, the color barrier was much greater than it was between Latins and Amerinds in Latin America. I would also say that religion has played more of a difference than the Nordic/Mediterranean distinction. Southern Europeans during the colonial era were generally Catholic whereas Northern Europeans were generally Protestant. Religious animosity is one of the greatest barriers to race-mixing known to man. It went a long way towards distancing the Christian population from Jews, Moslems, and other nonwhites during the Middle Ages, however imperfect. Atheism, however, strikes me as being associated with race-mixing. The more atheist the population the higher the amount of race-mixing seems to go on.

friedrich braun
Sunday, December 21st, 2003, 04:29 AM
Of course, most race mixing occurred, and is still occurring, in Latin America.

Gesta Bellica
Tuesday, December 23rd, 2003, 05:51 PM
Of course, most race mixing occurred, and is still occurring, in Latin America.

of course this is all to prove, in Argentina where the white meds were not the overwhelming minority (like in the rest of the countries) u can find pure white people with 100% european traits, no less than in the USA