PDA

View Full Version : Miscegenation Laws and Punishment



Deary
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 04:03 AM
Should there be laws against miscegenation? Should this only apply to marriage or also to interracial sex, other personal contact and cohabitation? How should this be regulated? Should the laws be nation-wide or state-decided only. Are anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional? Should there be laws regulating which ethnicities are and are not acceptable for marriage? What should be the punishment for those who miscegenate and how should the products of such affairs be dealt with? Should those involved be punished equally? Discuss.

Loddfafner
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 04:24 AM
Laws are the wrong tool for dealing with such matters.

Fortis_in_Arduis
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 07:53 AM
No, all we need to do is repeal laws such as a Race Relations Act (UK) which would allow people to 'discriminate' freely.

Flash Voyager
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 08:19 AM
Are anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional?

In much(if not all) of the developed world liberty is a constitutionally guaranteed right, so go figure.

Miscegenation is for the most part a side-effect of the immigration boom which should never have transpired.

OneEnglishNorman
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 08:26 AM
Side effect of immigration IMHO. Target that, not mixed unions.

Guy I worked with left England to live with his Thai wife (he met her there on holiday). Should European governments prevent that kind of miscegenation (God knows how to stop someone emigrating for that). Because the offspring will look either a little or very European, and could potentially enter Europe and be a future problem.

Bärin
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 11:59 AM
There should be laws against immigration. With foreigners, I think it should be like it was done in the GDR. If a foreign woman becomes pregnant, she should be sent back to her country. It's more difficult what to do if a German woman gets pregnant... I think children resulting from unions with foreigners should definitely not be given German citisenship. Maybe loss of citisenship for those Germans involving in miscegenation.

MockTurtle
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 02:11 PM
Should there be laws against miscegenation?

No, mostly because I think that such measures are just transitory and ineffective in the long-run. We had plenty of anti-miscegenation laws in the US awhile back, as you may know, but ultimately they didn't last because our culture changed dramatically. What should be done is to promote certain behavior that we consider 'eugenic' and beneficial for the gene pool rather than concentrating on the negative (i.e. 'forbidding' people to do this/that).

So, what we should really focus on is the cultural situation (and also the immigration situation, as others have pointed out). Plus, I've usually felt that, in a way, miscegenation could almost be beneficial for our race because it might take away those types who are less independent-minded and low-quality. Rarely have I seen a really impressive person involved in a mixed union, unless of course it was on television!



Are anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional?

Not according to "Pace v. Alabama" (1883), the case in which the Supreme Court decided that the anti-miscegenation statute (i.e. The Racial Integrity Act of 1924) was constitutional...

Jäger
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 03:47 PM
I would forbid it, the conscious part that is, just simple as that, I would be very strict, and even not allow such unions outside of Germany, if the culprits would ever return to Germany they would have to bear the consequences then.
It must be the ultimate goal to let no doubt about the destructiveness of such unions and the state has no obligation to tolerate it.
As punishment they should serve in a KZ for reeducation.

Thrymheim
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 09:04 PM
It would be totally impossible to emplace, after all what about those who are already mixed? if someone is half Indian 1/4 African and 1/4 Germanic would they have to find someone exactly the same? Or breed only with an Indian because it was the largest part? Or could they go with all 3? Also what about people who have a distant relative who is of a different race say a great great grandmother? what would you class them as?

So no it should not be banned, anyway making something illegal just makes it more desirable. Instead as others have said, people should be encouraged to stick with their own.

Jäger
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 09:21 PM
what about those who are already mixed?
They loose German citizenship, what they do is their problem, they can't marry a German though, or even stay in Germany.


Also what about people who have a distant relative who is of a different race say a great great grandmother? what would you class them as?
Depends on the race, but we have the luck of having had a great government once, and we just go after the "Ariernachweis".
Such questions are already solved, we just have to take care about the foreigners who invaded our blood after 1945 :)


So no it should not be banned, anyway making something illegal just makes it more desirable.
Well, it doesn't prevent it from happening, however it won't be the sole mean against race mixing, of course the first and foremost action should be to separate from the foreign blood, but it is necessary to make clear that we don't put up with mixed people, but that we reject them and won't tolerate them.
Besides, I hear the remark very often "the more illegal, the more desirable" but I doubt this "wisdom", if at all this only applies to teenagers, and by this logic nothing should be forbidden, neither rape nor murder nor whatever.


Instead as others have said, people should be encouraged to stick with their own.
This is not mutually exclusive, I agree that we need prevention too.

Schmetterling
Sunday, May 18th, 2008, 09:25 PM
If you want to keep something alive, ban it.

Deary
Monday, May 19th, 2008, 07:31 AM
Would it be illogical to make the argument that miscegenation is almost comparable to incest? There are laws against such because of the immorality and because the children of these relationships can have genetic abnormalities/defects as well as psychological trauma. This doesn't seem entirely different from what happens when people of differing races procreate and the reactions from society are similar. I've often retorted in my thoughts, "Why is it wrong to criticize miscegenation but it is understandable to shun incest?" We have one crime based on blood but no longer the other, yet, in a way, isn't miscegenation an incest of its own? Miscegenation is being promoted as acceptable and good while there are clearly negative consequences to it. Why should something so serious be approached without the help of the law? Immigrants aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

SwordOfTheVistula
Monday, May 19th, 2008, 10:24 AM
It would be totally impossible to emplace, after all what about those who are already mixed? if someone is half Indian 1/4 African and 1/4 Germanic would they have to find someone exactly the same? Or breed only with an Indian because it was the largest part? Or could they go with all 3?

In the US, they were generally classified as black if they had any black ancestry, the 'one drop rule'. A half Indian 1/4 African and 1/4 Germanic would be considered 'black', as Tiger Woods (half asian, 1/4 black, 1/8 native, 1/8 Germanic) is.

http://usversusthem.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/tiger-ice-grill.jpg

If we just kicked them out of the country, we wouldn't have to worry about this, and any regime capable of re-introducing such laws would likely also be able to expel the the alien elements.

If they leave the country to marry a nonwhite, this should be allowed, but they should not be allowed back in.

Cuchulain
Tuesday, May 20th, 2008, 04:43 PM
Laws haven't ever really proven to be a way of changing behavior, only institutionalizing a system of penalties for those who break them (i.e. Drug or alcohol prohibition, the death penalty as a deterrent to murder, Illegal Immigration). Such laws would do little to solve the problem, and would add to the already out of control costs of law enforcement and justice administration (as well as government spending altogether). I think that the root of the problem as well as the solution lies in the fact that our cultural values have deteriorated to become accepting of miscegenation. A cultural revival is what we need, a renewed sense of pride, a return to the values of yesterday.

