Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 112

Thread: "Anglosaxonism", Should Hannover Join the U.K.?

  1. #81
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Eastern
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Posts
    3,943
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    9,602
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    425
    Thanked in
    372 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Þoreiðar 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.

  2. #82
    Senior Member
    Wyrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    Monday, August 17th, 2020 @ 06:58 PM
    Ethnicity
    Norwegian American
    Ancestry
    Norwegian, German
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    Gender
    Age
    23
    Family
    Youth
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    141
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    30
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    73
    Thanked in
    36 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.

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


  4. #83
    6th army lives matter
    Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,820
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,262
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,322
    Thanked in
    1,534 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.
    “As brothers and sisters we knew instinctively that if we were going to stand in darkness, best we stand in a darkness we had made ourselves.” - Douglas Coupland

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


  6. #84
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Eastern
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Posts
    3,943
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    9,602
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    425
    Thanked in
    372 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 Rhône 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.

  7. #85
    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 
    1,502
    Thanked in
    692 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

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


  9. #86
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Eastern
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Posts
    3,943
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    9,602
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    425
    Thanked in
    372 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.

  10. #87
    Senior Member
    Coillearnach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Online
    Monday, October 12th, 2020 @ 08:16 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Celtic
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Vagrant
    Politics
    Nativism/Nationalism
    Religion
    Summum bonum
    Posts
    426
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    397
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    397
    Thanked in
    193 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

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


  12. #88
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Eastern
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Posts
    3,943
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    9,602
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    425
    Thanked in
    372 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).

  13. #89
    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 
    1,502
    Thanked in
    692 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.
    There is no such thing as "Anglo-German".
    The monarch system was not one of people's making. It's interesting that you worship that imposed system so much and the resulting, arbitrary divisions or 'alliances', while blahing about some "tribal choice", and when we Germans did exactly that, chosing our own Kaiser, circumventing and effectively blocking this Roman/Vatican-imposed power, you go berserk against it.

    It's btw of no relevance whether the chosen monarch comes from a German, a Spanish, a Dutch, a British or whatever "nobility house", they're in "power" because the Vatican approves them. It's all fake and smokescreen. And it's not the British people who chose these kings, nor is it the Spanish, the Dutch, the German etc people's choice. The "divorce" of Britain from Vatican is a fake one too, to allow for a second (and then a third) marriage, after Cromwell put the former wives to death. Didnt Cromwell also start this unhappy tradition of chosing "German" wives (Anna von Kleve) for the British king? To "connect to the mainland Europe protestants"?

    When you decry the "loss" of Cromwell's 'British unity' ambitions, it's quite hypocritical. While you accused our "evil Kaiser" of shedding blood for German unity (which he didnt), you ignore that it was Cromwell that started the still ongoing, and eternal lasting hostility between England and Ireland that can never be reconciled unless Britain let's Ireland go. But you dont care about that near-genocide of a people that Britain wants to rule over. Maybe this is because of your own mixlings status that you think, in far away America and your British larping fantasies, that they somehow "belong together" when they dont. Ireland is Ireland and England is England. But of course, you're an empire-worshipper and you dont care about that this empire is multi-ethnic and as such is the anti-thesis to ethnic preservation.

    That you want to score a point with denouncing British India doesnt work with me. Maybe you can fool others with that. The Commonwealth has a lot more problems than British India (let's say Pakistan, with Farsi being teached in British schools maybe, with Paki grooming gangs and Islam 'import' within the Commonwealth), again ignoring that the Indian Sikhs would even support actual English Nationalism and the Indians are not the ones causing trouble in Britain.
    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

  14. #90
    Senior Administrator
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Aeternitas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    1,562
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    68
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    581
    Thanked in
    191 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    Perhaps there should be a thread discussing how Germanic Ireland is, but I don't wonder if the knee jerk reaction would be overwhelmingly negative, since Ireland and Finland have no subforums despite being equally bicultural countries as Canada, Belgium, Luxembourg and Switzerland. I don't expect to see Irish and Finnish flags any time soon on Skadi, because of Continental and typically Hochdeutsch systemic bias that simply cannot relate outside of its little cubby hole, but they don't corner the market on extensions of ethnicity into cohabitational states. Imagine signs reading: "Swiss, Luxemburgers, Belgians and/or Canadians Need Not Apply", in the same vein as faced by the Irish, although curiously not by the Finns.
    There already is such a discussion thread - 60 pages of it - not to mention an entire section to discuss Germanic influences and questions of periphery.

    Furthermore, it's not a question of official status or bilingualism but of individual and group Germanic identity. There are plenty of areas where Germanic languages have no recognized/official status but from where we welcome individuals of Germanic background. In fact, we welcome Germanics from all over the world, be it Eastern Europe or South America. We also don't consider all Canadians, Belgians, Swiss, etc. equally Germanic, but only those of actual Germanic background. Neither the Swiss Italians nor the Walloons are considered Germanic on Skadi. We simply represent some of those countries via sub-forums because a good majority of their population is Germanic. To call Switzerland a "quasi-Italic" state for instance is stretching it. There are 8.5% Italian speakers in Switzerland (mostly concentrated in the canton of Ticino, the southern part of Graubünden and the Gondo Valley) and steadily decreasing, compared to the 63% German speakers; as for the Romansh, they make up a small 0.5%. Flanders is a similar case; it is the most populated area in Belgium (68% Flemish speakers). Alas, if you actually notice, there is no Belgian sub-forum, the forum is called Netherlands & Flanders. The same goes for Switzerland, it is included in a forum called The German Countries so when we say Switzerland, we actually refer to what is known as Deutschschweiz. I think the message is pretty clear; hardly anyone in the entire history of Skadi has been confused by this arrangement.

