View Poll Results: Please anwser both questions A and B.

Voters
79. You may not vote on this poll
  • A] 1) the pursuit of progressiveness is more important.

    18 22.78%
  • A] 2) the pursuit of racial preservation is more important.

    55 69.62%
  • B] 1) No - racial interbreeding cannot be justified.

    51 64.56%
  • B] 2) Yes - racial interbreeding can be justified if it doesn't reduce progressiveness.

    10 12.66%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30

Thread: What is More Important: Racial Progressiveness or Racial Preservation?

  1. #11
    Senior Member cosmocreator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Thursday, January 18th, 2007 @ 07:36 PM
    Subrace
    Other
    Gender
    Age
    54
    Politics
    Living in the real world
    Posts
    3,861
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Re: Progressiveness or racial preservation?

    Quote Originally Posted by Taras Bulba View Post
    Care to define progressiveness?

    Human traits that farthest removed from the ape form.
    .

    IHR Revisionist Conference, April 24, 2004, internet broadcast:

    http://www.internationalrevisionistconference.c om/

  2. #12
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Online
    Friday, December 25th, 2009 @ 02:12 PM
    Location
    K-PAX
    Gender
    Posts
    2,155
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: Progressiveness or racial preservation?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascension View Post
    Could you elaborate more on what you consider to be non-progressive subraces?
    In my understanding it's Baltids and Alpines mostly.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 20th, 2009 @ 01:11 AM
    Ethnicity
    Slavic
    Subrace
    Uralic/Alpine/Pontid mixed
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    USA
    Gender
    Posts
    3,309
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Re: Progressiveness or racial preservation?

    Quote Originally Posted by tinman View Post
    Human traits that farthest removed from the ape form.
    I see.

  4. #14
    Progressive Collectivist
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 10:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts

    AW: Re: Progressiveness or racial preservation?

    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  5. #15
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Online
    Friday, November 28th, 2008 @ 07:33 PM
    Ethnicity
    Danish
    Subrace
    West-Baltid + Pontid
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Oslo
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Occupation
    Typographer
    Posts
    616
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Sv: Progressiveness or racial preservation?

    I have a quick question: I understand that progressiveness is fixed to some subraces, i. e. some subraces tend to never be primitive, but still, how variable is progressiveness within a given subrace? For example, like height.
    Can two pure examplary species of same exact subrace have different degrees of progressiveness?
    Or is a subrace homogeneously progressive?

  6. #16
    Progressive Collectivist
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 10:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts

    AW: Sv: Progressiveness or racial preservation?

    Quote Originally Posted by goldgrube View Post
    I have a quick question: I understand that progressiveness is fixed to some subraces, i. e. some subraces tend to never be primitive, but still, how variable is progressiveness within a given subrace? For example, like height.
    Can two pure examplary species of same exact subrace have different degrees of progressiveness?
    Or is a subrace homogeneously progressive?
    Well, subraces, racial types are evolutionary tendencies, specialisations. As such its clear that there is usually still a lot of variation and even if there is no racial variation at a certain date, there would be variation through mutations, recombinations and gendrift in the future. So yes, individuals always vary, but to put it that way: Normal and typical individuals of a given racial type might be as a rule progressive, whereas the normal and typical individuals of another one aren't. Skandonordids f.e. are as a rule progressive, some just more than others and there is, like in all variants, normal and pathological variation - not just variation through mixture.

    One has to understand how certain tendencies came up: By being selected. Selected how? Genetic variants were in a given context more successful, had more offspring. Mutation - Variation - Selection, the most basic Darwinist rules. Variation exists in all populations and types, therefore different trends are always possible too and its mainly about selection which determines the fate.

    The higher the positive selective pressure (for a generalist type and high performance) the more progressive, the weaker, the slower the development (primitive) and the stronger the negative selective pressure, the stronger the degeneration (f.e. infantilisation).

    One could, in many, many generations, breed out of Negrids a Nordid type and vice versa f.e. by always favouring in every generation the respective traits and introducing the mutants being not present in the genpool from start.
    Nordisation is as a trend progressive, even though not all Nordid individuals are as such balanced and possess generally advantageous genetic traits of course, a population consisting out of Nordid individuals produces such a high level average.
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  7. #17
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member


    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    -
    Gender
    Posts
    2,858
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Re: Progressiveness or racial preservation?

    So its not about a religion of purity, its about the survival of the population and the base as such and to keep or even elevate the existing niveau.
    This is a problem for me. Eg, (on small scale, but same could be applied to a larger scale) if that's the case then my family and myself would be considered some of those who should be interbred with those with darker pigmentation, we're all very fair and this is obviously a weaker trait. Wherever you live in the world, darker pigmentation is going to be a plus. I'm sorry I wouldn't accept that. I love my family just the way they are and don't see why we should alter ourselves to appeal to some "higher ideal".