Dagna
Tuesday, May 20th, 2008, 04:46 PM
No, I believe it is ridiculous to make laws regulating people's private lives. I believe Germanic preservation should be encouraged instead and immigration limited.

Guntwachar
Tuesday, May 20th, 2008, 05:01 PM
I think atleast like someone said before that the law to discriminate has to be back again, so that you can even make tv programs or whatever about it.

People that racemix should loose there citizenship and get kicked out of the country, when they come back and we find them they go to jail.
There kids also get kicked out of the country no mather wich age they have, they dont belong anywhere because of there mixed blood and thats what we should tell the people also to prevent the race mixing at all.

Shamefully i still see everyday blonde Dutch girls with black men and kids from them.:mad:

stormlord
Tuesday, May 20th, 2008, 05:09 PM
There's also the theory that there could be a eugenic effect, in that generally, at least with regards to white women, those who have interracial relationships tend to be lower class, less educated, easily led by the media etc etc, generally the only non white men who get desirable white women are billionaires, sports stars etc, and they are only a tiny percentage of the population. On the other hand I've lost count of the times i've seen fat ugly white women with young, good looking (for an African) black men who obviously see any white woman as a status symbol. Essentially the detritus of European populations is being absorbed into the non white populations.

That doesn't however solve the other problem, which is higher status white men with asian women.

Remember that despite the constant media brainwashing, 95% of white people have never had a relationship with anyone of another race, with birth rates as they are, it's not miscegenation that's the problem, it's simply the miniscule numbers of white children.

Oswiu
Tuesday, May 20th, 2008, 05:52 PM
There's also the theory that there could be a eugenic effect, ...
That doesn't however solve the other problem, which is higher status white men with asian women.
Hmm, couldn't we even say the same for them? What matters the physical ideal if it is accompanied by damaging psychological traits? Reading some of the old descriptions of the Nordid in mental terms or Agrippa's odd comment, you'd almost be persuaded that they were predisposed to this sort of behaviour more than other Europids, owing to their greater thing for abstract objectivism to the detriment of their own best interests. What's so superior about this? :confused: Or is this just my Alpinised narrow 'practicality'? ;)

Volksdeutscher
Tuesday, May 20th, 2008, 08:08 PM
Enabling such laws is draconian and anachronical in our age. I don't approve of a nanny state with laws telling us who to breed with. The population here doesn't want to breed with gypsies anyway, so it's a natural thing.

Guntwachar
Tuesday, May 20th, 2008, 08:36 PM
Well yeah looking at my other post i seem to have a quite extreme opinion about this, but i have 2 things that work against eachother i'm for freedom of people but also a welldoing country with good laws and stuff.

But every rule in the law makes something easyer for one person and harder for a other person.

So guess to come back i wouldnt do race mixing myself but some punishments can be a bit to harsh to those people, even if they do something we dont like we cant force people to do what we want thats basicly like Islam and we are all against that i guess....

Scott Wodenson
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 04:28 AM
There just needs to be an exclusively Germanic territory/homeland
(sigh what a dream.)

This would eliminate about 99 percent of any race mixing taking place the other one percent would easily be spotted and eliminated by the the locals.

The Lawspeaker
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 06:58 AM
One of the characteristics of a Germanic society is personal freedom and not State regulation of private life, a thing that belongs in Asian societies, the Middle East and Eastern Europe (the Soviet era)
State regulation of private life and a nanny state go directly against the Germanic traditions and is as such not a friend but an enemy of Germanic preservation.

I happened to know that some American states also have these ridiculous laws that might ban some forms of otherwise normal sexual behaviour between consenting adults (yes some States seem to ban something as mundane as having sex under a shower including in ones own private home)- the State has to stay out of ones private life, we don't need a nanny state because that will utterly wreck the free Germanic spirit.

Dagna
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 07:03 AM
One of the characteristics of a Germanic society is personal freedom and not State regulation of private life, a thing that belongs in Asian societies, the Middle East and Eastern Europe (the Soviet era)
State regulation of private life and a nanny state go directly against the Germanic traditions and is as such not a friend but an enemy of Germanic preservation.
Exactly. I could not have said it better myself. Freedom is one of the most important Germanic values. I believe that instead of banning everything we should have educational programs for our Germanic kin, teaching them about their ancestors and the worth to preserve their Germanic heritage. Germanic preservation should not be a forced matter.

Jäger
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 07:24 AM
One of the characteristics of a Germanic society is personal freedom and not State regulation of private life
We can see very clearly that this hasn't been working, as long as people are prone to propaganda and the like, meaning that one can direct their thoughts, personal freedom is an illusion anyways, it mostly just translates to: "Let me be, I don't care what the others do", this is not the way to go in a society, because even as an individual we are dependent on society, social life.

The Lawspeaker
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 07:27 AM
We can see very clearly that this hasn't been working, as long as people are prone to propaganda and the like, meaning that one can direct their thoughts, personal freedom is an illusion anyways.
Neither has the regulation of private life. Most of the US states with such laws see young inventive people leaving in droves and are experiencing an incredible brain-drain.
No work, tough laws, hypocricy and corruption in their communities, religious institutions, in politics and law are hurting their development badly and thus young people (the next generation) are leaving.

Dagna
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 07:32 AM
We can see very clearly that this hasn't been working, as long as people are prone to propaganda and the like, meaning that one can direct their thoughts, personal freedom is an illusion anyways, it mostly just translates to: "Let me be, I don't care what the others do", this is not the way to go in a society, because even as an individual we are dependent on society, social life.
If we do not use freedom wisely, we will sign our sentence and then I believe we deserve to perish. But the Germanic concept of freedom must not be destroyed. People cannot be forced to do what they don't want. Sooner or later they will protest.

I believe we should start with deportation of the illegal, criminal and unfitting non-Germanic immigrants. This will free us from most undesirable elements in our Germanic communities. Then we should limit immigration to Germanic or at most, European immigrants from other countries.

Cuchulain
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 06:15 PM
Neither has the regulation of private life. Most of the US states with such laws see young inventive people leaving in droves and are experiencing an incredible brain-drain.

