Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 92

Thread: Thread split: "Anglosaxonism", should Hannover join the U.K.?

  1. #81
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Angelfolc
    Ancestry
    Angles, Frisians, Saxons
    Subrace
    Anglo-Saxon
    Y-DNA
    Y
    mtDNA
    X
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Hannover Hannover
    Location
    Between your ears
    Gender
    Family
    Yorkist
    Occupation
    Once More Unto the Breach
    Politics
    Welf
    Religion
    ex-U.C. of England & Ireland
    Posts
    2,734
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,039
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    216
    Thanked in
    186 Posts
    It was jarring to see the fasces in Congress when I watched some televised session recently, but it must have been copied from France by the Democrats back in Jefferson's administration, since he was a Francophile and participant in their Revolution. The other party has always been Anglophile and in Burkean conservative opposition to Jacobinism, so don't paint us all with the same brush. How about you and us both using the Roman eagle, which we copied from you? We originally had the HRE arms alongside the Belgic lion in addition to the same basic arms later adopted by Canada and seen on the defaced Red Ensign. Canada also chose the maple as based on the original New England pine tree Red Ensign.

    FYI I'm a renegade, as you know, so don't care about enforcing orthodox ideology of any kind, because it's all Greek to me. I'm agnostic and apathetic about most religious, political and economic dogmas, so whatever floats your boat. I'm not impressed with Communism, Fascism or National Socialism; people who believe in cult programming and social engineering are inhumane and repulsive. As I said, a traditional electoral monarchy on the Germanic model, with a warrior aristocracy, is all that's necessary for any folk, as neither despotism nor republicanism are meant to be long-term exercise of authority, any more than war or peace are permanent conditions.

  2. #82
    Whamen Respekter
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Žoreišar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    2 Hours Ago @ 01:12 AM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Ancestry
    East Norwegian + distant Finnish
    Subrace
    Nordid + reduced CM
    Y-DNA
    I1a1
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    30
    Occupation
    Traditional Craftsman
    Politics
    Family, Nation & Nature
    Religion
    Heathen Worldview
    Posts
    2,609
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,637
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,641
    Thanked in
    826 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    Perhaps the non-Indogermanic preservationist policies of New Zealand, Finland and Norway would fit The Apricity better likewise.
    Objectively speaking, Finland has one of the most preservationist policies for Germanic language in the World, seeing as less than 5% of its population speaks Swedish as their mother tongue, but 100% of the children going to school are required to learn it.
    A nation is an organic thing, historically defined.
    A wave of passionate energy which unites past, present and future generations

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Žoreišar For This Useful Post:


  4. #83
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Angelfolc
    Ancestry
    Angles, Frisians, Saxons
    Subrace
    Anglo-Saxon
    Y-DNA
    Y
    mtDNA
    X
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Hannover Hannover
    Location
    Between your ears
    Gender
    Family
    Yorkist
    Occupation
    Once More Unto the Breach
    Politics
    Welf
    Religion
    ex-U.C. of England & Ireland
    Posts
    2,734
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,039
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    216
    Thanked in
    186 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Žoreišar View Post
    Objectively speaking, Finland has one of the most preservationist policies for Germanic language in the World, seeing as less than 5% of its population speaks Swedish as their mother tongue, but 100% of the children going to school are required to learn it.
    Any kind of leverage to protect the Swedish folk in Åland and Åbo. It's funny how this was a condition of Finland going to Moscow, so as much as Finnish Swede doesn't like them over it, I wonder if the Uralics would have been so generous had the Fennomen written the treaty. I'd guess it would be no better or worse than in Ireland, with Stockholm getting all of Egentliga Finland and the archipelago becoming like the Isle of Mann. Without Russians involved, it's hard to tell where the capital would be without Helsingfors all built up, but probably still in Nyland. I have a feeling that Russia would come conquering anyway and with not as much capacity to ward them off.