    Remember what you said before to HH-City about kin and supporting each other? I find this whole notion of pan-racial progressiveness to be contradictory to that. I would NEVER say that a member of my family is inferior to a foreigner... even if objectively I could see that in some ways they were.... because I am loyal and supportive of my family members. On a larger scale this also applies to race - as race = kin, imo.

    By you singing the praises of foreigners, and at the same time insulting some of your own, you're betraying your own people.


    To break everything down to the most simple formula on that matter: The progressive avantgarde of the future should be my people and group if possible. I have the highest trust in the potential of Europeans, German and Indoeuropean idealistic spirit, the classic outlook on life formulated in Europe, the social discipline and scientific way of approaching problems, the rational and group oriented state models, the European racial peak types, the racial base of Europe. I belong to it, thats why I want to preserve it, my kin, my group, my race. But thats not the only reason. To lose this potential would be a serious blow for all of mankind, the potential destroyed with us, the chances lost with the true Europe would be horrific. A mixed-up, downgraded and downbred, heterogeneous plantagement of the plutocracy would be even a mean of destruction rather than production of real values for the people and species.
    I see you as contradicting yourself here... you say you want to preserve your kin, your group, your race... yet if they were to ever falter, or encounter a group who were objectively superior in many ways you'd readily see your own people's traits substituted for theirs.


    The "Dark Ages" were mainly a problem for cultural development, but not for racial-biological one.
    Well, realistically the same could be said for Australids and Negroids as well as many other supposedly inferior races then. Perhaps due to difficult, unfavourable environmental factors they never realised their true cultural potential. And obviously Negroids do have some physical characteristics that one could see as being advantageous to Europids... perhaps we should interbreed with them so that our people can run faster, have more sexual success, and sing and dance in a really groovy way.

  8. #18
    Awaiting Email Confirmation
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    Wednesday, December 21st, 2011 @ 05:27 PM
    Ethnicity
    European
    Subrace
    Don't know
    Gender
    Posts
    1,566
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: Progressiveness or racial preservation?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascension View Post
    Could you elaborate more on what you consider to be non-progressive subraces?
    I never said they were completely non-progressive, and I was only being half-serious with my post, but I think Alpinids, and certain varieties of Cromagnid like Baltid, Bruenn or Borreby are among the less progressive subraces in Europe, so to speak. Their features, height and body-types are less progressive and more infantile compared with Nordid and Dinarid types for example. However, with that said, I'd be much more inclined to preserve a non-progressive subrace of Europeans like Alpines, over a progressive but non-European subrace, like Iranids.

  9. #19
    Progressive Collectivist
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 10:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts

    AW: Progressiveness or racial preservation?

    This is a problem for me. Eg, (on small scale, but same could be applied to a larger scale) if that's the case then my family and myself would be considered some of those who should be interbred with those with darker pigmentation, we're all very fair and this is obviously a weaker trait. Wherever you live in the world, darker pigmentation is going to be a plus. I'm sorry I wouldn't accept that. I love my family just the way they are and don't see why we should alter ourselves to appeal to some "higher ideal".
    Skin pigmentation is secondary and lighter pigmentation has various advantages too, but it depends on the exact region of course. We spoke about that if looking at the Australian climatic zones already. As I said there, your bloodline has two options while staying unchanged: Look carefull after protection, some light Arabs and Berbers show how that could work, or simply living in an area which suits the racial specialisation better.

    Remember what you said before to HH-City about kin and supporting each other? I find this whole notion of pan-racial progressiveness to be contradictory to that. I would NEVER say that a member of my family is inferior to a foreigner... even if objectively I could see that in some ways they were.... because I am loyal and supportive of my family members. On a larger scale this also applies to race - as race = kin, imo.
    It does. Thats like an enemy being a great warrior and an ally being not such a great one - still they are enemies and allies in case.

    I agree with you on that insofar, that I want to be social, solidary and human especially to members of the own group as long as they show good will. Good will means for the future that they accept human Eugenic measures, working mostly prenatal, ACTUALLY FOR THEM, too. This means the knowledge of knowing the own insufficiencies, accepting them and accept to work on it as far as possible for the better of the own bloodline and group. If I attacked people of my kin, it was mainly about those being scum, thats one part and scum exists in every group, the other being people who think just because they "are pure and belong to X" they are generally superior, even if they aren't objectively, and dont have to change or work on themselves and their group, as if they would be perfect already. This attitude is not the rational approach one needs, at least not for the leadership, some common people can think that way if it helps them and makes them stronger probably...

    By you singing the praises of foreigners, and at the same time insulting some of your own, you're betraying your own people.
    Not really. If speaking about my people I dont speak in the same way of every individual - same is true if speaking about mankind, I dont mean every dégénéré somewhere in the jungle, even though they are humans too. Not every idiot, violent criminal or corrupted sociopath is a good member of my group, even if being born into it. In fact he might do more harm to my people than a lot of immigrants do. Its about whats good for the majority of individuals, the group as a whole and mankind, not about defending every jerk and his actions just because he has the same label.
    Otherwise honour to whom honour is due. By stating that the foreigner X is more intelligent or a great scientist, soldier or whatever, I'm just stating the obvious and facts. I dont betray my own people just telling them the truth.