Where are you getting this from? Such laws do exist, but aren't ever enforced. I've lived in the United States my entire life and pay a lot of attention to what is going on in the world and I have never heard of someone leaving a state because of a laws against certain sex acts. If such a phenomenon were to occur on the scale you claim it does it would have an effect on the state's economy and the antiquated laws would be removed from the books by the state's legislature.

Bärin
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 06:29 PM
One of the characteristics of a Germanic society is personal freedom and not State regulation of private life, a thing that belongs in Asian societies, the Middle East and Eastern Europe (the Soviet era)
State regulation of private life and a nanny state go directly against the Germanic traditions and is as such not a friend but an enemy of Germanic preservation.

I happened to know that some American states also have these ridiculous laws that might ban some forms of otherwise normal sexual behaviour between consenting adults (yes some States seem to ban something as mundane as having sex under a shower including in ones own private home)- the State has to stay out of ones private life, we don't need a nanny state because that will utterly wreck the free Germanic spirit.
As I said before, we should only perpetuate the characteristics of our ancestors which benefit our nations. It doesn't mean squat that something is Germanic or un-Germanic if it harms our nations. Unfortunately we need a "nanny state" because our people aren't responsible enough to make pro-Germanic decisions. Our end is Germanic preservation, the means we achieve it are less important in the long run, as Niccolo Machiavelli said, the end justifies the means. :)

By the way, if there are Germanics that would leave because they aren't allowed to miscegenate, good riddance I'd say. They can go to the countries of their partners and stay there. If such was the requirement however (sure, you can miscegenate, but only if you leave the country forever), I think many would reconsider their loves because they want to keep enjoying the benefits or European countries. ;)

The Lawspeaker
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 06:47 PM
As I said before, we should only perpetuate the characteristics of our ancestors which benefit our nations.

That would be blatant opportunism, Bärin. Which would be quite an un-Germanic way of conducting politics and more in line in which the diseased socalled "democracies" of today work.
Preserve the work and attitude of your ancestors and don't become like those that you are trying to fight off.


It doesn't mean squat that something is Germanic or un-Germanic if it harms our nations. Unfortunately we need a "nanny state" because our people aren't responsible enough to make pro-Germanic decisions.
No, thank you very much for a nanny state. It was the Third Reich, a nanny state, whose insane policies led to the wholesale slaughter of Europe, including millions of Germanics and it are todays nanny states that are leading us straight to our doom.


Our end is Germanic preservation, the means we achieve it are less important in the long run, as Niccolo Machiavelli said, the end justifies the means. :)[
Allthough I admire Macchiavelli, he was an Italian, a Tuscan and I don't think that we should quote a non-Germanic here. Ooh the bitter irony of Il Principe (I have read it when I was a teenager), it was originally as a warning displaying as much dirty political tricks in one book as he could find (I was amazed;)) and ironically speaking it were to be used as a kind of manual by the same corrupt rulers that he had condemned. But I am not too certain whether this comes from Il Principe ? (it's only 10 years ago that I read it)

Thrymheim
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 06:53 PM
Although the "nanny state" has benefits in this way. The cost is much higher than I for one, am prepared to pay. If people want to breed with others of a different race that is their business, obviously that does not further the cause of Germanic preservation in any way. However in my perfect society the stigma associated with such actions would effectively make the couple and their children (possibly the last bit being more important) outcasts. Not accepted by members of either race

Bärin
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 06:54 PM
That would be blatant opportunism, Bärin. Which would be quite an un-Germanic way of conducting politics and more in line in which the diseased socalled "democracies" of today work.
Preserve the work and attitude of your ancestors and don't become like those that you are trying to fight off.
If opportunism saves the Germanic race, why not. By the way if you talk about "un-Germanic" things, our ancestors may have been free but they didn't racemix. It was a very rare phenomenon because the Germanics didn't come in contact with other races. When they came in contact with other white foreigners they discriminated. So race mixing is un-Germanic.

By the way Lawspeaker, our ancestors also killed homosexuals and threw them into swamps, very "Germanic" thing, so according to your logic we must do that today too, otherwise we are so un-Germanic for not following the habits of our ancestors? :rolleyes:


No, thank you very much for a nanny state. It was the Third Reich, a nanny state, whose insane policies led to the wholeslaughter of Europe, including millions of Germanics and it are todays nanny states that are leading us straight to our doom.
No. Once again you make the same mistakes as people who condemn communism. National socialism is an ideology, it doesn't preach slaughtering Europe. That was the consequence of a war. And this war wasn't even started by my country, because other countries declared war on it. My country only wanted to recover stolen German land. It didn't poke its nose in British affairs for example.


Allthough I admire Macchiavelli, he was an Italian, a Tuscan and I don't think that we should quote a non-Germanic here. Ooh the bitter irony of Il Principe (I have read it when I was a teenager), it was originally as a warning displaying as much dirty political tricks in one book as he could find (I was amazed;)) and ironically speaking it were to be used as a kind of manual by the same corrupt rulers that he had condemned.
I don't care what he was, he made a very good point. :)

There is no justification for race mixing. A person who racemix is not a preservationist. He dilutes his ethnic Germanic heritage.

The Lawspeaker
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 07:09 PM
If opportunism saves the Germanic race, why not. By the way if you talk about "un-Germanic" things, our ancestors may have been free but they didn't racemix. It was a very rare phenomenon because the Germanics didn't come in contact with other races. When they came in contact with other white foreigners they discriminated. So race mixing is un-Germanic.
You're wrong.Germanics already had contact with the Greeks and traded with other tribes, the Greeks and the Romans (there have been finds of Roman and Greek coins) and during the Viking Age the Vikings traded with just about everybody that they could trade with (there have been finds of Arabic coins all over Viking territories) and the Varangian Guard fought for the Byzantine Empire. Also later on, it were the Germanics of Western Europe (and in particular the United Provinces) that opened up their doors for refugees from all over Europe, including my own ancestors. A thing that still makes me proud to be Dutch. I have read somewhere that some of the brilliant Dutch scientists came from France, Portugal and Bohemia. Just as our art was developed by Brabantians and Flemings. I don't advocate multi-culturalism but that is a fact. Historical fact.


By the way Lawspeaker, our ancestors also killed homosexuals and threw them into swamps, very "Germanic" thing, so according to your logic we must do that today too, otherwise we are so un-Germanic for not following the habits of our ancestors? :rolleyes:
You have never heard me defend homosexuality? No. Because I never defended them.




No. Once again you make the same mistakes as people who condemn communism. National socialism is an ideology, it doesn't preach slaughtering Europe. That was the consequence of a war. And this war wasn't even started by my country, because other countries declared war on it. My country only wanted to recover stolen German land. It didn't poke its nose in British affairs for example.

No- I don't make a mistake. At least I interpret history not through pink glasses but just the way that it is. German territory ? Warsaw never was ? Neither was Prague ? The National Socialists wanted lebensraum and couldn't care less about who was to die or to be enslaved for it.
Just as, sorry for my bluntness, the GDR was a system that had just one goal: to stay in power, whether the people liked it or not and impose their way of socialism upon the populus in a way contrary to German(ic) tradition.




I don't care what he was, he made a very good point. :)
There is no justification for race mixing. A person who racemix is not a preservationist. He dilutes his ethnic Germanic heritage.

Wrong. At least I know what I stand for.
But I am not going to explain my private life to you. We are quite passed mutual trust.

Bärin
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 07:16 PM
You're wrong.Germanics already had contact with the Greeks and traded with other tribes, the Greeks and the Romans (there have been finds of Roman and Greek coins) and during the Viking Age the Vikings traded with just about everybody that they could trade with (there have been finds of Arabic coins all over Viking territories) and the Varangian Guard fought for the Byzantine Empire. Also later on, it were the Germanics of Western Europe (and in particular the United Provinces) that opened up their doors for refugees from all over Europe, including my own ancestors. A thing that still makes me proud to be Dutch.
Greeks and Romans aren't other races. They are white foreigners. I meant other races like blacks, asians.


You have never heard me defend homosexuality? No. Because I never defended them.
So, we must kill them and dump them in swamps, as our Germanic ancestors did?


No- I don't make a mistake. At least I interpret history not through pink glasses but just the way that it is. German territory ? Warsaw never was ? Neither was Prague ? The National Socialists wanted lebensraum and they didn't care who were to die for it.
The Germans wanted Prussia. Which was German terriroty. The Poles did not want to cede it, so the Germans had to intervene militarily in their country.


Just as, sorry for my bluntness, the GDR was a system that had just one goal: to stay in power, whether the people liked it or not and impose their way of socialism upon the populus in a way contrary to German(ic) tradition.
The Third Reich and the GDR did a better job at assuring ethnic German preservation than people who talk about Germanic tradition on the Internet. If people use freedom to kill their nation's ethnicity, then they don't deserve to have it anymore.


Wrong. At least I know what I stand for.
But I am not going to explain my private life to you. We are quite passed mutual trust.
I know what I stand for too. And excuse me, but I didn't make any comment on your private life.

Ossi
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 07:23 PM
There should be laws against anything that damages our people. We have laws against murder, torture, robbery, paedophilia. Miscegenation should qualify as TREASON to the nation.

stormlord
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 07:51 PM
I guess it's just personal character as to whether one thinks the end justifies the means, but I personally don't. Behaving in a way that is contrary to our natural spirit, with the same sort of hive collectivism and social conformism that characterises the Russians and the Chinese is a mistake, and undermines the reason for wanting to preserve germanic peoples in the first place.

The other mistake that people make is thinking that people naturally race mix so we need to ban it, in some ways believing that is being fooled by the same leftist propaganda that most people are. We don't need to ban race mixing, we need to root out the elements in our society, the media etc that are constantly brainwashing people into thinking that race mixing is normal.

I don't know if I'm being entirely clear here, but basically the crux of the argument is that we don't need to teach (or ban) people not to miscegenate, we need stop those who are teaching people to miscegenate.

Racial consciousness has existed for the entirety of our existence without government intervention and the nanny state, and the destruction of racial consciousness has only come about with centralised education, the mass media, big government etc, which has allowed an insidious minority to control society. I have enough faith in our people to think that if you remove government, media and social brainwashing and let them make up their own minds, they'll come to the right decision. The totalitarian thinking of the left, of people being told "what's good for them" is not the road to the lasting preservation of our people.

Deary
Wednesday, May 21st, 2008, 11:27 PM
Miscegenation isn't confined to a couple's business. It's eveyone's business because the offspring of the affair will become part of society. The more mutts, half-breeds and bastards there are running about, the more civilizations will crumble because there won't be any of its forebears left to uphold it. Germanic countries cannot exist without Germanics, Slavic countries without Slavics, Celtic countries without Celtics, and etc. The histories, cultures and values that people and their ancestors created and lived by will cease to exist when the blood becomes diluted. Miscegenation perpetuates itself. After a certain extent, there isn't any turning back.

Of course, everything cannot be regulated. Drivers who speed don't always get a ticket. Men who rape women don't always get found, but we show our disapproval by offering punishment for such actions when discovered in hopes to regulate it and keep it from affecting us. No one has yet to say what benefit legalized miscegenation offers. So, what kind of society do you want to live in; the ethnically and racially homogenous one or the one where something clearly wrong is condoned by the law?

Miscegenators to me are some of the most selfish, foolish people on earth. The point of creating a family and having a child is to further what is your own. In the end, neither parent really wins and society has to receive the burden. Strangely enough, I bet all of them told themselves their actions would make such a small dent in attempts to console themselves from whatever feelings of doubt they had. How wrong they were. Miscegenation is a sad reflection of what little appreciation is had for one's people. I would like to see miscegenation removed somehow.

Angelcynn Beorn
Thursday, May 22nd, 2008, 12:09 AM
There seem to be some very strange assumptions at work in many of the posts on this thread. If we are assuming that we're in some sort of hypothetical situation where we (as nationalists) have already taken control of our country, why all this talk of what to do with mixed people, or how to discourage race-mixing without legislation?

Surely the very first thing any real nationalist government would do once it got in power, would be to start shipping back the millions of coloured immigrants that are already here. Once that little matter is taken care of, all of the debates about educating young white girls not to mix, and finding the right partner for a mixed up quadroon, become entirely redundant.

Get the immigrants out. Keep them out. Problem solved.

Ossi
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 12:08 PM
The miscegenation laws shouldn't only apply to mixing with non-Europeans, they should also apply to mixing with non-Germanics. Those who do it should be stripped from their citizenship and rights. That will make them think twice before they want to try any "exotic fruit".

Oswiu
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 02:26 PM
The miscegenation laws shouldn't only apply to mixing with non-Europeans, they should also apply to mixing with non-Germanics. Those who do it should be stripped from their citizenship and rights. That will make them think twice before they want to try any "exotic fruit".
English and Irish? Welsh and English?

