Why Do Other Ethnicities Always Seem to Want Very Much to Fit into Germanic Culture?

[Bradford]

Slavs, Finns, and a number of other eastern ethnicities. They always seemingly have very little pride in their own ETHNIC GROUP, but plenty of pride in their particular nation. South slavs typically try to associate themselves with latins, while West Slavs, even after WW2, seem to want to be considered Hitler's race (sort of forgetting why Hitler even invaded them in the first place.) And of course East slavs never fail to mention how Swedes invaded Kiev and started the state that basically kickstarted what is today Ukraine and Russia (Because frankly without them, those eastern savages probably would've been wide fields populated by marginally lighter mongols.)

You'll also notice that a lot of these eastern peoples, particularly slavs, have a lot more White Nationalism going on as well than any undisputably white, western countries.

[Sigurd]

Slavs, Finns, and a number of other eastern ethnicities.

I yet have to see a Finn other than a Finland-Swede (=Germanics) claiming that they belonged to the Germanic ethnic group.

More than a hundred years of oppression by Russia led to their emancipation, and that they take quite a bit of pride in their heritage.

That they should however seek friendly relations with the Germanic world, is also caused by historical ties: Being ruled - somewhat more benevolently than by the Russians - by Sweden for several centuries, as well as the geographic proximity, would come into account there.

But I haven't yet found a Finn pushing an agenda that they be Germanics. On the contrary, I've come across the equally crackpot theories of Turanism, a pan-Mongolian movement, a scourge to which alas growing numbers of Finnish nationalists alas subscribe.

while West Slavs, even after WW2, seem to want to be considered Hitler's race

Point out details? I can't seem to find much reference that many Poles, Czechs or Slovaks wished to be Germanics, let alone Germans. Whenever it has happened, then it is a development of the last 15 years, undoubtedly this has to do with an agenda other than identity.

Also, what is "Hitler's race" - the Nordid phenotype? Well, that is not exclusive to Germanics, that stretches beyond Germanic lands, and Germanic lands are also not exclusively Nordid.

sort of forgetting why Hitler even invaded them in the first place

First of all, Hitler did not invade any of these lands. That is an old historical error, malicious propaganda by the Allied victors. He annexed that which remained of Bohemia and Moravia, made Slovakia a puppet state. Of Poland he originally only claimed stretches of land that had previously been German, and were still populated by Germans then. As for Mission Barbarossa, that was merely a pre-emptive strike against Russia, which can credibly be believed to have planned an invasion of Germany intstead.

Secondly - why did he even look eastwards? Can you find anything other than "living space" as a rationale?

It is out of question that he did not hold the Slavs in particularly high esteem, but his supposed "invasion" of their lands was not based on that disregard. Whether this could have at a later stage have been a decisive reason in annexing further land and re-populating it with Germans, remains possible - but was not a large factor in the conflicts that were actually fought.

(Because frankly without them, those eastern savages probably would've been wide fields populated by marginally lighter mongols.)

The Slavs are not Germanics, but still racially Europid, I doubt there would have been much of a Mongoloid racial influence added thereto. Bear in mind, that much of the Asian part of the Russian Federation are not Slavs, but parts of myriad originally Nomad groups absolutely unrelated to Indo-Europeans.

That the Golden Horde would have been more successful is something I would dispute, too - Genghis Khan's empire was quite extensive when it existed, but collapsed reasonably soon thereafter, this would not have had much of a bearing about cultural or racial influences into Russia.

You'll also notice that a lot of these eastern peoples, particularly slavs, have a lot more White Nationalism going on as well than any undisputably white, western countries.

Yes, this is the reservation. Even though I had to point out some errors in your post, I have to agree that there is a "sentiment of shame" amongst many of them, especially those of Slavic or Romance background.

It is undeniable that they appear to suffer from some sort of inferiority complex, and always want to "belong" with us, they must evidently envy us for something.

[Neophyte]

More than a hundred years of oppression by Russia led to their emancipation, and that they take quite a bit of pride in their heritage.

Ahem, it was the Finns themselves who sought that solution. The Russian annexation of Finland was, basically, a Finnish coup de etat as they felt that they would have greater political autonomy as a Russian archdukedom than as a part of Sweden. So much for Germanic identification on their side.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Magnus_Sprengtporten

[Sigurd]

Ahem, it was the Finns themselves who sought that solution.

I never claimed otherwise, I am well aware of that historical fact.

What remains undisputed however is the fact that Russian rule turned out to be less benevolent than Finns had hoped, and certainly less benevolent than the Swedish rule from which they sought to flee, and with even less political autonomy.

