Page 23 of 54 FirstFirst ... 13181920212223242526272833 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 538

Thread: Is There Any White Group You Strongly Dislike?

  1. #221
    Senior Member
    Gary in TX's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Online
    Wednesday, April 12th, 2017 @ 04:19 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Danish, English and Scottish.
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Saxon, Scot and Dane.
    Subrace
    Borreby
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Aryan Nationalist
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    194
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    I agree with you that the term 'white' shouldn't be a real problem in America and that it is the easiest way do distinguish between your people and the ones coming from Africa, which perhaps are the two most important ethnic groups in America. There aren't any other autochthonous white ethnicities in America. But in Europe there are other white ethnicities than ours and therefor 'white' can be a confusing term when used as a way to make a distinction between certain ethnicities.
    Yes, exactly.

    I do understand that to be white mostly means more than just skin colour and that Americans would not accept a white looking Turk or something like that in there country. But when people are caucasian but not white (as it was said in the post I quoted), then what does white really mean? The term looses its meaning, if it even had one in a European or physical anthropological context, and is reduced to nothing more than skin colour.
    In my opinion it depends on who is using the term and how much credibility they have.

    If it's a White Nationalist or Pro-European Organization known for taking great pains in making sure that anyone that's the least bit Asian, African, Native American, Mesitizo, Pacific Islander doesn't slip in then it doesn't lose it's meaning because someone who's merely 'Caucasian' wouldn't automatically make the grade. They would be weeded out.

    Now if it's the US Government which classifies 'Hispanics' and Arabs as so called 'Whites' then their interpretation of what is 'White' or not should be immediately suspect and shouldn't be taken worth a grain of salt based completely on their past record of lies and half truths.

    So it kind of depends on who's using the term.

    You have to sift through all the BS and take a look at the kind of people that the particular group in question is talking about in order to determine whether they're White/European's or not.

    That's the best I can explain it, hope that works for you.

    So my comment was mostly directed at the statement that some people are not racially compatible because they are not white although they are caucasian. The question I then ask myself is: When is someone white or not and therefor racially incompatible because of a lack of said whiteness? Ethnical or racial terms are thus in my opinion better concepts to determine whether someone is compatible or not.
    When that person is of mixed blood, meaning that there's something other than European blood in their genetic makeup and background (Asian, African, Jew, Arab or whatever).

    For instance there are quite a few groups that fit into this mixed category (Albanians, Bosnians, Armenians, Persians, Southern Italians for some examples although there are many more). Just because some of these groups have some European ancestors somewhere in the woodpile doesn't make them 'White' or of European Heritage.

    It's as simple as that. They're mixed...perhaps their ancestors were (unmixed) Europeans at some point WAY back in history, but over the generations there was enough inter-breeding with Non-Europeans because of various invasions and migrations to the point where they changed into something different (a mixture of European and something else).

    I hope this clarifies it a bit.
    It's okay, I figured I knew what you meant (and I did).

  2. #222
    Senior Member
    velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, March 8th, 2020 @ 03:10 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    47
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    5,000
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,295
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,476
    Thanked in
    672 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard
    But in Europe there are other white ethnicities than ours and therefor 'white' can be a confusing term when used as a way to make a distinction between certain ethnicities.
    Oh my, I apologize for using the term (maybe I should edit my post )

    Nah. Well, since on Stormfront, Apricity and other such places Turks, Arabs, Middle Easterners, Semites and even some North African people are considered white, it slipped my fingers. Btw, what you quoted of my post refered to Turks, not Bosniaks, maybe this also added to your confusion

