PDA

View Full Version : The Environmentalist Argument for Preserving Europeans



OneEnglishNorman
Sunday, September 17th, 2006, 09:41 AM
http://www.lioncrusher.com/images/tiger_white.jpghttp://www.worldalmanacforkids.com/images/panda.jpg

I believe that an "environmentalist" case can be made to "Joe Public" for strategies to maintain the European lines, unmixed.

If the Germans/Italians/English/Swedes/etc were Pandas or Whales they would be conserved.

Were an animal species facing similar obliteration, public outcry would demand action. Therefore it is hypocritical to deny the same to Europeans. At the very least, it is hypocritical for European governments not to allow or create "whites only" territories.

I believe that this will be approached as a conservation issue. Possibly firstly in Sweden, where 12% of the population are foreign. Forgetting the "nazism" and KKK and other connotations; even the politically dis-interested will have to confront the question, later in this Century, is it desirable or not that Europeans are obliterated by integration?

Not a question of 10,000 foreigners out of 10 million; that could be dismissed as small-mindedness. But a concrete and unavoidable question; do I (Joe Public) think that whites should survive into the future? People will ask themselves this, as even the non-urban refuges are threatened.

Phrased like this, as a conservation issue, similar to preserving whales, tigers and other species, it will make people think hard.

http://www.cap-soleil-maurice.com/faune/img/dodo01.jpg

Pervitinist
Monday, September 18th, 2006, 12:01 AM
...
Were an animal species facing similar obliteration, public outcry would demand action. Therefore it is hypocritical to deny the same to Europeans. At the very least, it is hypocritical for European governments not to allow or create "whites only" territories.
...
Phrased like this, as a conservation issue, similar to preserving whales, tigers and other species, it will make people think hard.


What has become of white man? I remember a time (at least from history books) when people (white people of course) were speculating that negroes would some day become extinct due to their cultural inferiority and when whole continents were conquered and colonized by scores of young, healthy, optimistic European settlers.

And now we are talking about preservation! I fear this truly might the beginning of the end. Shall we or our children end up in Zoos where the mixed-racial standard humanoids of the future throw us a few peanuts (or hand us a spoonful of Sauerkraut)?

I think we shouldn't be talking about preservation and conservation here but about how we can finally go into the offensive again and expand rather than retreat.

An economical analogy might be in place here. A company that merely consolidates its share of the market is likely to be overtaken by other companies that manage to expand theirs. White people need no WWF protection. They must simply believe in their own future again.

Kaiser
Monday, September 18th, 2006, 08:38 AM
The dichotomy of the White race is one of both a certain superiority over all other races firmly entrenched with a self destructive, even suicidal gene. Lemming-like, we willing leap headfirst over the evolutionary cliff face making way for lesser developed humanoid species. Furthermore, Whites are cajoled by perhaps the most racially aware and self-preserving human stock known to mankind, the jew, into committing fratricidal wars against fellow Whites in the guise of defending arbitrary lines on a map or sometimes in promoting obscure variations in political self-governance.
Whites are further brainwashed into not only maintaining a much lower birth rate, rather, creating an environment where third-world non-white breeders flourish at an astounding rate. In most White nations, these same White's children are passed by in favor of subsidizing non-white children in myriad social programs and even in promoting the non-white's children's parents into better employment and economic statuses than they otherwise could naturally could possibly obtain. The most bizarre observation here is that this racial destruction of the White race is not only happening despite White intervention, but due mostly to White's subsidizing their own demise!
We are far from "going on the offensive" in any sense of the term at this historical juncture. Furthermore, with the miscegenation of Whites with non-whites, we are as a species willingly destroying ourselves genetically through counter productive sex acts as well. If a serious study of telegony were applied to White reproduction as it is amongst purist breeders of animals, evidence of our genetic destruction due to inter-racial sex acts may prove to be even more deleterious toward our survival as a distinct Folk than we currently are aware of.
In nature, predation, adaptation, and variances help to weed out weaker species of animals from the plane of competition with other animals. Natural selection often provides a more superior creature as time rolls inevitably on. Observation provides mounds of empirical data where this course of purification is not only present, but most often healthy in the animal world for most species as a whole. Yet, if we were to step back and look at the White as a viable competitor in the quest for human racial development, we would find many members of our species unnaturally diseased; they are riddled with a perverse desire to commit racial suicide-genocide against their own cultural well being.
If first providing an All White zone on this planet helps us to survive long enough to weed out the demented amongst our species in order to then go on this proposed offensive, then I am certainly all for it. I am tired of living with the savages of the jungle anyway.

Aistulf
Monday, September 18th, 2006, 10:06 AM
Another environmentalist argument for preserving Europeans (Europids) would be that they [Europeans] have the best reputation for preserving environment itself; as I don't recall the Chinese, Arabs and/or (sub-Saharan) negroes - to just name a few - to treat animals so greatly, for instance.

