View Poll Results: Who are the greater miscegenators, Meds or Nords?

Voters
56. You may not vote on this poll
  • Meds! They have an affinity for dark meat!

    18 32.14%
  • Nords! They're the most liberal and carefree!

    22 39.29%
  • About the same.

    16 28.57%
Page 1 of 7 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 64

Thread: Who are the greater miscegenators, Meds or Nords?

  1. #1
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Nordhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Monday, February 6th, 2006 @ 07:08 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Gender
    Politics
    Nordicist
    Posts
    3,153
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    Post Who are the greater miscegenators, Meds or Nords?

    There has been some debate on whether Mediterraneans miscegenate more than Nords. I have pointed out that Mediterraneans who colonized Central and South America had very different results from Northern Europeans who colonized North America, Australia, New Zealand, etc. Northern European colonies have largely been a success, whereas Mediterranean colonies have been racial failures. Can it be purely circumstantial? Also considering that Southern Europeans have more nonwhite admixture than Northern Europeans, albeit arguably insignificant. And most of the "Pan-Aryans" who have a questionable standard of whiteness seem to be Mediterraneans. Others say that Nords mix more in today's Jewish-controlled world. So what do you think? Overall, all things considered, who mixes more, who is more innately liberal in terms of racial preservation, Meds or Nords, or is it about the same?

  2. #2
    Member Gesta Bellica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, May 3rd, 2010 @ 07:45 PM
    Subrace
    Padanian
    Location
    30Km south from Milano
    Gender
    Age
    45
    Occupation
    Unknown
    Politics
    Isolationism
    Religion
    Agnostic
    Posts
    839
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post

    I think it was different in the past and the mestizos that came out in south america prove that...
    this happened because the local population was not so dark like africans or else?
    I really don't know what to think but a certain fact that the same mediterraneans that are claimed to be race mixing did not the same in Africa or Asia and that's aproven fact as well..

    I also wonder where all those afro-american with slighter skin (that are surely not 100% black) come from, if the nords are so pure and clean in the depth of their soul.. i mean they are almost the majority of the blacks there in the US!
    i have seen really few blacks that can be taken for africans...
    It's not that in the years of slavery a mongrel born from an interracial relationship was just destined to a life of slavery like the other? In the end the children of a mixed couple looks always really dark.
    And moreover i have travelled a lot in Europe and i have never seen people more willing to mix like scandinavians or germans.. it was a pure Babylon there..
    Wether we admit it or not everywhere we go raxemixing looks cool and exotic for at least the 95% of the population, maybe not with blacks but with mulattos or else...
    I think we are both in dark water...

    "E tutti si scandalizzano quando sentono dire: quel tale tipo di mammifero o di uccello ormai è sparito dalla faccia della terra, non lo vedremo più; è una grave perdita. Certo, si tratta di gravissime perdite.
    Ma non sarebbe forse più grave se sparisse una comunità umana?? --Bruno Salvadori

    Seven pictures of northern European males and seven pictures of northern African males were presented randomly via a computer screen to 82 Italian female undergraduates of the University of Padua, Italy.
    Each picture depicted a full frontal face with a neutral facial expression. Participants were asked to classify each picture as either northern Italian or southern Italian.
    On average, the seven pictures depicting northern Europeans were classified as northern Italians 81% of the time. The seven pictures depicting northern Africans were classified as southern Italians 83%
    of the time.



  3. #3
    Senior Member Scoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Friday, April 1st, 2005 @ 09:39 AM
    Subrace
    Europid
    Country
    European Union European Union
    Location
    Inside the Box
    Gender
    Politics
    Posthuman
    Posts
    836
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Gesta Bellica
    I think it was different in the past and the mestizos that came out in south america prove that...
    this happened because the local population was not so dark like africans or else?
    I really don't know what to think but a certain fact that the same mediterraneans that are claimed to be race mixing did not the same in Africa or Asia and that's aproven fact as well..

    I also wonder where all those afro-american with slighter skin (that are surely not 100% black) come from, if the nords are so pure and clean in the depth of their soul.. i mean they are almost the majority of the blacks there in the US!
    i have seen really few blacks that can be taken for africans...
    It's not that in the years of slavery a mongrel born from an interracial relationship was just destined to a life of slavery like the other? In the end the children of a mixed couple looks always really dark.
    And moreover i have travelled a lot in Europe and i have never seen people more willing to mix like scandinavians or germans.. it was a pure Babylon there..
    Wether we admit it or not everywhere we go raxemixing looks cool and exotic for at least the 95% of the population, maybe not with blacks but with mulattos or else...
    I think we are both in dark water...
    Good point. I know that in the Americas, the British (Anglo-Celtic) mixed with blacks and Indians, but usually did not accept the child as "one of them" (especially part-black kids). But obviously there was a lot of jungle fever on the plantation, because Afro-Americans don't look quite like Africans in most cases.