  5. #84
    Senior Member
    Wyrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 11:45 PM
    Ethnicity
    Norwegian American
    Ancestry
    Norwegian, German
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    Gender
    Age
    22
    Family
    Youth
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    133
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    12
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    56
    Thanked in
    29 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Norman Pride View Post
    I think this thread raises a series of pertinent questions about what it is that constitutes a nation. There was a similar discussion before where I raised a similar question, although I cannot find that thread any longer. Anyway, the point raised back then was how far do we go when we want to define a nation? Who were the first Germans, Englishmen, Norwegians, Swedes, etc.? Were the Vikings a nation? What about all these Germanic tribes, such as the Saxons or the Suebians? According to which criteria do we define a nation? For example, the Low Germans and Dutch have more in common and are more similar culturally and genetically to each other than they are to the Bavarians or Austrians. The Alemannics from Vorarlberg in Austria are more similar to the Alemannics from Germany and Switzerland than they are to Viennese or Styrians. Are the Austrians or Flemish nations of their own, or are they German, respectively Dutch? That depends on whom you ask. Some people consider the Dutch people to be Germans in denial rather than an ethnicity of their own. But are they really German, or have they been separate for long enough to form a nation of their own? Are the Luxembourgers more German or are they Netherlanders? And what about the Afrikaners? German, Dutch, or a nation of their own? What about the people in bordering areas? Are people in Schleswig more German or more Danish? Are the Alsatians German or French? Again, it depends whom you ask.

    Baorn's idea to unite Saxons from different countries is not that far-fetched when you think about the Bajuvarians, Alemannics or Frisians. Which begs the question, are the Frisians a nation? They have a sub-forum here on Skadi, indicating that their tribal identity would somehow supersede their national identity. Some will agree because like the Saxons, they're a tribe that extends beyond a single country, while others will say no, because Frisian is just a local/regional identity, like the Bavarians or Swabians, who are first and foremost German in their eyes. In Canada, there are several types of nationalists. A certain type of nationalist, loyalists, considers Canada a Dominion of the English rather than a separate, newborn nation. Those will usually fly the Dominion of Canada flag instead of our current flag. Anyway, in my opinion there are multiple forms of Germanic preservation, whether it's national, tribal, regionalist of pan-Germanic.

    I also have to agree with Baorn about the attitude towards those who don't support the Axis during WWII. I have experienced it myself and it is rather unpleasant and close minded. Just because someone is not NS does not make them an enemy of Germanic preservation. Actually, there are many aspects of NS that aren't exactly the most Germanic and which some members like Dagna pointed out quite well in another thread. History is not black and white and blindly supporting NS and worshipping Hitler like a Messiah is not the most objective view either. Instead of burning bridges with fellow Germanic preservationists, those bridges should be built. Intolerance and close mindedness leave us stuck in the past instead of progressing forward.
    I agree with this, very good questions. Not all Germanics subscribe to nationalism, some would like to see a pan-Germanic state or alliance for example.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Wyrd For This Useful Post:


  7. #85
    The lion's gate
    Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    1 Hour Ago @ 01:24 AM
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Politics
    Völkisch traditionalist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,477
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,745
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,960
    Thanked in
    1,334 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    LMAO @ ignoring Frenchmen, but the Westhoek Dutch have no such luxury.
    There's no such thing as Westhoek Frenchmen. The Mesen-Wervik-Heuvelland area of the Westhoek (the green zone on the map below), the most Southern tip, is under some French pressure, but that's it. They're not "Westhoek Frenchmen", they're just Frenchmen who are settling and living in Flanders. It's a recent development.



    How am I ignoring this though? And how is that relevant to this debate?

    Sorry, but it was you who praised the carving up of Saxony by Charlemagne and ephemeral victory of a jailbreak by the Ottonians in their prison environment as a job well done
    I've never done such a thing. And carving up Saxony? Also, I would fail to see how it's (politically) relevant to anyone living today. It doesn't practically affect us.

    Pleasant news about Belgian Flanders, so please support annexation of the Westhoek.
    The Westhoek is Flemish. Not sure why you advocate annexation by France.