Kaiser
Monday, September 18th, 2006, 11:17 AM
Bingo! In fact, Hitler not only respected animals as a vegan, he developed a park system which is yet to be rivaled by even the most successful western nations of modern times.

It is the Aryan way to respect nature and harness her forces for useful purposes. It is the Aryan way to respect animals, even those whom we harvest for food and clothing. It is even the Aryan way to respect all forms of life to include sub-humanoids more so than they even respect their own kind.

Should and Aryan see a black baby covered in ants, obviously suffering, in the wilds of africa, he would either try to render medical aid or at least seek out a humane method of ending its misery. Even if there was no ability or time to help this creature, most Aryans would still feel a tinge of sympathy toward this baby animal.
Yet a black negroid merely from a rival tribe may not only not help the innocent baby or feel empathy for its own kind; the negroid actually revels in the cruelty displayed. This is why cannibalistic thugs become such worshiped dictators in africa.

Another phenomenon to be noted, as relayed by an American trucker is the observance that everything around blacks decays and dies. This trucker could be traveling through empty city streets in the wee hours of the morning with no pedestrians present and still determine the race of the inhabitants for that particular metropolitan quadrant. It wasn't the gangbanger graffiti, litter, and the dilapidation of the homes he noticed so much (along with a proliferation of liquor stores and fried chicken shacks I might add); it was the trees he noticed!

Everywhere there lives negroids the trees, bushes, shrubs, grass, and parks had dead, dying, and sickly looking flora. Now, the liberal White will exclaim that this is due to the poor black being downtrodden by mean old whitey therfore he doesn't get to afford adequate irrigation which causes this strange phenomenon. I think not. I know plenty of markedly poor Whites whose homes, yards, and parks are not only impeccable, but rather verdant never-the-less.

Therefore, besides for the good of the White Folk, negroids, and all races for that matter to benefit, but for the flora and fauna of this planet to develop as well, it is in all our best interests to promote Aryan ideals and dominance of this world.

OneEnglishNorman
Monday, September 18th, 2006, 07:38 PM
The other key aspect about an environmentalist argument, is that it can introduce people not ordinarily concerned about race, to the concept.

Talk of conserving rainforests, animals is already common currency.

And to a lesser extent, the ethnic cleansing at this very moment in Darfur with the Arabs vs the Africans. Or respecting the habitat of primitive tribespeople.

Whether you agree with those points is irrelevant; what matters is that these arguments are already ingrained in the popular consciousness across the Western world.

So to think positively for a moment, perhaps the environmentalists are already laying the intellectual groundwork for future race preservers. Worth thinking about and bearing in mind.

Pervitinist
Monday, September 18th, 2006, 09:39 PM
Whether you agree with those points is irrelevant; what matters is that these arguments are already ingrained in the popular consciousness across the Western world.

I think you're too optimistic about the (usually leftist) environmentalists. Because of their perverted instincts and double standards they will always care more for dogs, cats and big-eyed negro babies than for their fellow Europeans. No chance that they will ever be interested in preserving their own race. By preservation, people commonly understand preservation of primitive, atavistic, pathetic lifeforms. Aren't Europeans the exact opposite? :|


So to think positively for a moment, perhaps the environmentalists are already laying the intellectual groundwork for future race preservers. Worth thinking about and bearing in mind.

Maybe, but I still think that we can only preserve our race by further expanding our habitat while purifying it at the same time. Retreating to some remote "Germanic Park" is complete nonsense and would do us no good - and who can guarantee that all the others will not simply follow us?

OneEnglishNorman
Monday, September 18th, 2006, 10:08 PM
I agree that the environmentalists are childish, irrational and leftist.

But the arguments they make about conservation are picked up by politicians of all shades, and enter the political climate. So whether we disagree with them is not important, what is important is that pro-conservation notions are entering public conciousness.

If people generally feel neutral or positive towards protecting tigers or wildlife habitats, it is not a large leap towards hijacking those feelings in the direction of racial protectionism.

Pervitinist
Monday, September 18th, 2006, 10:43 PM
But the arguments they make about conservation are picked up by politicians of all shades, and enter the political climate. So whether we disagree with them is not important, what is important is that pro-conservation notions are entering public conciousness.

Well ... ok, I'm a bit slow today but I think I got your point :)


If people generally feel neutral or positive towards protecting tigers or wildlife habitats, it is not a large leap towards hijacking those feelings in the direction of racial protectionism.

Hm ... in principle, yes, but something has also to be done about the common habit of protecting anything but one's own kind. Europeans donate large sums of money for Pakistani earthquake victims, Indonesian tsunami victims, Lebanese zionism victims etc. but they don't give a penny for their poor white neighbours from next door. How can you make sure that your 'folk preservationism' chooses the right object?

Weiler
Tuesday, September 19th, 2006, 02:24 AM
I believe that an "environmentalist" case can be made to "Joe Public" for strategies to maintain the European lines, unmixed.

If the Germans/Italians/English/Swedes/etc were Pandas or Whales they would be conserved.
I could not agree with this more. In fact, it is why I am as opposed to ethnic mixing as I am to racial mixing, if not moreso.

However, one must be careful with the argument posted by Aistulf. It is true that whites have been at the forefront of the environmental movement. But it is also true that whites have been the race most responsible for industrialization, urbanization and other sources of environmental destruction.

As an aside, I have noticed that ethnic Germans seem to be at the forefront of the environmental movement, even moreso than other whites. Here in the Northwest I frequently read about eco-terrorists and other radical members of the environmental movement. You would be amazed at the large percentage of these people who have German surnames. I rarely see Russian surnames, I rarely see Italian surnames, I rarely see Polish surnames, and I rarely see Spanish surnames. But I often see British surnames, I often see Scandinavian surnames, and most of all, I very often see German surnames.

I've sometimes wondered if this is because the people who have been disproportionally responsible for destroying the environment are the ones who are most interested in preserving it?

Jäger
Tuesday, September 19th, 2006, 09:06 AM
The environmentalist argument for preservation is useless, as long as most parties disagree on what preserving means. If they acknowledge us a reservart for 100.000 people to live a pethetic life it is useless.
Fruthermore, it is very unlikely that the white race becomes extinct, it just goes into unimportance and meaninglessness and will be at the mercy of others.
Additionally I have seen very few enviromentalists fighting for the White-Shark or some insects, what is considered bad is not wanted to eb preserved.


As an aside, I have noticed that ethnic Germans seem to be at the forefront of the environmental movement.
I actually don't think that this is a "white" trait, rather a germanic one. Most souther slavs are very creul to their animals, in my perception that is.
Same goes for Romance people, and how the USSR treated their resources should be known. :(

Kaiser
Tuesday, September 19th, 2006, 01:03 PM
We have to be careful with "German surnames" in America and elsewhere as often times they are really jews whose ancestors purchased surnames from the Austrian empire. Jews have parasitically infiltrated societies throughout the ages by blending in and even in being"white". Blond-haired, blue-eyed SS posterboy type jews where displayed on CNN serving in the IDF during the recent invasion of Lebanon. Most pornography has jews with German surnames as well as the ACLU whacked out lawyers, judges, and government officials actively subverting White Kultur and instituting anti-family policies.

Here's one we may be able to throw on these liberal scum:

We finally agree that it is the White Man who is the scourge of society and the root of all historical evil. It is the White Man who is actively oppressing negroids, latinos, orientals, and jew-hating. Ergo, it is only logical to banish his Folk to a land where he can no longer prey upon the poor sub-humanoids around him. Siberia, Canada, Alaska, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Norway? Somewhere far, far away from the poor oppressed non-whites in the filthy inner city barrios for sure!

As for "whites" being the ones most responsible for environmental damage, I submit that the most economical damage to our planet has actually been perpetrated by former communists (read jews or jew inspired), chinese (read non-white), and many third-world countries (read non-white).

Either way, Hitler was a conservationalist versus an environmentalist in every sense. The difference being, the respect of BOTH Aryans and the animals versus fanatical snail darter worship whilst partial-birth aborting infants.

Never-the-less, whomever is to blame, it is incumbent upon all Aryan-minded peoples of this World to unite in both the preservation of our Folk and the furtherance of conservationalist principles.

OneEnglishNorman
Tuesday, September 19th, 2006, 07:38 PM
The environmentalist argument for preservation is useless, as long as most parties disagree on what preserving means. If they acknowledge us a reservart for 100.000 people to live a pethetic life it is useless.
Fruthermore, it is very unlikely that the white race becomes extinct, it just goes into unimportance and meaninglessness and will be at the mercy of others.
Additionally I have seen very few enviromentalists fighting for the White-Shark or some insects, what is considered bad is not wanted to eb preserved.

The environmentalist argument is not useless, it is another tool in the armoury which can convert/influence the uninterested.

Every argument which can be developed is needed, anything which helps cannot be a harm.

As for environmentalists/naturists not having an interest in, or seeking to preserve the Great White Shark, I am sceptical. There are people who are trying to do that.

Jäger
Tuesday, September 19th, 2006, 08:18 PM
As for environmentalists/naturists not having an interest in, or seeking to preserve the Great White Shark, I am sceptical. There are people who are trying to do that.
They are few, if we go in the realm of spiders it becomes even less. Certainly no argument for the masses.

ChaosLord
Wednesday, September 20th, 2006, 02:33 AM
I truly think that a lot of white people are very aware of what's going on in this world, but are too afraid to do anything about it because they'll be labeled as a 'racist'. Since it seems that being labeled a 'racist' in the U.S. is a demotion of personal status.

Theudanaz
Thursday, September 21st, 2006, 07:34 PM
It took the mind and heart of the white soul to come up with the thought of keeping things from dieout. Really that came somewhat from need, after whites' quick spreading over the earth and winning of land and taking its riches sometimes sped up or helped the dieout of some kinds of life.

3rd-worlders can only roughly ape the way whites spread and won land and took its riches-- they have not been as good at keeping many kinds of life, like birds, whales and trees, from the brink of dieout through mindfulness. This is inborn in the great, lusty western soul and of it, so only we can think of holding ourselves from all-out death.

It comes I think from the two lifeways that are found in us: that of the hunter-gatherer that wanders around with huts or tents, and that of the field-grower that builds houses. The latter, by building and growing, gave us the means to spread out over the land in strength, but also took too much from the earth; the former way found love and home in the world as it was, and kept life's even keel from being upset one way or the other, but it could not afford us the wherewithal to become first among all living beings, and could not keep our yearning hearts and thirsting minds happy.

Pervitinist
Thursday, September 21st, 2006, 07:55 PM
It comes I think from the two lifeways that are found in us: that of the hunter-gatherer that wanders around with huts or tents, and that of the field-grower that builds houses. The latter, by building and growing, gave us the means to spread out over the land in strength, but also took too much from the earth; the former way found love and home in the world as it was, and kept life's even keel from being upset one way or the other, but it could not afford us the wherewithal to become first among all living beings, and could not keep our yearning hearts and thirsting minds happy.

I am most sympathetic with your view of White man being the guardian of natural life in its diversity, and I agree with you that today he really is the only one who has the will and ability to achieve such a thing on this whole planet. But it has not always been that way. Think of the extinction of the bears and wolves in most of Europe, think of the Buffalos and bears in N-America. It is good that we have learned from such sins of the past. But we have to remember that we can always fall back. The same is true of our own self-preservation, of the survival of our race. We are not 'by nature' self-preservationists as we are not by nature preservationists of nature. Much effort is needed to spread the mentality of racial preservationism among the people. We cannot sit back and retreat to some Ultima Thule and hope that our kind will be preserved without effort. We must work on it, with mind and body. And we must deal with the realities of modernity that are endangering our survival by making us forget about the thoughts and actions required for it.

OneEnglishNorman
Thursday, September 21st, 2006, 07:57 PM
Not just the European.

Think of the Chinese preserving the Pandas.

If Pandas existed in Africa, that would not happen.

Europeans and East-Asians are the most far-sighted of all races, they have the lowest time preference.

Africans have high time preference - they want things now and quickly - food now, clothes now, money now, etc.

Pervitinist
Thursday, September 21st, 2006, 08:50 PM
Not just the European.

Think of the Chinese preserving the Pandas.

If Pandas existed in Africa, that would not happen.

Europeans and East-Asians are the most far-sighted of all races, they have the lowest time preference.

Time preference is an interesting idea in this context. But the Chinese? I don't know, I always got the impression that they just literally devoured everything except a few Pandas - and who knows whether those happy few don't end up in gourmet woks from time to time? But if you say Japanese: Most definitely yes! They are some of the most ingenious preservationists on earth and clearly on the same level as most Europeans. That is, if it wasn't for the whales; but those are being hunted by Icelanders as well.


Africans have high time preference - they want things now and quickly - food now, clothes now, money now, etc.

... as well as 'white girls now' ;)

But how could you show that this is really in their genes and not merely bad manners?

Pervitinist
Sunday, September 24th, 2006, 02:45 PM
Here's some more on the Chinese attitude towards the preservation of endangered species:

Report on "Beijing's Penis Emporium" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/5371500.stm)

Excerpt:


...
Rare order

"Not long ago, a particularly rich real estate mogul came in with four friends. All men. Women don't come here so often, and they shouldn't eat testicles," says Nancy solemnly.

The men spent $5,700 (£3,000) on a particularly rare dish, something that needed to be ordered months in advance.

"Tiger penis," says Nancy.

The illegal trade in tiger parts is a big problem in China.

Campaigners say the species is being driven towards extinction because of its popularity as a source of traditional medicine.

I mention this, delicately, to Nancy, but she insists that all her tiger supplies come from animals that have died of old age.

"Anyway, we only have one or two orders a year," she says.

"So what does it taste like?" I ask.

"Oh, the same as all the others," she says blithely.

And does it have any particular potency? "No. People just like to order tiger to show off how much money they have."

Welcome to the People's Republic of China - tigers beware.
...