    We are not going to create a sub-forum for every single country, territory or region where Germanics live, but only for those countries which we consider to be predominantly or fully Germanic. In addition, we generally create new forums when the amount of activity calls for it. We don't have separate sub-forums for Åland or the Orkney Islands, for instance, because there aren't enough threads about these topics to warrant it. But that doesn't mean that we discriminate against Germanics from such territories or consider them second-class citizens. It was precisely for such cases that the Germanic Diaspora, Enclaves, & Influences section was created. And while Skadi welcomes Finland Swedes and considers them as Germanic as any other group, let me tell you why you won't be seeing a Finnish flag on Skadi. Years ago, somewhere back in 2006 if memory serves well, we decided to experiment with this very idea. Skadi opened a Finland section where Germanic cultural influences, as well as Germanic minorities in Finland and Åland could be discussed. Most people however misunderstood the section's purpose and turned it into a Finnish section where people discussed non-Germanic topics. Soon, some people started discussion threads in Finnish language, Fenno-Russian disputes or topics that had very little to do with Germanic preservation. We ended up having to close down that section. Same story with the former French forum, which was also disbanded. Same reason why we don't need an Italian section for the South Tyroleans. Actually, South Tyroleans don't even consider themselves Italian and according to polls a good percentage of the German population would support secession.

    I can picture Continentals at Skadi raising a shitstorm, instead of equal treatment of disinterest in those from four quasi-Italic states as they take for granted somehow only befitting those from a single quasi-Celtic state (even though Ireland is no more Celtic or less Germanic than Wales and Scotland, unless you agree that Romanism is a foreign religion); getting all squinty-eyed about those from quasi-Uralic Finland.
    Ireland and Wales not being considered Germanic countries has very little to do with Catholicism. Nowhere outside of Northern Ireland is Catholic used as an ethnic denominator and we actually accept the Northern Irish Ulster and Scottish Lowlanders as members. The Scottish Highlands, Ireland proper and Wales are where we draw the line. Germanic heritage is more than just language and culture, it is a combination of ethno-genetics, linguistics/culture and finally, identification. Possessing only one of those factors does not necessarily make one Germanic. Studies have shown that the genetics of territories considered Celtic differ quite a bit from one another. For example, the genetics of the Scottish Germanics differ from those of Gaelic Scots and other Celts, including the Welsh. The Scottish were found to carry the highest Viking/Scandinavian genetic footprints, as high as 30% in Shetland and 25% in Orkney. Some consider Scots to be a separate Germanic language rather than a dialect of English. The Cornish, who some consider to be Celtic are much more similar genetically to other English groups than they are to the Welsh or the Celtic Scots. You might find the following topics of interest: The Forgotten Legacy of Germanic Scotland & Irish, Scots, Welsh Not "Celts"; More in Common with Portuguese, Spaniards. In addition, most of the Celts don't identify as Germanic and resent any idea of assimilation into the Anglosphere or Germanicdom. If you were a member of Irish Nationalism back in the day, you would be well aware of this. I can tell you with certainty what would happen if we were to open an Irish sub-forum: half of the time, we would be dealing with Celtic/Gaelic cultural topics and the other half, the staff would have to clean the forum up from flame wars and dramas between unionists and supporters of the IRA. Now that's something we can do without. Let the Celts be Celts, and the Germanics Germanic. Whether people like it or not, the line has to be drawn somewhere and someone is going to be outside of that line. Historically speaking, one will hardly find any part of Europe that has not been inhabited at one time or another by a Germanic tribe or submitted to Germanic settlements and particularly from a cultural POV, most of the West has been "germanicized" to a certain degree. But if we included all such countries it would be a tedious, complicated process to establish which of their natives would qualify as Germanic and to what degree. If we gave one of them the benefit of the doubt, we'd have to be fair and give it to all and this would sooner or later lead to Skadi transforming into a de facto pan-European rather than Germanic community.

    The Skadi of 2020 is not the Skadi of 2004. Skadi changed its orientation from European to Germanic in December 2004 (de jure). By September 2008, when Skadi was resurrected after about a year hiatus and merged with its intermediary, the Althing, the transition had been complete. And we are not going back, but only moving forward. In fact, if you read Thorburn's post from back then, you will learn that Skadi itself was originally supposed to be a Germanic project. Skadi did not start as Aryan Dawn or Pantheon Europa, but as Thorburn's personal website - the domain skadi.net, which was supposed to develop into an information portal about the indigenous Germanic ways of life - and later toplist and banner exchange. The reason Skadi Forum was originally Eurocentric is nature is because it inherited AD/PE's orientation and decided to keep it. However, even at that time, a significant number of its membership was in fact Germanic and many of the members who joined were pro-Germanic rather than pan-European in nature.