Scots and Scots, for that matter? Highlands vs. Lowlands.

Ossi
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 02:31 PM
English and Irish? Welsh and English?

Scots and Scots, for that matter? Highlands vs. Lowlands.
Highlands vs. Lowlands? I know nothing about that and don't care to know. I couldn't care less what England and Scotland do. Germany is my only concern, and in a nationalist Germany it would be unacceptable to breed with non-Germanics period. Whether Irish, Poles, Russians or Greeks, non-Germanic is non-Germanic. And foreigners shouldn't be in my country in the first place.

OneEnglishNorman
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 03:08 PM
Highlands vs. Lowlands? I know nothing about that and don't care to know. I couldn't care less what England and Scotland do. Germany is my only concern, and in a nationalist Germany it would be unacceptable to breed with non-Germanics period. Whether Irish, Poles, Russians or Greeks, non-Germanic is non-Germanic. And foreigners shouldn't be in my country in the first place.

Can you clarify, do you mean "Germans" or "Germanics"? What about a Scottish tourist to a hypothetical nationalist Germany, who becomes pregnant by a German? What happens to her and the baby. Or would you ban Scottish tourists from visiting Germany?

I realise that you care about Germany and I respect that, but also I find your "I couldn't care less what England and Scotland do" talk to be a little affected. Not quite posturing for the gallery, but getting there.

My concern is England, but I do care what Germany does; not just because of a possible knock-on effect outside of Germany, but also because Germany is related to nations outside of it, such as Holland, Switzerland, England, among others. Germany does not exist in a vacuum, and has sister nations.

Ossi
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 03:35 PM
Can you clarify, do you mean "Germans" or "Germanics"? What about a Scottish tourist to a hypothetical nationalist Germany, who becomes pregnant by a German? What happens to her and the baby. Or would you ban Scottish tourists from visiting Germany?
Germans with some Germanic exceptions, like the Danes, Frisians and other minority ethnic groups living in our country. A Scottish tourist who becomes pregnant by a German is a foreigner and no better than a prostitute or sex tourist in my eyes. What kind of woman visits a country and sleeps with the first person she meets there and doesn't even know properly? It's as disrespectful as the sex tourists who go to Thailand and other countries to sleep with the locals. She would be sent back to Scotland obviously. It isn't Germany fault that she can't keep her legs crossed. That's what happened in the GDR. Vietnamese women were allowed to work/apprentice for a limited amount of time there, but if they got pregnant they would be shipped back to Vietnam. I wouldn't ban tourists from visiting Germany if they respect the place they visit. I would even allow Negroes to visit my country if they respected it and left it as they found it. But those who don't would get a prohibition to set foot on it again for sure.


I realise that you care about Germany and I respect that, but also I find your "I couldn't care less what England and Scotland do" talk to be a little affected. Not quite posturing for the gallery, but getting there.

My concern is England, but I do care what Germany does; not just because of a possible knock-on effect outside of Germany, but also because Germany is related to nations outside of it, such as Holland, Switzerland, England, among others. Germany does not exist in a vacuum, and has sister nations.
That's how I feel and I see no reason to play hypocrite and say I do care how other countries solve their problems, when the truth is, I don't. I don't meddle into the affairs of foreign countries by telling them how to solve their own problems. I don't appreciate it when foreigners do that about Germany, so I extend them the same courtesy. I respect the Germanic fight for preservation, but if they have better ways to achieve it, it's their business. Not mine.

Oswiu
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 10:26 PM
My concern is England, but I do care what Germany does; not just because of a possible knock-on effect outside of Germany, but also because Germany is related to nations outside of it, such as Holland, Switzerland, England, among others. Germany does not exist in a vacuum, and has sister nations.
Well said, but I am sufficiently hereetical to take it a step further, and say that the Germanic meta-ethnicity doesn't exist in a vacuum either, and has sister meta-ethnicities in the same manner.

Bloem
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 10:48 PM
The Germanic man is a free man who chooses what to do with his private life by himself, not forced by a law. Therefore, I oppose a law telling our people which races to marry and which races not to marry.

The Lawspeaker
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 11:38 PM
The Germanic man is a free man who chooses what to do with his private life by himself, not forced by a law. Therefore, I oppose a law telling our people which races to marry and which races not to marry.
In our country it would never work. Since our countrymen have been emancipated for such a long time- it would at least destroy the cabinet and destroy a lot of political carreers if someone would even mention it. Not because it is about race but it about destroying freedom.

Æmeric
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 11:41 PM
The Germanic man is a free man who chooses what to do with his private life by himself, not forced by a law. Therefore, I oppose a law telling our people which races to marry and which races not to marry.

But how would you feel about a Dutchman who married a Thai or Nigerian woman? Should they be allowed to bring the non-Europid spouse back to the Netherlands, should the children of that union have Dutch citizenship? This is what miscegenation means in the long run, altering the basic bloodstock of the nation through the admixture of alien elements.

Bloem
Saturday, May 24th, 2008, 11:47 PM
But how would you feel about a Dutchman who married a Thai or Nigerian woman? Should they be allowed to bring the non-Europid spouse back to the Netherlands, should the children of that union have Dutch citizenship? This is what miscegenation means in the long run, altering the basic bloodstock of the nation through the admixture of alien elements.
I wouldn't be very happy about it but I'm no one to tell them who to marry. If the foreigners integrate in our country then they can stay. It's a tradition to be open and friendly for people here anyways. The foreigners simply abused it. Islamic and African immigrants simply abused our tradition of hospitality. Yet those who integrate are welcome.

SuuT
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 01:05 AM
...I see no reason to play hypocrite and say I do care how other countries solve their problems, when the truth is, I don't. I don't meddle into the affairs of foreign countries by telling them how to solve their own problems. I don't appreciate it when foreigners do that about Germany, so I extend them the same courtesy. I respect the Germanic fight for preservation, but if they have better ways to achieve it, it's their business. Not mine.

Rather myopic and unjustifiably obstinate perspective, there. The same problems with immigration are happening all over Europe (a German friend of mine continually refers to Germany as "New Turkey" - he will be moving North soon). Moreover, no one is "telling" Germany how to solve its problems: do you have problems with a healthy and productive dialogue concerning the best way(s) to solve the same one problem suffered throughout the Germanic theatre; a wider perspective - looking out and down - on the extiction of Germanic peoples, Racially and Culturally and Spiritually?

Whether you like it or not, that which affects your Germanic bretheren, affects, and effects, you. That is your business.


Well said, but I am sufficiently hereetical to take it a step further, and say that the Germanic meta-ethnicity doesn't exist in a vacuum either, and has sister meta-ethnicities in the same manner.

Slippery slope. Although I'd like to hear more about this, for sure. Such lines are drawn arbitrarily, but not capriciously.


The Germanic man is a free man who chooses what to do with his private life by himself, not forced by a law. Therefore, I oppose a law telling our people which races to marry and which races not to marry.

This does not follow. Here is what does (assuming, for arguments sake, the validity of some of your terms such as 'free'): "Germanic man is a free man who chooses what to do with his private life by himself, not forced by law. Therefore, he may go on choosing what to do in his private life as there is no law against that."

Which is false: there are all manner of laws that consider the inter-connectivity of the public and private spheres of life. Laws against miscegenation would be, by extention, no less invasive than most Germanic nation's laws regarding the posession of child pornography. Even if the individual posessing the pornography uses it in an entirely private manner, someone else was harmed in the production of the pornography, and is punishable by law, therefore. The same logic can apply to miscegenation: many people are harmed - either directly, or indirectly - by it. It can be punishable by law, therefore.


... If the foreigners integrate in our country then they can stay.

To the short and long term detriment of your nation?

I'm baffled.


It's a tradition to be open and friendly for people here anyways. The foreigners simply abused it.

Yeah, it's working great for the Swiss, too, - being all happy and welcoming, is it not?


Islamic and African immigrants simply abused our tradition of hospitality. Yet those who integrate are welcome.

Welcome to do what?

Do you or do you not care whether or not your children marry and procreate with a Middle Easterner or an African?

Bloem
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 01:22 AM
This does not follow. Here is what does (assuming, for arguments sake, the validity of some of your terms such as 'free'): "Germanic man is a free man who chooses what to do with his private life by himself, not forced by law. Therefore, he may go on choosing what to do in his private life as there is no law against that."
Right. He may.


Which is false: there are all manner of laws that consider the inter-connectivity of the public and private spheres of life. Laws against miscegenation would be, by extention, no less invasive than most Germanic nation's laws regarding the posession of child pornography. Even if the individual posessing the pornography uses it in an entirely private manner, someone else was harmed in the production of the pornography, and is punishable by law, therefore. The same logic can apply to miscegenation: many people are harmed - either directly, or indirectly - by it. It can be punishable by law, therefore.
No. Child pornography isn't the same with "miscegenation". It involves children who can't/don't give their consent. "Miscegenation" is done with fully consent between the adults.


To the short and long term detriment of your nation?

I'm baffled.
Sorry for you.


Yeah, it's working great for the Swiss, being all happy and welcoming, is it not?
I don't know the Swiss. I'm Dutch.


Welcome to do what?
Live here.


Do you or do you not care whether or not your children marry and procreate with a Middle Easterner or an African?
I do, which is why I'll educated my children to marry Dutch people from my province. I don't need a law to force them to do something which is very un-Dutch.

By the way, no offense but could you speak more like in normal English? English is only my third language and I don't do so well so the philosiphical bluffering isn't so helpful. :confused:

OneEnglishNorman
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 01:39 AM
I wouldn't be very happy about it but I'm no one to tell them who to marry. If the foreigners integrate in our country then they can stay. It's a tradition to be open and friendly for people here anyways. The foreigners simply abused it. Islamic and African immigrants simply abused our tradition of hospitality. Yet those who integrate are welcome.

Africans that do not abuse hospitality, can stay?

Bloem
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 01:41 AM
Africans that do not abuse hospitality, can stay?
I have yet to see an African who didn't abuse our hospitality. But if such a person exists and he is a citizen of our country, yes, he can stay. I don't think our immigration policies should be open without reason. We should demand tests for integration and I'm afraid people like Africans wouldn't score high on the list.

SuuT
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 01:53 AM
Right. He may.

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_14_4.gif
You've missed the point. Don't worry, you're not alone.


No. Child pornography isn't the same with "miscegenation". It involves children who can't/don't give their consent. "Miscegenation" is done with fully consent between the adults.

You're 2 for 2 on missing the point. Consent is not the core of the issue: The same logic of child pornography can apply to miscegenation: many people are harmed - either directly, or indirectly - by it. It can be punishable by law, therefore. It has to do with Preservation of the Meta-Ethnicity.


Honestly, I don't know how you people end up on a Germanic Preservation forum. To expell alien elements, both racially and culturally, is the most basic of basic steps in ensuring survival. You not only don't mind that miscegenation is legal, you don't even care about alien elements living in your country. - so long as they 'assimilate'.

Bloem
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 02:04 AM
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_14_4.gif
You've missed the point. Don't worry, you're not alone.
Don't worry, I don't worry at all if you think I missed the point. :p


You're 2 for 2 on missing the point. Consent is not the core of the issue: The same logic of child pornography can apply to miscegenation: many people are harmed - either directly, or indirectly - by it. It can be punishable by law, therefore. It has to do with Preservation of the Meta-Ethnicity.
Yes it is. Many people are harmed by adult pornography too, yet it is legal because the people who make it give their consent.


Honestly, I don't know how you people end up on a Germanic Preservation forum. To expell alien elements, both racially and culturally, is the most basic of basic steps in ensuring survival. You not only don't mind that miscegenation is legal, you don't even care about alien elements living in your country. - so long as they 'assimilate'.
I care about my nation yet I am not as narrowminded as you are. Preservation doesn't mean enacting a nanny state. Would you like to be forced by law to marry an African? I wouldn't. If you open your mind and perspectives one day, maybe you will see it too. :)

OneEnglishNorman
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 02:10 AM
I have yet to see an African who didn't abuse our hospitality. But if such a person exists and he is a citizen of our country, yes, he can stay.

This is difficult to reconcile with preservation of the European peoples. Most Africans in Europe do not commit crime and most "pay their way" through taxes. So a majority or sizeable minority are not abusing hospitality. But that's not the point.

SuuT
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 02:49 AM
Don't worry, I don't worry at all if you think I missed the point. :p

I've no doubt that that is true. Fact remains.


Yes it is. Many people are harmed by adult pornography too, yet it is legal because the people who make it give their consent.