    I see you as contradicting yourself here... you say you want to preserve your kin, your group, your race... yet if they were to ever falter, or encounter a group who were objectively superior in many ways you'd readily see your own people's traits substituted for theirs.
    Depends on the own group's potential. If the own group could reach a similar level without being substituted and be it just in parts, I would go this path, if that isnt possible, substitution is of at least certain parts and the introduction of new traits would be inevitable if the own group should be able to compete and true progress being the goal.

    Well, realistically the same could be said for Australids and Negroids as well as many other supposedly inferior races then. Perhaps due to difficult, unfavourable environmental factors they never realised their true cultural potential.
    The difference is that progressive variants showed their potential various times, again and again, in different regions and times. Furthermore they didnt lived as primitive as Australids even in Mesolithic times, even before. So thats not even worth a direct comparison. The European's in pre-state, pre-higher civilisation times were already much higher developed and much closer to us than many Aborigines are today even if speaking about cultural and social characteristics alone.

    And obviously Negroids do have some physical characteristics that one could see as being advantageous to Europids... perhaps we should interbreed with them so that our people can run faster, have more sexual success, and sing and dance in a really groovy way.
    All of their advantages produce, as far as I know, significant disadvantages for general adaptiveness, but regional (temperate climate, European socio-cultural patterns) in particular and especially for modern and higher developed societies. If there would be any truly advantageous traits - f.e. an immune variant being important for our well-being and survival, this would be true, like I said above already:
    Quote Originally Posted by Agrippa
    If the own group could reach a similar level without being substituted
    Actually with the possibility of genetic engineering and manipulation this will be no problem in the future and as I said:
    -Through modern mixture no selective sweep in favour of our group could take place in time - for sure not while keeping up the own base and structures.
    -Even if this would mean interbreeding with large numbers and uncertain results, with many mixed ones getting negative foreign traits and just a few the need ones.

    There is no real alternative in such a case (immun-variants being the most likely scenario) of emergency for the group than genetic manipulation anyway. Mixture won't solve that - the only group which would really get improved to mixture are some Negrid variants and not vice versa. To let them in masses into our European core and primary areas is just madness. I know you know that too hopefully, but its worth to be repeated for all...
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  10. #20
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    Wednesday, February 27th, 2008 @ 07:59 AM
    Subrace
    mixed Europid
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    Location
    Good ol' Dixie
    Gender
    Age
    42
    Politics
    White supremacist
    Religion
    Agnostic and pagan wannabe
    Posts
    391
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: AW: Re: AW: Progressiveness or racial preservation?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agrippa View Post
    Remind you, its not about a cult of purity I say, its about the big picture. The problem is not a foreigner here or there, its about the millions and millions which came and the fact that our own birth rates, especially "of the progressive backbone" constantly declined in the last decades, even centuries already.
    That is an issue with the progressive backbone pretty much everywhere. Look at the birthrates in Japan. Same goes with the upper classes of the other nations, even those with relatively high birthrates. Once the society reaches a certain standard of living, the birthrates decline.

    No. But I dont have too much sympathies for a lowest level "white" who constantly proclaims he is superior to the highest standing Indians or Chinese, thats like a pug saying to a wolf-husky breed "you dirty bastard are not worth to stay in the same room with me because I'm 'pure'..."

    Worst are those not even knowing why they say so. Kinship has a value in its own, thats why even such Europeans are my kin and the highest standing Indians and Chinese are not, but this doesnt make the European really superior per se. .
    The thing is, they have the potential to breed progressive and superior individuals. If anything they have the superior aesthetic beauty compared to the others, pretty well capable of reaching to the level fo the better Indians or Chinese when supplemented with higher education.

    Besides, this is not a kind of behaviour you see only from the whites; many Arabs, Turks, Filipinos etc also think they are superior. they encourage their children to marry up (within their own race/ethnicity) if possible, and they strongly oppose mixing with the foreigners.
    I think it's quite healthy attitude and helps preserving the race. I personally find it quite ridiculous to hear a low level Filipino or Pakistani (or any Flipino or Pakistani for the matter) to claim they are superior to the whites, but I support their idea since it discourages race mixing. Besides, many of those so called lowly hillbillies are proud to be white cause of the accomplishments of the whites. They are not all tha ignorant imho.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What Is More Important to You - Progressiveness or Attractiveness?
    By Glenlivet in forum Bio-Anthropology & Human Variation
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: Friday, May 20th, 2011, 02:56 AM
  2. Racial Partition for Racial Preservation in the US
    By Gefjon in forum The United States
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: Friday, October 22nd, 2010, 11:41 PM
  3. 'European Cultural, Racial and Spiritual Preservation'?
    By angloengland in forum Help & Suggestions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: Sunday, November 7th, 2004, 08:27 PM
  4. A Serious Poll About Racial Purity: Which is Most Important?
    By Razmig in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Thursday, January 29th, 2004, 12:59 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
  •