    I wonder why France doesn't insist on annexing Wallonie and Geneva, Monaco and Andorra
    The Walloons are not French and are viewed as a joke in France, not in the least due to the Walloons' weird French accent. They feature in many a French joke. Ideally France does want to annex Wallonia though and all the land to the West of the Rhine - so that means all of Flanders, the southern Netherlands, Luxembourg and a large chunk of German territory. This has been the case since the days of Napoleon. This is France's most important geopolitical ambition in Western Europe, Charles de Gaulle was interested in getting this done too.

    If you had your way and carved up the Netherlands and Germany the French would be one step closer to achieving that long standing geopolitical goal of theirs. But then again, all the victims and potential victims of this plan are all Italoceltics to you anyway.

    There should have been more concerted effort to link up Calais with Holland instead of being bogged down in Aquitaine and Gascony and that was a particular failing of the Lancastrians, because it's due to the Yorkists that Burgundy et al served a bridge that resulted in Leicester as English viceroy and the subsequent Orangist realignment.
    French-Flanders, which was never fully Flemish - for instance no-one ever spoke Dutch in Lille (Rijsel) - is now almost completely romanized. Only some very old people living right on the border still speak a Flemish dialect there.

    The only chance of Flanders ever taking back French-Flanders is when France would be engulfed and distracted by civil war - and it would require Flanders having an ultra-nationalist government when that happens. Or the Germans would have to do it for the Flemings, if they had an ultra-nationalist government of their own (and hence are not divided and weakened by living in three seperate states as you propose) - they actually did it in 1940. The area which was historically populated by Flemings was designated to be attached to Flanders and Flanders to the Reich - but then your country ruined the chance of the Flemings still living there not "being bogged down by Aquitane and Gascony" by first supporting the U.K. and eventually waging war on Germany. Now nearly all the Flemings there are gone or romanized.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyrd
    I agree with this, very good questions. Not all Germanics subscribe to nationalism, some would like to see a pan-Germanic state or alliance for example.
    These are valid questions if you do not know the answer to them yet. Such questions plague us European Germanics much less than people across the pond apparently. The answers to these questions were never arbitrary nor can they be - not for ethnopreservationists and not without wrecking the intellectual basis which underpins ethnopreservationism; nations are the product of history & represent an end point in history.

    We already have plenty of other threads dealing with these and similar questions. What Baorn suggests is well beyond the scope of these matters, as are these questions. And he advocates much more than a pan-Germanic state, he wants to absorb Celtic nations too while having no problems with Flemings and most Germans expanding to the South and mixing with Italians and Gauls. All his backpedaling and sophistry notwithstanding, it still boils down to that.

    Also not pertinent are the shenanigans of aristocrats: just because centuries ago some royals married and ruled multiple nations or allied with this or that kingdom does not make for good modern day territorial claims for ethnopreservationists. There are no Anglos in Hannover and no Germans in the U.K. Hannover joining the Anglosphere makes no sense in this universe nor an alternate universe.

    And Europe is not the U.S.A. or North-America; it may be quite possible to merge several states in the U.S.A., for instance in the South, but Europe is not manufacturable like that. Americans may look at map and think "hmm, Schleswig-Holstein, wasn't that once Danish territory? Okay, let's re-attach it to Denmark", but all you'd get is war between the Danish and German nations. This not about nationalism per se, but it is about the preservation of Germanic (sub)nations - there is nothing else for us to preserve but that, whether you are a nationalist (= someone who advocates independence for their nation) or not as a preservationist. Nationalism is the best way of pulling it off in nearly every case nonetheless.

    I myself however am for a return of Flanders to the Netherlands and a united Netherlands to Germany, I'm not a Flemish independist per se; I'm a Flemish preservationist - and Flanders can best preserve itself when aligned with the Netherlands and all the German countries. That move is primarly about power politics for me, not about identitarian questions. it's because Flanders has zero chance of surviving French ambitions if it does not band together with other Germanic nations - Flemish culture simply can not withstand the strength of the pull of French culture. Then it makes most sense for Flemings to join a union with the Netherlands - and even Germany - to accomplish that. But I will never deny the existence of nations which are actually around, nor can this political union I favor facilitate the erasure of a nation residing within the union: a Germanization of the Low Countries is completely undesirable as well.

    Not all pan-Germanic ideas are equally valid either as a Dutch-German union (or Scandinavian or American-Canadian unions - those combinations are not inherently ridiculous) and even that would be incredibly hard to pull off as at present there's not enough support it. The ship of Dutch-Germany unity sailed by 1850, probably forever - and the outcome of WW2 was the final nail in the coffin. Yet German lands or Hannover being part of a U.K. led block can never work, will never work. It's begging for war.

    Advocate pan-Germanic states or a return to subnations all you want, but do not expect much support for such agendas from European Germanics, least of all when it involves Anglos seizing Dutch or German lands on the basis of fantasies about the middle ages or the early modern era - or when the agenda looks like anything remotely resembling white nationalism. If Anglos feel passionate about such issues, why not concentrate on North-America and promote such things over there? It could be hypothetically done in the Anglosphere, but not in Europe.
    "Beauty is a form of genius, higher, indeed, than genius, as it needs no explanation." - Oscar Wilde

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Chlodovech For This Useful Post:


  9. #86
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Angelfolc
    Ancestry
    Angles, Frisians, Saxons
    Subrace
    Anglo-Saxon
    Y-DNA
    Y
    mtDNA
    X
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Hannover Hannover
    Location
    Between your ears
    Gender
    Family
    Yorkist
    Occupation
    Once More Unto the Breach
    Politics
    Welf
    Religion
    ex-U.C. of England & Ireland
    Posts
    2,734
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,039
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    216
    Thanked in
    186 Posts
    I did inform you that I'm on your side of the Flemish question. What you said about blowing off Frogs trying to talk with you was awesome! You did seem a little too proud and amused by the state of Saxons disintegrated by your hero Charlemagne; I prefer when the Merovingians didn't yet gain that absolute power, when Saxons and Longobards were still extant free folks. I only wrote that you shouldn't forget the Westhoek Dutch trapped behind French borders when you combine Flanders with the Netherlands, so fight for them too. Yes, Chlodovech XIV loved that type of Rhine and Rhōne lebensraum. No, I think that we should all be in one decentralised Germania and with ethnolinguistic subdivisions thereof, so all Franks, Saxons, Frisians, Swabians, Bavarians, etc get undivided lands within. The Italo-Celtic enemy wouldn't stand a chance; it would be like Augustus crossing the limes and inviting the assimilation of the West by Germanic retribution, which was funny and actually proved Rome wasn't so great, but they still won the Kulturkampf even though we won soil.

    I've already written that I don't see any difference between Italic vs Celtic cohabitational arrangements, but maybe the Uralic question is because it's non-Indogermanic. I used to think that the Danish-German Border belonged at the Danevirke, but if further North, isn't far from the convention of Anglo-Scottish Border beyond Hadrian's Wall. Furthermore, as owning Hannover proved to echo, the Anglo-Saxon homeland belongs behind a West Germanic boundary as the pre-Viking relationship is more fundamentally sound to restore. This means that Jutland is properly West Germanic and I support Englishness tied to the fates of both sides of the Bight, not within the scope of Celtics, but traditional ethnolinguistic brethren. This has been so much harder since the split with Hannover and when Albert conferred Saxe-Coburg-Gotha onto Alfred instead of Edward VII--similar disunity to the Norman and Angevin domains 700 years before. England got stuck with India instead of either Welf or Wettin Saxony, so you must understand the situation. Good that you want to preserve Flat Dutch within the sphere of overall Teutonic and not subordinated to High Dutch, for we agree. Wouldn't you like to synchronise efforts across the Atlantic and bypass the EU? It IS a global environment now and we have to think about those types of geopolitics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyrd View Post
    I agree with this, very good questions. Not all Germanics subscribe to nationalism, some would like to see a pan-Germanic state or alliance for example.
    They're not mutually exclusive goals.
    Last edited by Chlodovech; Friday, March 6th, 2020 at 03:55 PM. Reason: Only quote those parts of a post you reply to.

  10. #87
    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
    46
    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 
    1,439
    Thanked in
    644 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    Wouldn't you like to synchronise efforts across the Atlantic and bypass the EU? It IS a global environment now and we have to think about those types of geopolitics.
    Nations are the only antidote to globalism, and globalism is the greatest threat to unique Volks.