3 for 3. The issue, once again, of a Germanic preservation forum, is what are the means by which Germanic Meta-Ethnic Preservation can be achieved. The more non-Germanics in a Germanic land is a threat. An obvious one, I might add.


I care about my nation yet I am not as narrowminded as you are.

Please remove your Ad Hominem: this is a highbrow section.


Preservation doesn't mean enacting a nanny state.

What does Preservation mean?


Would you like to be forced by law to marry an African?

False dilemma.


If you open your mind and perspectives one day, maybe you will see it too. :)

Yes. Maybe if I devote more time to thought and active pursuit in 'real' life to saving our collective asses my mind will one day be set free. It shall soar like an eagle to the heights of introspection; I will be freed of all this baggage of hate and ignorance from which I suffer so greatly.


Sprake hierover ter Nederlanders spraak zou merk niet onderscheid ter uw zin.

Bloem
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 03:14 AM
3 for 3. The issue, once again, of a Germanic preservation forum, is what are the means by which Germanic Meta-Ethnic Preservation can be achieved. The more non-Germanics in a Germanic land is a threat. An obvious one, I might add.
It doesn't sound like you are being very realistic. Non-Germanics won't disappear from our land any soon. People talk about deportations, laws against miscegenation and more, I've seen it on SF and other places, but this is just keyboard warrior talks. It's 21st century not 1930's and 40's Nazi Germany. It will never happen and it's against our Dutch tradition too. Not all people marry Africans or Asians only a minority do and putting laws against them won't stop it. Look at drug prohibition laws, more and more drug consumption and the war on drugs isn't solving nothing.


Please remove your Ad Hominem: this is a highbrow section.
I don't know what's an ad hominem, if you mean an insult, it's only insulting if it's untrue. Which it isn't. Wanting to force others what to do and rudely questioning the presence of other nationalists on the board only because they don't think exactly like you is narrowmindedness.


What does Preservation mean?
Passing down our Dutch heritage and culture.


False dilemma.
No, it's the same thing. You want a law forcing consenting adults not to marry, it's the same principle. What goes around comes around. Don't use force on others unless you don't want force forced onto yourself.


Sprake hierover ter Nederlanders spraak zou merk niet onderscheid ter uw zin.
Ik zou niet weten waar jij Nederlands hebt geleerd maar jouw Nederlands is nog zo een 100 keer slechter dan mijn Engels. :o

SuuT
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 05:08 AM
It doesn't sound like you are being very realistic. Non-Germanics won't disappear from our land any soon.

Not if people of your perspective predominate.


People talk about deportations, laws against miscegenation and more, I've seen it on SF and other places, but this is just keyboard warrior talks.

Indeed. More action needs to be taken.


It's 21st century not 1930's and 40's Nazi Germany. It will never happen and it's against our Dutch tradition too.

Never say never. No matter, we now know where we can send bastards, half-breeds, muts, misegenators and hypocrites: the Netherlands.:)


Not all people marry Africans or Asians only a minority do and putting laws against them won't stop it.

You need to read this thread: http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=66224#post66224

And yes if laws are enacted, and enforced after a mass deportation, they will stop misegenators dead in their tracks. Or they can always move to the Netherlands where there are more open minds.


I don't know what's an ad hominem, if you mean an insult, it's only insulting if it's untrue. Which it isn't.

The burden of proof is now on you to prove my "narrowmindedness". Which cannot be done. Please remove your Ad Hominem.


Wanting to force others what to do...

Is Misegenation good for Germanic Preservation?


...and rudely questioning the presence of other nationalists on the board only because they don't think exactly like you is narrowmindedness.

Might I suggest that you attempt to read with more exactness? Here is what I said:


Honestly, I don't know how you people end up on a Germanic Preservation forum. To expell alien elements, both racially and culturally, is the most basic of basic steps in ensuring survival. You not only don't mind that miscegenation is legal, you don't even care about alien elements living in your country. - so long as they 'assimilate'.

I've said nothing of Nationalism. Nationalism is narrower than the cause of Germanic Preservation, which is - clear as day - what I was talking about. You, just like all of the people who are going to thank you in these types of threads, are missing the fundamentals and jumping straight to the feel-good empty rhetoric; or, attempting to justify their own behavior. Because they want what they want. Period.


Passing down our Dutch heritage and culture.

Again, you should read this: http://forums.skadi.net/showthread...6224#post66224

All of the reason, rationale, and logic is laid-out very plainly. In short order, you will not have a Dutch heritage or culture to pass down.


No, it's the same thing. You want a law forcing consenting adults not to marry, it's the same principle. What goes around comes around. Don't use force on others unless you don't want force forced onto yourself.

The 'Golden Rule' argument is destroyed in the below thread by a very wise Englishman:

http://forums.skadi.net/showthread...6224#post66224 (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=66224#post66224)



Ik zou niet weten waar jij Nederlands hebt geleerd maar jouw Nederlands is nog zo een 100 keer slechter dan mijn Engels. :o

:D Please excuse me. Dutch is only my 6th language.:) (I would say more like 50%, though - 100% is absurd);).

Jäger
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 08:35 AM
Well said, but I am sufficiently hereetical to take it a step further, and say that the Germanic meta-ethnicity doesn't exist in a vacuum either, and has sister meta-ethnicities in the same manner.
No, the boundaries of such family relations is exactly what a meta-ethnicity (should) describes, or else, we are at a point where no one on the planet is foreign.

Dagna
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 11:40 AM
This is difficult to reconcile with preservation of the European peoples. Most Africans in Europe do not commit crime and most "pay their way" through taxes. So a majority or sizeable minority are not abusing hospitality. But that's not the point.
You seem to see Africans through rosy spectacles. Africans in countries like France and Spain cause a lot of trouble. Some of them even immigrate illegally. They start riots and protests. Others bring their polygamous families there despite that polygamy is illegal. The African lifestyle is simply incompatible with European and Germanic communities. That you preach to Germanic Americans that they should accept Africans in their country despite being foreign, but you do not practice what you preach as you reject the presence of all the nice and pleasant Africans you like into your country, also speaks volumes.

Siebenbürgerin
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 11:55 AM
I don't approve of miscegenation or even ethnic mixing but I don't think laws against it will solve anything. Maybe they will only make it worse and attract negative attention on the country. I agree with Bloem that in the 21st Century it won't happen. The last time there were laws against marriages with Gypsies in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Age. However, like Volksdeutscher said, we don't even need these laws. Save for a few money-hungry girls which like to go out with the rich Gypsy Manele singers, most people don't mix with Gypsies. Most people avoid the Gypsies because with very few exceptions they are known to be low class, poor, dirty and violent. We had a Gypsy classmate in Primary School and she was always alone without a deskmate because no one wanted to sit with her at the desk. So, we have our own unwritten, common "code of conduct".