    But we should indeed adopt a more accurate term to describe North-West Europeans when we mean North-West Europeans. White is just confusing, and even in America differs in meaning depending on who is using it. Same for Caucasian. There are stabilised ethnicities that emerged from a mix, where basic Caucasian features often seem to be more dominant and remain, although the people clearly are not "white" and even less European. So, more accuracy prevents confusion, always a good thing, I would think.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  3. #223
    Waffenbrüder und Blut
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Rassenhygieniker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Homo europæus
    Ancestry
    Iutum (Jutes), Agendicum (Sénons)
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    Scotland
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    NS-Eugeniker
    Religion
    Highland Catholic
    Posts
    725
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    12
    Thanked in
    12 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Gary in TX View Post
    Over here the term 'White' has a certain meaning and whenever I use it personally then it basically means people of Northern European Heritage.
    Yes personally perhaps, but when it comes to wider audiences in America that it be amongst “White Nationalists” or other this word had it's meaning changed/altered/distorted from North Western European, to just European, which is bad for Germanics because it puts highborn pure bloods in the same category as lowborn mixed bloods such as the wops, dagos, swarthoids, blond mongoloids and any other sorts of racial mongrels. Which is bad because having them being called “white” just like Germanics, will make Germanic people think they are just as equal as us or that Europeans are “all the same”, which will encourage race mixing with these “whites”.

    Personally this is one of the many reasons why Stormfront is not very well liked amongst Germanic Europeans, because it encourages race mixing and miscegenation.


    Quote Originally Posted by Gary in TX View Post
    Now if it's the US Government which classifies 'Hispanics' and Arabs as so called 'Whites' then their interpretation of what is 'White' or not should be immediately suspect and shouldn't be taken worth a grain of salt based completely on their past record of lies and half truths.
    Would you classy her as “White” or “Non-White”?


  4. #224
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last Online
    Thursday, May 3rd, 2012 @ 09:29 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Mainly Yorkshire
    Country
    England England
    State
    Yorkshire Yorkshire
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Gender
    Age
    35
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,109
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    30
    Thanked in
    30 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    Nah. Well, since on Stormfront, Apricity and other such places Turks, Arabs, Middle Easterners, Semites and even some North African people are considered white
    Exactly. And members of garbage sites like those two are actually probably of worse racial quality than your average random non-racialist board. The reason is that all-inclusive pan-Europeanism and 'white nationalism' only appeal to the impure, or those who are currently trespassing in another person's homeland. The Apricity has about 20 Poles/Balts who are living in Britain or Germany, and a ton of half Gypsies, Lapps etc., and all they talk about is how much they hate racism

    Stormfront is mainly Americans with ancestry from all over Europe, who are so insecure about their heritage they have to level the playing field by acting as though 'whites' were a homogenous group of equals.

    I have less than no respect for such 'preservationists'.

  5. #225
    Senior Member
    Gary in TX's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Online
    Wednesday, April 12th, 2017 @ 04:19 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Danish, English and Scottish.
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Saxon, Scot and Dane.
    Subrace
    Borreby
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Aryan Nationalist
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    194
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Rassenhygieniker View Post
    Yes personally perhaps, but when it comes to wider audiences in America that it be amongst “White Nationalists” or other this word had it's meaning changed/altered/distorted from North Western European, to just European, which is bad for Germanics because it puts highborn pure bloods in the same category as lowborn mixed bloods such as the wops, dagos, swarthoids, blond mongoloids and any other sorts of racial mongrels. Which is bad because having them being called “white” just like Germanics, will make Germanic people think they are just as equal as us or that Europeans are “all the same”, which will encourage race mixing with these “whites”.
    All I can go by is what I believe in and what the people I know believe in.

    To me and others like me that's what the term 'White' means.

    Personally this is one of the many reasons why Stormfront is not very well liked amongst Germanic Europeans, because it encourages race mixing and miscegenation.
    ...and that's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

    Would you classy her as “White” or “Non-White”?
    Non-White.

    To me she looks like she probably has some European Heritage in her somewhere, but like it's mixed with something else.

    Hard to tell what it is though. Part Arab or South/Central American perhaps???

    This is kind of like that game we used to play going to WN Rallies ('Name That Creature').

  6. #226
    I agree, because 'White' is indeed a term which has no stable definition, but is often used because it can be an easy term depending on the context. I would be lying if I said that noone in the Netherlands uses the term. When someone here for example says "we white people should stand up against all those immigrants" I do understand what he means.

    When that person is of mixed blood, meaning that there's something other than European blood in their genetic makeup and background (Asian, African, Jew, Arab or whatever).

    For instance there are quite a few groups that fit into this mixed category (Albanians, Bosnians, Armenians, Persians, Southern Italians for some examples although there are many more). Just because some of these groups have some European ancestors somewhere in the woodpile doesn't make them 'White' or of European Heritage.