    If the EU should ever become the "Europe of Regions" (which is merely a nicer sounding euphemism for the United States of Europe) we'll have the same kind of balkanisation, ethnic mixing and ethnic conflicts like the US. No thanks. Our efforts should be to undo the EU and reinstate strong, independent, ethnocentric Nation States.

    This has been so much harder since the split with Hannover and when Albert conferred Saxe-Coburg-Gotha onto Alfred instead of Edward VII
    Did you ever consider that the wild intermarrying of "monarchs" did not affect the people that happen to live under their rules? Hannover wasnt "English", ever, just as England isnt German just because every female monarch since the 16th century is German. And this "power-politics marriage business" is one of the greatest problems of the old-monarch system, because it often was arranged to break into this or that other country and excert influence through the bed (or children), which never worked, but often wrecked havoc across Europe in the end.
    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

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to velvet For This Useful Post:


  12. #88
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Angelfolc
    Ancestry
    Angles, Frisians, Saxons
    Subrace
    Anglo-Saxon
    Y-DNA
    Y
    mtDNA
    X
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Hannover Hannover
    Location
    Between your ears
    Gender
    Family
    Yorkist
    Occupation
    Once More Unto the Breach
    Politics
    Welf
    Religion
    ex-U.C. of England & Ireland
    Posts
    2,734
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,039
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    216
    Thanked in
    186 Posts
    There's a correlation between Anglo-Saxonism and Anglo-German monarchy, something better than "British India". Try thinking about what the English wanted: a German king, not a French one. You really don't know anything about us English.

  13. #89
    Senior Member
    Coillearnach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Online
    1 Hour Ago @ 01:55 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Celtic
    Gender
    Age
    31
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Vagrant
    Politics
    Nativism/Nationalism
    Religion
    Summum bonum
    Posts
    385
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    335
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    314
    Thanked in
    154 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    There's a correlation between Anglo-Saxonism and Anglo-German monarchy, something better than "British India". Try thinking about what the English wanted: a German king, not a French one. You really don't know anything about us English.
    No one ever asks what the English people want, just wave after wave of displacing, foreign elites the multitudes never ask for - I honestly have to wonder if it's almost solely responsible for the intense classism in Britain.

    That said, I don't want German monarchs either British people deserve British monarchs

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Coillearnach For This Useful Post:


  15. #90
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Angelfolc
    Ancestry
    Angles, Frisians, Saxons
    Subrace
    Anglo-Saxon
    Y-DNA
    Y
    mtDNA
    X
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Hannover Hannover
    Location
    Between your ears
    Gender
    Family
    Yorkist
    Occupation
    Once More Unto the Breach
    Politics
    Welf
    Religion
    ex-U.C. of England & Ireland
    Posts
    2,734
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,039
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    216
    Thanked in
    186 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Coillearnach View Post
    No one ever asks what the English people want, just wave after wave of displacing, foreign elites the multitudes never ask for - I honestly have to wonder if it's almost solely responsible for the intense classism in Britain.

    That said, I don't want German monarchs either British people deserve British monarchs
    Agreed. Conventions didn't allow for the Cromwellian solution to stick and we had to wait for the American Revolution instead, but at least Parliamentarian Prime Ministry could put our kind in power and maintain relations with NW Germanics in Holland (William III), Denmark (Prince George) and Germany (Hanover and Saxe-Coburg-Gotha). America cuts to the chase by restoring the Protectors--Presidents, so we've had mostly English, Dutch (van Buren, Roosevelt, Roosevelt), German (Hoover, Eisenhower, Trump), Welsh (Davis--I don't count Obama), Scottish (Monroe, Polk, Buchanan, Arthur, McKinley, Kennedy) and Irish (Reagan).

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Thread split: The U.S.A., American or English?
    By Idis in forum The United States
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 1 Week Ago, 08:45 PM
  2. [SPLIT] FS' Christian Credentials (Schwab vs FS - thread split)
    By schwab in forum Christianity
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: Tuesday, August 27th, 2019, 05:58 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
  •