    Surely, there are many memorable moments from the pre-Germanic Skadi, yet at the same time we are glad to have put the dramas and flame wars typical of that time behind us: Nords vs. Meds, East vs. West, Slavs vs. Germanics, Finns vs. Russians, Croats vs. Serbs... They might be entertaining for a while but after you've seen a few, it becomes old and repetitive. As someone who was on staff during that period too, I've heard it all a thousand times and tbh, our people don't learn anything and aren't brought in touch with their roots and culture through soap operas; on the contrary, they are multi-culturized and confused. They enforce the worst stereotypes and encourage negativity in others, and that is neither conducive to European, nor Germanic preservation.

    Am I not a reliable reference for those times?
    I'm afraid not. Your presence on Skadi was on-and-off in 2004 too.

    Parsifal was a nobody back then.
    So? Everybody was a nobody at some point, including those movers and shakers you speak of. Hardly anyone became famous overnight, with the exception of trolls of course. But while trolls get noticed quickly, they also get flushed just as quick. And that's not something to aspire to. Chlodovech happens to be the longest-serving, most loyal and most active staff member on Skadi (aside from Thorburn and myself). Consequently, he earns a rightful place in the Skadi hall of fame.

    All the key movers and shakers did go so you think that some transhumanistic idea of Skadi should be an acceptable and desirable "Great Replacement"? If we cannot vouch for the SNPA, tNP, BuB, NF and even early TA, as well as AD, PE, or SF and VNN, I think we will have The Phora, Stumble Inn and The Beer Barrel. Let's go ask Fade if he wants to take his rightful place before Hellstar.
    Skadi is not frozen in time, its history stretches for nearly 20 years. Since 2004, many other names have joined the list of movers and shakers. Sigurd and Thusnelda, for instance, who joined in 2005, our second admin, Huginn ok Muninn, who joined in 2007. Despite the fact that they joined later, these people have been involved in Skadi significantly more than many of the folks who were active during the pre-Germanic era.

    Loki didn't agree with the heavy Continental emphasis that soon came to dominate Skadi when the German language subforum was around, even though he and I both are proud of our German roots.
    There was no particular Continental emphasis and the German language forum operated pretty much on its own. It had its own admins, its own moderators and its own staff forum which were separate from ours. Also, neither the German forum nor a perceived heavy Continental emphasis had anything to do with the reasons Loki did his own thing. Skadi never treated New World Germanics like second class citizens and welcomed them among staff just as they did Europeans. In fact, some people complained that Skadi was too "americanized". What is however true is that sometimes the membership and discussion trends fluctuated according to political and world trends. We've had times when European topics were more popular (e.g. European refugee crisis, Brexit) while at other times it was American topics (such as the alt-right or the Trump presidency) that were discussed more.

    You and velvet rely on second hand experience to cast your criticism of my good memories of vibrant message boards and so what if I have always faced abrasive cults of personality?
    I rely on first-hand experience and the source of all sources, Thorburn himself. And there are no cults of personality on Skadi. The reason you've faced issues before was because of your own attitude towards staff. Skadi is not the right place to attack, slander or insult its orientation, its staff or their decisions. Furthermore public threads are not the right place to discuss or complain about all the aforementioned issues. The staff can only respect you if you respect them. And the same goes for other Germanic ethnicities and groups. We wish to maintain a friendly and respectful climate where Germanics feel comfortable and at home, like in an extended family. Particularly regular and veteran members are expected to self-moderate and set an example through their behavior and speech because newer members observe how they behave and follow suit. Veteran member status doesn't only come with privileges, it also comes with responsibilities and the two are interconnected.

    Finally, while Skadi equally accepts nationalist/ethnocentric and pan-Germanic ideas, we frown upon ideologies and ideas which promote a weakening of or disregard for our Germanic identity, heritage and culture and whose direct or indirect result is the dissolution or the division of Germanic ethno-genetic substance. Similarly, there's a difference between highbrow discussions of the degree of Germanicity in various nations and downplaying the heritage of traditionally regarded Germanic nations and labeling them "Romanized", "Italo-Celtic", "quasi-Uralic" or the like, calling members of said nations "half-Germanic" and generally adopting a "more Germanic than thou" mindset. Let's not get sidetracked by such squabbles. The scope of our board is to foster Germanic unity and a positive vision for Germanics.

  15. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Aeternitas For This Useful Post:


Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Israel to Join the EU?
    By Siebenbürgerin in forum Politics & Geopolitics
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: Saturday, April 10th, 2021, 03:08 AM
  2. Swiss to Join the EU – NOT!
    By Nachtengel in forum The German Countries
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Tuesday, September 11th, 2018, 06:11 PM
  3. Haji Clans Taking Over Bremen, Hannover, Stuttgart...
    By Ahnenerbe in forum The German Countries
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Saturday, November 19th, 2016, 09:40 PM

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
  •