Bloem
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 02:23 PM
Not if people of your perspective predominate.

Indeed. More action needs to be taken.
So go ahead and do something out in the real world. I'm not stopping you. :p


Never say never. No matter, we now know where we can send bastards, half-breeds, muts, misegenators and hypocrites: the Netherlands:)

And yes if laws are enacted, and enforced after a mass deportation, they will stop misegenators dead in their tracks. Or they can always move to the Netherlands where there are more open minds.I'm afraid not, because Americans don't fit with the Dutch culture. American culture is very alien to ours and they do bad job at integrating. You'll have to keep them there in the USA. :(


The burden of proof is now on you to prove my "narrowmindedness". Which cannot be done. Please remove your Ad Hominem.I have already proven it, it's as obvious as the fact that the grass is green. Accepting the possibility of more than one solution = open minded. Accepting the possibility of only one solution = narrow minded. I won't remove anything.


Is Misegenation good for Germanic Preservation?No. But like I said, not everything that is bad can be made illegal. Is smoking good for Germanic preservation? Not either. Sorry but out in the real world you can't ban everything you don't approve of.


I've said nothing of Nationalism. Nationalism is narrower than the cause of Germanic Preservation, which is - clear as day - what I was talking about. You, just like all of the people who are going to thank you in these types of threads, are missing the fundamentals and jumping straight to the feel-good empty rhetoric; or, attempting to justify their own behavior. Because they want what they want. Period. It's simple, I'm a nationalist and care for my people, including for their freedom to do what they wish with their lives. You attacked me because I had a different opinion from those you agree with. If you don't want to admit that, then it's not my problem.


Again, you should read this: http://forums.skadi.net/showthread...6224#post66224

All of the reason, rationale, and logic is laid-out very plainly. In short order, you will not have a Dutch heritage or culture to pass down.I will have one because it has been passed down by my family and I will pass it down to mine. You don't know much about my country to begin with, and you grossly overestimate the threat of miscegenation. I have news for you, not all the immigrants in my country miscegenate. There is a bigger problem. That's the Muslim immigrants who refuse to integrate and who spread their culture in my country. I happen to like my culture and my values so I don't welcome those immigrants. And the Dutch women I know wouldn't touch them even from distance.


The 'Golden Rule' argument is destroyed in the below thread by a very wise Englishman:

http://forums.skadi.net/showthread...6224#post66224 (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=66224#post66224)Why don't you make your own arguments here instead of using 1000 links elsewhere and what other people said?


:D Please excuse me. Dutch is only my 6th language.:) (I would say more like 50%, though - 100% is absurd);).It's absurd that you think I said anything about "100%" because I didn't. I said "100 times" which isn't the same thing. ;) Even so, if you think your Dutch is half as good as my English, you're still wrong. Because judging by your near nonexistent level of speaking/understanding Dutch I guess we will have to continue in English. :o


Enjoy your short stay on the forum.Why short? I think I'm going to stick around for a long time. :)

Gefjon
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 05:32 PM
The Germanic man is a free man who chooses what to do with his private life by himself, not forced by a law. Therefore, I oppose a law telling our people which races to marry and which races not to marry.

In our country it would never work. Since our countrymen have been emancipated for such a long time- it would at least destroy the cabinet and destroy a lot of political carreers if someone would even mention it. Not because it is about race but it about destroying freedom.
What if this freedom means the extinction of the Germanic race? Is it worth it? What should be the priority of Dutch people, freedom or survival?


Most Africans in Europe do not commit crime and most "pay their way" through taxes.
Utter nonsense. Please have a read through the news.

Angelcynn Beorn
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 06:07 PM
The Germanic man is a free man who chooses what to do with his private life by himself, not forced by a law. Therefore, I oppose a law telling our people which races to marry and which races not to marry.

The Visigoths - who were far closer to the original Germanics than any alive today - had laws against mixing with Romano-Iberians 1,500 years ago. So your theory falls flat on the very first hurdle.

DanseMacabre
Sunday, May 25th, 2008, 06:32 PM
Well, ideally there would be no non-Germanics in America for Germanics to mix with. So if there were to be miscegenation laws it would apply to Germanic Americans would visited some place. They could simply be stripped of their citizenship and forbidden to return.

Nachtengel
Monday, January 12th, 2009, 01:11 AM
There should be laws against miscegenation if we care about the future of our ethno-racial make-up. I'm in the category of people who think miscegenation should result in removal of national rights. First of all foreigners should not be handed German citizenship. Upon entering a relationship with a foreigner (cohabitation, engagement or marriage, whatever it may be), the German should lose his/her citizenship and all rights that come with it. If a child is born, it shall not be awarded German citizenship either. If this doesn't deter Germans from participating in miscegenation, harsher laws could be added. Example, the German who miscegenates should no longer be allowed to set foot on German soil (exile).

InvaderNat
Monday, January 12th, 2009, 01:37 AM
Miscegenation is for the most part a side-effect of the immigration boom which should never have transpired.

Indeed, laws cant realistically stop it, the only way to stop/reduce it is to remove the conditions in which it can occur i.e. multicultural/racialism. Not to mention encouraging your children to look after there own and reject marxist ideaology.

Telluride
Monday, January 12th, 2009, 07:16 AM
Would it be illogical to make the argument that miscegenation is almost comparable to incest? There are laws against such because of the immorality and because the children of these relationships can have genetic abnormalities/defects as well as psychological trauma. This doesn't seem entirely different from what happens when people of differing races procreate and the reactions from society are similar. I've often retorted in my thoughts, "Why is it wrong to criticize miscegenation but it is understandable to shun incest?" We have one crime based on blood but no longer the other, yet, in a way, isn't miscegenation an incest of its own? Miscegenation is being promoted as acceptable and good while there are clearly negative consequences to it. Why should something so serious be approached without the help of the law? Immigrants aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

If, at some point in the future, society had an extremely negative reaction to white people marrying and procreating, would you argue that it should be banned?

I'm not arguing for (or against) interracial relationships themselves, but banning things that society finds "icky" can lead to all sorts of trouble and abuse. Laws prohibiting Holocaust denial and racism are good examples of this.