Due to this malevolent Russian rule, tensions between Finns and Russians are today much greater than those between Finns and Swedes, who began to co-operate again. The longer Finns were ruled by Russia, the more they realised that Sweden had not been that malevolent to them after all.

[Nachtengel]

Simply put, because Germanics are superior.

[þeudiskaz]

The Germanic ethnicity is strong. It has outlasted foriegn influences better than any other ethnicity. As soon as Rome realized that the German Volk could not be militarily defeated, they attempted to "convert" the Germanic people to using conventional Roman ideas, such as Empire, and "civilization" but such foreign-ness was not only rejected in Roman times, but persisted throughout the Middle Ages, when the Germanic people retained much of their heritage in regards to localization of loyalty, as well as a greater ethnic bond than many other ethnicities.

I can think of no other culture that could have resisted the lure of Roman Imperial culture than Germany. I can think of no other ethnicity that is still so in touch with it's true heritage, and ethnic pride. In addition to these things, the Germanic people are renowned for their martial skill, a skill that is no doubt envied by many other cultures with... less proud martial prowess.

[AngloTeutonic]

Germanics could have taken over the whole world during world war 2, if Brtiain and America (2 Germanic Empires) had joined with the Reich. Then who would have stopped us? Unfortunately, we had to kill eachother.

[Rassenhygieniker]

First of all, Hitler did not invade any of these lands.

He may not have succeeded in invading these lands, but he at least tried to do so back in 1941.

It is out of question that he did not hold the Slavs in particularly high esteem, but his supposed "invasion" of their lands was not based on that disregard.

Wrong, he viewed them as a racial mixture between several different type of untermenschen who were torturing the lands on which they lived on and wanted to liberate these lands from the subhuman oppression exerted on them.

The Slavs are not Germanics, but still racially Europid

More specifically Slavs are a mixture of races, if Slavs are to be considered as racially Europids, so should any type of caucasoid.

[Sigurd]

He may not have succeeded in invading these lands, but he at least tried to do so back in 1941.

This is a matter of perspective. Hitler viewed the two-front war of the Central Powers in WWI particularly inconducive, having fought in that particular conflict. Hitler was strategically cleverer than that.

By his own accord, he would thus have never started a two-front war, that is without threat from the other side of the border. Considering that the Russians had a greater fighting force, it can be assumed that Stalin was ready to invade Germany.

Hitler was just faster, hoping to gain strategic advantage, in the face of a conflict that would be fought either way - because it would likely not have been before long until Stalin invaded.

But it could hardly have been a pure war of invasion. Germany had 3,410 tanks, Russia had 24,000 ... if it had been an fail-safe aggressive war, Germany should have had three times the power, i.e. near-enough twenty-two times the amount they had, nearly 70,000. Moreover were these Sovjet tanks technically more advanced, approx. 1,400 T-34 and nearly 700 KW-Series, both of which considered the most advanced tanks.

This means, that the invasion of the Sovjet Union was hardly a war of aggression, but rather a pre-emptive strike of necessity.

Wrong, he viewed them as a racial mixture between several different type of untermenschen who were torturing the lands on which they lived on and wanted to liberate these lands from the subhuman oppression exerted on them.

He viewed "Russia's vassal border states" as potential land for living space for Germans. That he could have thus invaded Russia or her bordering allies at some stage earlier or later, is quite likely.

However, starting a conflict whilst another conflict is still going on, with the mission to gain territory on a major power - that would be historically unique.

So, whilst it possible that he would have invaded them later for their disregard of them - in this case, this is very unlikely as the main driving reason, had the conflict with the USSR been resolved victoriously, this would merely have been a positive side-effect.

To believe anything else is to give credence to Allied Victor Propaganda without even looking at the details.

More specifically Slavs are a mixture of races, if Slavs are to be considered as racially Europids, so should any type of caucasoid.

Yes, any type of "Caucasoid" is racially "Europ(o)id", the two terms are synonymous. "Europid" as a term was merely made fashionable by Cavalli-Sforza.

"Caucasoid" is a term which relates to the ethnological hypothesis of a racial genesis of Europids in the caucasus.

But by definition, yes, both the term "Caucasoid" and the term "Europid" include the races of Europe, the Near-East and Middle-East and Northern Africa.

[Bradford]

I yet have to see a Finn other than a Finland-Swede (=Germanics) claiming that they belonged to the Germanic ethnic group.

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/5751/finnishk.jpg

Read this.