Green Hair, Purple Skin... Why the Emphasis on "Preservation"?

[Gentilis]

The more threads I read on the Skadi forum the more concerned I become that the emphasis on preservation seems to be out of step with modern times.

Are people here only interested in preservation or is there room to dialogue about evolution too?

I mean, what's with all the avatars of antiquated warrior types. After all, when was the last time you saw a viking in full battle dress, with sword unsheathed, rubbing shoulders with the rich and powerful of this world? Isn't it time for a role model update? Isn't it brain power, rather than brute force, that is going to save us?

And what of evolution? Are we a pickled lot, are can we not contemplate cultrual, racial and spiritual evolution? Europe may be old, but that's not to say we need be archaic.

If a previously unknow race of humans with green hair and purple skin suddenly came out of hiding and it turned out that they were all endowed with superior athletic abilities, superior intelligence (IQs in the 150-200 range), and unsurpassed physical symmetry/beauty, would miscegenation with them be a good or bad thing? If the answer it a firm negative, does that mean to say that Europeans would be better off giving up on their notions of superiority than fosake the goals of cultrual, racial and spiritual preservation? What do we really want?

[svartabrandr]

Are people here only interested in preservation or is there room to dialogue about evolution too?

I mean, what's with all the avatars of antiquated warrior types. After all, when was the last time you saw a viking in full battle dress, with sword unsheathed, rubbing shoulders with the rich and powerful of this world? Isn't it time for a role model update? Isn't it brain power, rather than brute force, that is going to save us?

In my opinion the future is as important as the past. To me tradition and innovation are equals. Our past is very important since it has made us who we are. It is part of our identity. Our future is as important since it represents who we want to be and what we should strive for. I think one reason that you see such an emphasis on the past is that it is easier. It is much easier to put a picture of a Viking then to draw a picture of what you think the Scandinavians should look like in 500 years. As for a picture of a modern day role model what would you suggest? Unfortunately I can’t really think of anything modern that would equate to the warriors of our past. As far as discussions go it’s much easier to talk of something that has happened than the uncertainty of the future. Any plans for evolution would probably be long term so I think in the end we should make sure the futures of our cultures are secured before we start planning the future itself. On the other hand if we deicide where we want to end up it could make it easier to fix the problems of today.

If a previously unknow race of humans with green hair and purple skin suddenly came out of hiding and it turned out that they were all endowed with superior athletic abilities, superior intelligence (IQs in the 150-200 range), and unsurpassed physical symmetry/beauty, would miscegenation with them be a good or bad thing? If the answer it a firm negative, does that mean to say that Europeans would be better off giving up on their notions of superiority than fosake the goals of cultrual, racial and spiritual preservation? What do we really want?

I am interested in what others have to say about this.

[Oskorei]

A good example of a future Aryan ideal, from science fiction, are S.M. Stirlings Drakas (he's written about them in several books by now). I dont agree with the Drakan worldview 100% but its inspiring.

Basically it takes place in an alternative history, where the Loyalists moved to Southern Africa after they lost the war against the 13 colonies. They create an elitist, slave-owning, ruthless society, eventually becoming an ethnic group and a culture, called Drakas, and take over the world in about 300 years.

I could go on and on, but if you like the idea of cybernetically and genetically enhanced, immortal, space-travelling Aryans hunting down democratic yankees like prey, you should check out these books

[svartabrandr]

Sounds interesting I will check it out.

[Grimr]

http://www.smstirling.com/

[B4HXTA]

The more threads I read on the Skadi forum the more concerned I become that the emphasis on preservation seems to be out of step with modern times.

Are people here only interested in preservation or is there room to dialogue about evolution too?

I mean, what's with all the avatars of antiquated warrior types. After all, when was the last time you saw a viking in full battle dress, with sword unsheathed, rubbing shoulders with the rich and powerful of this world? Isn't it time for a role model update? Isn't it brain power, rather than brute force, that is going to save us?

And what of evolution? Are we a pickled lot, are can we not contemplate cultrual, racial and spiritual evolution? Europe may be old, but that's not to say we need be archaic.

If a previously unknow race of humans with green hair and purple skin suddenly came out of hiding and it turned out that they were all endowed with superior athletic abilities, superior intelligence (IQs in the 150-200 range), and unsurpassed physical symmetry/beauty, would miscegenation with them be a good or bad thing? If the answer it a firm negative, does that mean to say that Europeans would be better off giving up on their notions of superiority than fosake the goals of cultrual, racial and spiritual preservation? What do we really want?

I assume from your example that you are saying they have complete superiority. Other genetic traits such as morality and work ethic are important.

I would recommend racial mixing for the white race with the purple skinned race [I would prefer green skin and purple hair (photosynthetic skin)]. But why would a beautiful race with a 150-200 IQ be dumb enough to breed with us ugly stupid savages?

It is natural for the superior to avoid breeding with the inferior, and it is natural for the inferior to breed with the superior. I suppose the top must fight a losing battle.

[Siegmund]

Are people here only interested in preservation or is there room to dialogue about evolution too?

My view is that preservation without evolution is doomed. Even individuals must evolve on a personal level, or stagnate.

I mean, what's with all the avatars of antiquated warrior types. After all, when was the last time you saw a viking in full battle dress, with sword unsheathed, rubbing shoulders with the rich and powerful of this world? Isn't it time for a role model update? Isn't it brain power, rather than brute force, that is going to save us?

Because of our small numbers, probably brain power as you say. If we were in the majority, I'd say brain power and brute force.

To your underlying question, though, I think idealized models from the past can be useful metaphors of strength and dedication for those in the present. For heroic archetypes drawn from a more up to date "chronicle," John Galt and Dagny Taggert of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged are hard to beat.

And what of evolution? Are we a pickled lot, are can we not contemplate cultrual, racial and spiritual evolution? Europe may be old, but that's not to say we need be archaic.

Absolutely. We don't want to be left behind!

If a previously unknow race of humans with green hair and purple skin suddenly came out of hiding and it turned out that they were all endowed with superior athletic abilities, superior intelligence (IQs in the 150-200 range), and unsurpassed physical symmetry/beauty, would miscegenation with them be a good or bad thing? If the answer it a firm negative, does that mean to say that Europeans would be better off giving up on their notions of superiority than fosake the goals of cultrual, racial and spiritual preservation? What do we really want?

I doubt very much they would come out of hiding, as they would be recognized as the threat that they are, hunted down, and killed.

Some years ago there was a TV series in the US entitled Prey whose story line was that select members of the human species had evolved into a new, superior species. The idea was unpopular; the show was canceled after one or two seasons; and I have been looking for it to be re-released on DVD ever since. It captured my imagination as an obvious metaphor for white or Aryan supremacy and separation, but also literally: what if this process of evolution had already begun?

In any case, such a species would not want to mate with its inferiors but would, rather, treat them as prey. So from the vantage point of the old, the new species would have to be annihilated, to the last child.

And isn't that annihilation already happening to whites today, slowly, through miscegenative assimilation? The difference is that few whites are as intensely self-aware as the new species in Prey, and thus we stand a correspondingly lower chance of survival than they.