    It's as simple as that. They're mixed...perhaps their ancestors were (unmixed) Europeans at some point WAY back in history, but over the generations there was enough inter-breeding with Non-Europeans because of various invasions and migrations to the point where they changed into something different (a mixture of European and something else).
    I don't think that if someone is less white it is always caused by intermixture with non-Europeans. (But this is a completely different discussion.) And what if someone is mixed with a white Armenian? That person would be Europid, white, but still foreign to Germanics. That's why a sub-racial classification to determine whether someone is assimilable or not would be a lot clearer.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet
    Nah. Well, since on Stormfront, Apricity and other such places Turks, Arabs, Middle Easterners, Semites and even some North African people are considered white, it slipped my fingers. Btw, what you quoted of my post refered to Turks, not Bosniaks, maybe this also added to your confusion
    It did indeed, my bad. As far as I know there are many Bosniaks who belong to sub-races which are also present in the Germanic countries. That's why I found the term 'white' confusing. But when it comes to Turks such a confusion doesn't occur very easily, because they are racially very foreign to Germanics. This also shows the importance of context when using relative terms. It's not like the term is completely useless.

  7. #227
    Senior Member
    Gary in TX's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Online
    Wednesday, April 12th, 2017 @ 04:19 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Danish, English and Scottish.
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Saxon, Scot and Dane.
    Subrace
    Borreby
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Aryan Nationalist
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    194
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    I agree, because 'White' is indeed a term which has no stable definition, but is often used because it can be an easy term depending on the context. I would be lying if I said that noone in the Netherlands uses the term. When someone here for example says "we white people should stand up against all those immigrants" I do understand what he means.
    Yes, exactly.

    Many times it's simply a title of convenience.

    It's accuracy just depends on who's using the term.

    For instance I've heard of soccer players of African origin referred to as 'British' or 'English' simply because they live and reside in the UK. Just because some people (including the British government) refer to these people as 'British' or 'English' doesn't make the terms any less accurate or mean that anyone should quit using them, it just means that some people misuse the terms in an attempt to make those Africans something that they are not and never can be.

    I don't think that if someone is less white it is always caused by intermixture with non-Europeans. (But this is a completely different discussion.) And what if someone is mixed with a white Armenian? That person would be Europid, white, but still foreign to Germanics. That's why a sub-racial classification to determine whether someone is assimilable or not would be a lot clearer.
    Armenian's are not White/Europeans, they themselves are a mixture of Asian/Arab and European Blood.....so they wouldn't be 'As White' because of an intermixture.

    (which is kind of my point)

    It did indeed, my bad. As far as I know there are many Bosniaks who belong to sub-races which are also present in the Germanic countries. That's why I found the term 'white' confusing. But when it comes to Turks such a confusion doesn't occur very easily, because they are racially very foreign to Germanics. This also shows the importance of context when using relative terms. It's not like the term is completely useless.
    Not too many Bosniaks in my neck of the woods, but from what I've read regarding the history of their people and seen from pictures of quite a few of them then they'd also be in the 'Mixed Race' category as far as I'm concerned.

  8. #228
    New Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Online
    Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 @ 05:23 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Germany/Austria
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Arizona Arizona
    Location
    Phoenix
    Gender
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Retired engineer
    Politics
    Conservative/Libertarian
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    8
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Europeans smarter?

    Europeans are smarter because they are multilingual? I see you live in the Pacific Northwest. I am sure that if Oregon, Washington, and Idaho had different languages and cultural histories, every resident in those states would communicate just fine with the others.
    My mother, raised in Germany, was taught 3 languages growing up, like most educated Germans.
    I spoke only German until I was 6, and have since studied Latin and French in school. But I have no fluency in any of those languages now, because they no relevance in my day-to-day life and I have no one to speak them with.
    Does that make me dumber than if I had remained in Europe?
    I am sure multilingualism bears little relationship to intelligence.