    French, Portuguese and Spanish mixed with the Indians and Blacks, and assimilated or partially assimilated the results into their own societies.

    I also notice that, it seems (this is very subjective and based on limited experience) that the French were much more open to assimilating culture from the African, Asian, and Indian peoples they came in contact with. In contrast, the British in the USA tended to push mainly their own Anglo-Saxon culture to the exclusion of others. I think the Meds being from a geographical crossroads of Europe/Asia/Africa and civilizations, were more open to assimilating blacks and indians in the New World.

    As for the failure of Med-derived New World governments to achieve prime status in geopolitics? Could be lack of ambition in the hot tropics (British-descended whites don't accomplish much in the "dirty south" of the USA either), could be their racial temperament, could be influence of non-European races in their societies.

    As for true nordics? They didn't have huge empires in recent history. The Varangian Rus could be an example, but it's so long ago (and doesn't include contact with Indians or Blacks) that it's hard to say.

  4. #4
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member


    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Gender
    Politics
    Putinism
    Posts
    5,212
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Scoob
    As for true nordics? They didn't have huge empires in recent history. The Varangian Rus could be an example, but it's so long ago (and doesn't include contact with Indians or Blacks) that it's hard to say.
    How about the Franks? The Ostrogoths? The Visigoths? The Danes? The Swedish Empire? Prussia? The British Empire? I could go on. Judging by their relatively small populations, Scandinavians have achieved an awful lot -- Vikings once held virtually the entire Europe at ransom, being only a fraction of the total population of Europe.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Necronomicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Wednesday, October 4th, 2006 @ 07:24 AM
    Subrace
    Mediterranid
    Location
    São Paulo
    Gender
    Age
    35
    Politics
    Racialist
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    133
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post

    I have never seen a pure North American Indian, they all have white traits, in Latin America most Armerindians are pure with no white mix.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki
    How about the Franks? The Ostrogoths? The Visigoths? The Danes? The Swedish Empire? Prussia? The British Empire? I could go on. Judging by their relatively small populations, Scandinavians have achieved an awful lot -- Vikings once held virtually the entire Europe at ransom, being only a fraction of the total population of Europe.
    The British empire was great but IMO it wasn't better then the Portuguese and the Spanish Empire.

    Also Britain does have a large med population, so obvious all the greatness in their Empire was due to its med population </sarcasm>

  6. #6
    Account Disabled on Request
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Friday, January 8th, 2010 @ 08:32 AM
    Ethnicity
    Dutch
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Lappland Lappland
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Posts
    3,345
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Post

    Meds and "Latins" in general. No contest.

    Rather than point out the obvious Mediterranean/Latin interracial transgressions (of which there are endless examples), I'll have a go at describing some "Nordish" ones.

    You can't count Australia as a regular "Nord population" because it population is descended from British convicts, and you know people in jail will have sex with anything - even another species of humanoid which more closely resemble a gorilla in a blond wig.

    Americans were spoiled by a land full of natural resources and used to getting what they wanted, and so became lazy and stupidly imported negroes. I don't think initially they were meant to be permanent parts of the landscape, in fact the colony of Liberia was formed as a place to repatriate negroes and Abraham Lincoln had already sent back thousands of them before he was assassinated by a radical Confederate loyalist and ardent supporter of slavery:

    "This country was formed for the white not for the black man. And looking upon African slavery from the same stand-point, as held by those noble framers of our Constitution, I for one, have ever considered it, one of the greatest blessings (both for themselves and us) that God ever bestowed upon a favored nation." - John Wilkes Booth, November, 1864, in a letter to his brother-in-law.

    And one cannot forget the persecution and forced assimilation of our Native peoples, the so-called 'Indians', mainly at the hands of Anglo-Germanic men, although the Spaniards had already beat them to it centuries earlier.

    The Dutch East Indies, the colonies in Indonesia are another example of Nordid intrusion, but yet again Mediterraneans/Latins, the Portugese, beat them to it.

    The sixteenth century marked the arrival of the Portuguese, the first Europeans in Indonesia. Although the Portuguese broke the Islamic hold on Indonesia, they were eventually displaced in turn by the Dutch, who named the area the Dutch East Indies. Although a revolt led by Javanese Prince Diponegoro in 1825 briefly threatened Holland's empire, Dutch rule continued until W.W.II and invasion by the Japanese.

    Not much needs to be said about Dutch, Belgian and German intrusion into lower regions of Africa, it is well known. In fact I have relatives in the Belgian Congo who could tell me all about it.

    Here is a vexillological approach to German colonies, including a Reichskolonialbund in West Samoa.

    The French, arguably on the border between Nordid and Mediterranean though definitely "Latins", had colonies in the Americas, Algeria, Cameroon, Morocco, Guinea, Polynesia.

    In 1848, before the age of the 'new imperialism', France already claimed an overseas empire extending from the Americas to Africa and the Indian Ocean. The sole North American possession France retained were the islands of Saint-Pierre and Miguelon off the coast of Newfoundland. Far more important were the West Indian islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe (including several smaller islands, administrative dependencies of Guadeloupe) colonized in the early 1600s, and the vast territory of Guyane on the South American continent.

    More on French colonies

    Some lesser known colonies are those failed attempts of the English and Irish in Brazil. Another South American colony involving Elizabeth Nietzsche, who took a small group of "pure Aryans" and set sail to Paraguay. There they attempted to set up Nuevo Germania, whose inhabitants suffer from several diseases due to inbreeding (they eventually gave up marrying their cousins and opened up the gene pool to Natives). Also the Irish colonies of predominantly Mexican Texas in the 1860's-70's.

    I'm sure I'm forgetting several.

    More info on miscegenation in colonies here.
    Brazilian colonial and slavery history here.

  7. #7
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member


    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Gender
    Politics
    Putinism
    Posts
    5,212
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Necronomicom
    Also Britain does have a large med population,
    No, this is untrue. Britain has a minority Med element (mainly northern Wales and some parts of inner western England), but almost nowhere found in a pure variety. Almost always mixed with Celtic and/or Germanic elements.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Last Online
    Sunday, February 25th, 2007 @ 10:29 AM
    Subrace
    nordiſch-weſtiſch
    Location
    Deutſchland
    Gender
    Family
    Single
    Politics
    Volk und Raſſe
    Posts
    1,628
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by ladygoeth33
    In fact I have relatives in the Belgian Congo who could tell me all about it.
    Not really a big difference to Detroit, eh?

  9. #9
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Nordhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Monday, February 6th, 2006 @ 07:08 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Gender
    Politics
    Nordicist
    Posts
    3,153
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Necronomicom
    I have never seen a pure North American Indian, they all have white traits, in Latin America most Armerindians are pure with no white mix.
    That's because we call Indians with white admixture Indians, while you call them white.

  10. #10
    Member Gesta Bellica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, May 3rd, 2010 @ 07:45 PM
    Subrace
    Padanian
    Location
    30Km south from Milano
    Gender
    Age
    45
    Occupation
    Unknown
    Politics
    Isolationism
    Religion
    Agnostic
    Posts
    839
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by ladygoeth33
    Meds and "Latins" in general. No contest.

    Rather than point out the obvious Mediterranean/Latin interracial transgressions (of which there are endless examples), I'll have a go at describing some "Nordish" ones.

    You can't count Australia as a regular "Nord population" because it population is descended from British convicts, and you know people in jail will have sex with anything - even another species of humanoid which more closely resemble a gorilla in a blond wig.

    Americans were spoiled by a land full of natural resources and used to getting what they wanted, and so became lazy and stupidly imported negroes. I don't think initially they were meant to be permanent parts of the landscape, in fact the colony of Liberia was formed as a place to repatriate negroes and Abraham Lincoln had already sent back thousands of them before he was assassinated by a radical Confederate loyalist and ardent supporter of slavery:
    For me the contest is all but over...
    Interesting point about Australia.. but for the Spanyards South America was nothing but a place where to steal and dominate not surely the promised land or a place where to settle down and start a new life like it was for Anglo-saxons and French in North America.
    As a matter of fact Spain sent to the New world pratically only the well known conquistadores (that represented the scum of the spanish socity) and bureaucrats, not surely a good example of spanish people either!!
    The only nation that was hugely colonized by Spanyards and later by Italian (with many others) was Argentina (and partly Brazil).
    Still if u look at a sample of the argentinian population u will see that the majority is definitely white.
    And also all the pro-white nationalist thata re Southamericans all come out from these nations, i wouldn't call it a coincidence.

    "E tutti si scandalizzano quando sentono dire: quel tale tipo di mammifero o di uccello ormai è sparito dalla faccia della terra, non lo vedremo più; è una grave perdita. Certo, si tratta di gravissime perdite.
    Ma non sarebbe forse più grave se sparisse una comunità umana?? --Bruno Salvadori

    Seven pictures of northern European males and seven pictures of northern African males were presented randomly via a computer screen to 82 Italian female undergraduates of the University of Padua, Italy.
    Each picture depicted a full frontal face with a neutral facial expression. Participants were asked to classify each picture as either northern Italian or southern Italian.
    On average, the seven pictures depicting northern Europeans were classified as northern Italians 81% of the time. The seven pictures depicting northern Africans were classified as southern Italians 83%
    of the time.



Page 1 of 7 123456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Would you rather live with Nords or Meds?
    By Nordhammer in forum The Hearth
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: Saturday, July 29th, 2006, 03:13 AM
  2. Nords/Meds what do you admire from each other?
    By manvatara in forum The Hearth
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 09:30 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
  •