  9. #229
    Member
    Vlad Cletus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Wednesday, June 16th, 2010 @ 06:50 PM
    Ethnicity
    .
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Posts
    209
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post

    Islam isnt any less imperialistic. Unlike Britain, which to a certain degree always respected the indigenous cultures they added to their empire, Islam always comes as a package. Kill the culture, kill the people, build the ugly mosques and impose a religious state. Islam is the perfectionism of imperialism and the Quran a handbook of conquering and submission.
    You could say the same thing about Christianity in many respects. In fact Christian missions were supported by the British Empire much like their predecessors (Spain and Portugal) or contemporary counterparts (France) albeit with more "civilized" means if you will. Do you recall what some of the Spaniard missionaries did after the Aztec Empire crumbled? Some of them desired to preserve aspects of the Aztec culture in written form, but then again many of them wanted to leave no trace of the old Aztec religion behind.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    They might be Caucasian. They are not European though, they are not white, they are not Germanic. And as such, racially incompatible.
    They might be Caucasian? They overwhelmingly are. Your bias is inhibiting and blinding you. Given the country's location and proximity to "Europe", in addition with the influx of immigration from further west over the centuries, how could there not be anyone who is European in Turkey? You're not acknowledging the dynamics here, you're just going with a very linear black-and-white perspective.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    And the problems the islamic world has, are self-made.
    History is a dynamic process that is multi-faceted. To lay the blame all upon the Islamic religion is ridiculous and goes against that dynamic. Again, no acknowledgment of the dynamics which is typical of ideologues or people who have their minds made up and will not listen to other perspectives.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gary in TX View Post
    What you're talking about there is Franjo Tuđman's initial idea/belief that Bosnian Muslims were just Croats who had converted to Islam in the previous centuries, that doesn't neccessarily mean that all Croatians felt that way (besides, even he changed his mind pretty rapidly as the war progressed which is why he went for the idea of a Greater Croatia later on...intitially he had just envisioned a Croatia within the framework of Yugoslavia too, that idea also went right out the window as well).

    This is what I think that you're talking about....(it's from one interview)...
    I was not referring to that. I take it that you did not read my entire post or at least read it more carefully. What I meant by the Independent State of Croatia is the Independent State or "Puppet State" under the Ustaša regime during World War II.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gary in TX View Post
    Otherwise why did the Croats go to war against the Muslims and ethnically cleanse them from their areas using the HOS and the HVO? See my point? Once the war began all that crap about them being Croats of the wrong religion went right out the window along with the idea of co-existing within Yugoslavia (just with more autonomy for the Croatian People).
    The Hrvatske Obrambene Snage or HOS actually endorsed the view of a Bosnia that would promote the unity of both Croats and Bosniaks rather than a greater Croatia envisioned earlier in the war by the HVO. Mind you, the latter organization was far less successful in the beginning compared to the HOS. There were actually Bosniaks amongst other foreign volunteers who fought in a number of irregular units of this paramilitary organization.

  10. #230
    Bloodhound
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Jäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Atlantean
    Gender
    Posts
    4,403
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    23
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    113
    Thanked in
    82 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Vlad Cletus View Post
    Given the country's location and proximity to "Europe", in addition with the influx of immigration from further west over the centuries, how could there not be anyone who is European in Turkey?
    I guess you understand the paradoxical nature of this statement, and that is why you put "Europe" in quotation marks, which doesn't really defy the logical trap you lay out here though.

    In any case, what should it really matter whether they are "European" () or not?
    "Nothing is more disgusting than the majority: because it consists of a few powerful predecessors, of rogues who adapt themselves, of weak who assimilate themselves, and the masses who imitate without knowing at all what they want." (Johann Wolfgang Goethe)

Similar Threads

  1. Dutch Study: White-Muslim Marriages Don’t Assimilate Either Group
    By Nachtengel in forum Netherlands & Flanders
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, October 16th, 2017, 02:30 PM
  2. White Males Now Classed As a 'Minority Group' at University
    By Hersir in forum Education & Schooling
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Thursday, June 1st, 2017, 08:18 AM
  3. ‘White Nationalism’ Group Registers to Lobby in Washington
    By blutundboden in forum The United States
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, June 18th, 2012, 10:49 PM
  4. Another Elderly White Man Attack by a Group of Blacks
    By OnePercent in forum The United States
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Friday, October 21st, 2011, 04:52 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •