Who is White?

[Old Tyrannia]

You must've never owned an animal in your life. Domesticated animals also will often split themselves into different groups based on dominance, strength, compatibility, and genetic finess or lack thereof. Horses do that, dogs do it, cats...

Even domesticated animals are not a Disney fantasy.

But they are a Stormfront fantasy?

I'm fairly sure Stormfront fantasies involve more leather. And spikes. And whips. And good, strong Aryan women viz zhe sexy German accent, ja?

[Text People]

You must've never owned an animal in your life. Domesticated animals also will often split themselves into different groups based on dominance, strength, compatibility, and genetic finess or lack thereof. Horses do that, dogs do it, cats...

Even domesticated animals are not a Disney fantasy.

I own two dogs and have dealt with many others in the past. The fact you seem to think wild dogs are the same as domesticated species talks about your experience with dogs.

Excuse me, I've owned horses, dogs, and other animals that tend to form their own little societies with ins and outs. Even cats have a social strata in groups. I was able to care for and observe plenty. Two dogs is not a great example.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I own two dogs and have dealt with many others in the past. The fact you seem to think wild dogs are the same as domesticated species talks about your experience with dogs.

Excuse me, I've owned horses, dogs, and other animals that tend to form their own little societies with ins and outs. Even cats have a social strata in groups. I was able to care for and observe plenty. Two dogs is not a great example.

Oh sure, tell us how dogs are racist of each other. That'll definitely help your case. Of course.

[Avenio]

You must've never owned an animal in your life. Domesticated animals also will often split themselves into different groups based on dominance, strength, compatibility, and genetic finess or lack thereof. Horses do that, dogs do it, cats...

Even domesticated animals are not a Disney fantasy.

I own two dogs and have dealt with many others in the past. The fact you seem to think wild dogs are the same as domesticated species talks about your experience with dogs.

Very much so. There are major behavioural differences between domestic cats and dogs and their wild progenitors; our companion animals stay, behaviourally, in a juvenile stage their entire lives. That's because juvenile wolves and wildcats are more sociable and less hierarchical than their adult counterparts, and those traits were selected for as being useful by our ancestors.

You must've never owned an animal in your life. Domesticated animals also will often split themselves into different groups based on dominance, strength, compatibility, and genetic finess or lack thereof. Horses do that, dogs do it, cats...

Even domesticated animals are not a Disney fantasy.

But they are a Stormfront fantasy?

Could be. Did they ever use any work by Richard Wagner in The Aristocats?

[The Grim Reaper]

I own two dogs and have dealt with many others in the past. The fact you seem to think wild dogs are the same as domesticated species talks about your experience with dogs.

Excuse me, I've owned horses, dogs, and other animals that tend to form their own little societies with ins and outs. Even cats have a social strata in groups. I was able to care for and observe plenty. Two dogs is not a great example.

Literally just Google Pack Theory.

[Mons Garle]

What ethnicities and groups of people do you consider to belong to the White race? This will be an important consideration for the future leaders of the future resurgent National Socialist state in Europe.

I consider the white race to be made up of members of lightskinned ethnic groups that originate from Europe. However, there are some exceptions: the Lapps are Siberian/Tungusic migrants: the Finns are the descendants Mongolic tribes and Siberian/Tungusic groups that had migrated westward into modern day Finland and mixed throughout a long period of cohabitation: the Magyars/Huns, as the name suggests, are the descendants of a cohort the Turanic Huns of Central Asia which had migrated west to the Pannonian Plain and were later separated from the rest of the Huns; the Bulgars are the descendants of Mongolian central asian tribes; the Albanian Shqiptars are a mix of Turkic Azeris and the Turks themselves; and the Georgians and Armenians experience deep racial admixture throughout the entire populations of their respective ethnicities. Of course, the Jews and Gypsies are not White either.

I also believe that a considerable fraction of Spaniards and Italians are not white, due to heavy Mohametan/Arab admixture in the case of the Spaniards and heavy African admixture in the case of the Italians.

What are your thoughts on this matter?

There is no such thing as "white", "black", "brown", "red"... Etc etc. They're all irrelevant, historical labels for groups that were thought to be physically different. A much more appropriate way to label oneself is by nationality or the ethnic group that you feel you belong to. I'd always call myself English first, never "white" - because that's actually a fact - I was actually born in England.

[Camelza]

What the fuck do wild dogs have to do with domesticated dogs?

You must've never owned an animal in your life. Domesticated animals also will often split themselves into different groups based on dominance, strength, compatibility, and genetic finess or lack thereof. Horses do that, dogs do it, cats...

Even domesticated animals are not a Disney fantasy.

You can't seriously mean that humans are divided into breeds the same way as dogs are? First, even if you do imply it, learn that dog "breeds" are a human construct achieved through forced and selective breeding, as such the normal "natural" form of dogs is that of a wolf, which with some small differences is the same all over the world. For a human dog-like breed to be created we'd have to have an extremely strict Eugenics programme through which we would "create" a un-natural "race" of human beings with certain "charachteristics"(it has been tried, it can't be done).
Humans are more like wolves, not dogs.
And even then this is not what logical humans are; we're vastly different through our use of critical thinking and being extremely more social with each other, virtues which of course lead to more extensive interbreeding between humans from different places, than it would be the case with, ie; wolves.

[Text People]

Excuse me, I've owned horses, dogs, and other animals that tend to form their own little societies with ins and outs. Even cats have a social strata in groups. I was able to care for and observe plenty. Two dogs is not a great example.

Oh sure, tell us how dogs are racist of each other. That'll definitely help your case. Of course.

Not racist. The genes tell. They always know the best among their small populations.

[Issam]

From your own article.
http://sites.biology.duke.edu/rausher/Hm1.jpg

I got a question.

I'm Aryan in appearance, German on my mother side (And related to William Ellis Corey) and am very pale.

But I'm also Hispanic on my father side, have a Spanish name and was born in America.

Am I white?

Hispanic isn't a race.

[Communal Ecotopia]

While Europeans were building great civilizations and hude empires, Asiatic Turans were roaming the steppes drinking horse blood and achieving absolutely nothing of value culturally.

Have you noticed that the first peoples to make a civilization were the Asians? Does Sumer and Babylon ring a bell? In places like the Middle East, North Africa, the Indian sub-continent and East Asia were the first "civilized" peoples. The "civilized" Europeans were only so far after these other regions were.

And I'll take the Golden Age of Islam in Spain, the Middle East, and Central Asia for cultural and scientific achievement over Medieval Europe or the Mongols (though it was a safe Empire with a stunning postal system) any day.

[Transoxthraxia]

Caucasians.

[Utceforp]

What ethnicities and groups of people do you consider to belong to the White race? This will be an important consideration for the future leaders of the future resurgent National Socialist state in Europe.

I consider the white race to be made up of members of lightskinned ethnic groups that originate from Europe. However, there are some exceptions: the Lapps are Siberian/Tungusic migrants: the Finns are the descendants Mongolic tribes and Siberian/Tungusic groups that had migrated westward into modern day Finland and mixed throughout a long period of cohabitation: the Magyars/Huns, as the name suggests, are the descendants of a cohort the Turanic Huns of Central Asia which had migrated west to the Pannonian Plain and were later separated from the rest of the Huns; the Bulgars are the descendants of Mongolian central asian tribes; the Albanian Shqiptars are a mix of Turkic Azeris and the Turks themselves; and the Georgians and Armenians experience deep racial admixture throughout the entire populations of their respective ethnicities. Of course, the Jews and Gypsies are not White either.

I also believe that a considerable fraction of Spaniards and Italians are not white, due to heavy Mohametan/Arab admixture in the case of the Spaniards and heavy African admixture in the case of the Italians.

What are your thoughts on this matter?

There is no such thing as "white", "black", "brown", "red"... Etc etc. They're all irrelevant, historical labels for groups that were thought to be physically different. A much more appropriate way to label oneself is by nationality or the ethnic group that you feel you belong to. I'd always call myself English first, never "white" - because that's actually a fact - I was actually born in England.

Considering he's been referring to people as "Magyars", "Turans" and "Asiatic", "Black" and "White" are the least outdated labels he's used. I'm surprised the OP hasn't called anyone a "Mongoloid" yet.

[Mons Garle]

There is no such thing as "white", "black", "brown", "red"... Etc etc. They're all irrelevant, historical labels for groups that were thought to be physically different. A much more appropriate way to label oneself is by nationality or the ethnic group that you feel you belong to. I'd always call myself English first, never "white" - because that's actually a fact - I was actually born in England.

Considering he's been referring to people as "Magyars", "Turans" and "Asiatic", "Black" and "White" are the least outdated labels he's used. I'm surprised the OP hasn't called anyone a "Mongoloid" yet.

Hahaha Now you mention it...! Mohametan?!?!

[Olerand]

1- Heh, we clearly haven't been properly introduced. I'm opposed to the principal of egalitarianism on the grounds that total equality is unachievable and civilisation is inherently hierarchical in organisation. I'm also opposed to secularism, especially laïcité, and support the partnership between church and state. I'm not an advocate of absolute monarchy, per se; my preference is for an executive constitutional monarchy, as exemplified by the government of the Bourbon Restoration, but I am a legitimist. My monarchist position stems from my belief in mixed government, scepticism towards democracy, legalistic philosophy and traditionalism; I don't accept the legitimacy of any revolutionary regime and consider tradition and precedent the basis of all legitimate government. I'm also an ardent admirer and defender of Their Most Christian Majesties King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette, and deplore the way their names have been dragged through the mud by generations of republican propagandists.

2- I suppose we Brits got off lightly for the most part. There was the Marian Persecutions, of course. And the witch burnings under James VI and I, and the anti-reformationists executed by Henry VIII and Edward VI...

1- First, that is quite interesting. Would you say you would support an "Enlightened Despot"'s rule?
Also, the fight is rather lost. The monarchy is quite done. Supporting it now is akin to supporting the return of the Roman Empire.

2- All nothing in comparison to Germany. Or us for that matter.

[Ifreann]

And they sniff each other's arses to say hello. So yeah, maybe leave the rest of us out of it if you want to emulate dogs.

People here would be the first ones to find justification in homosexuality becaue it exists in the animal kingdom. I do what comes naturally to me. I don't mind sniffing a woman but slightly removed from the "arse".

Again, leave the rest of us out of your emulation of dogs.

[Lingang]

I think the American civilizations came much later though, right?

Yes, but they did arise independently of any outside influence.

Yeah, just like the Great Zimbabwe did too!

[Camelza]

And they sniff each other's arses to say hello. So yeah, maybe leave the rest of us out of it if you want to emulate dogs.

People here would be the first ones to find justification in homosexuality becaue it exists in the animal kingdom. I do what comes naturally to me. I don't mind sniffing a woman but slightly removed from the "arse".

[Northwest Slobovia]

There is no such thing as "white", "black", "brown", "red"... Etc etc. They're all irrelevant, historical labels for groups that were thought to be physically different. A much more appropriate way to label oneself is by nationality or the ethnic group that you feel you belong to. I'd always call myself English first, never "white" - because that's actually a fact - I was actually born in England.

Considering he's been referring to people as "Magyars", "Turans" and "Asiatic", "Black" and "White" are the least outdated labels he's used. I'm surprised the OP hasn't called anyone a "Mongoloid" yet.

Since he's joined the rest of the Nazis in the toilet of history, I don't think he got the chance.

[Text People]

People here would be the first ones to find justification in homosexuality becaue it exists in the animal kingdom. I do what comes naturally to me. I don't mind sniffing a woman but slightly removed from the "arse".

Again, leave the rest of us out of your emulation of dogs.

You and your ilk give up Bonobos as your idols and I'll stop my worship of dawgs.

[Old Tyrannia]

1- Heh, we clearly haven't been properly introduced. I'm opposed to the principal of egalitarianism on the grounds that total equality is unachievable and civilisation is inherently hierarchical in organisation. I'm also opposed to secularism, especially laïcité, and support the partnership between church and state. I'm not an advocate of absolute monarchy, per se; my preference is for an executive constitutional monarchy, as exemplified by the government of the Bourbon Restoration, but I am a legitimist. My monarchist position stems from my belief in mixed government, scepticism towards democracy, legalistic philosophy and traditionalism; I don't accept the legitimacy of any revolutionary regime and consider tradition and precedent the basis of all legitimate government. I'm also an ardent admirer and defender of Their Most Christian Majesties King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette, and deplore the way their names have been dragged through the mud by generations of republican propagandists.

2- I suppose we Brits got off lightly for the most part. There was the Marian Persecutions, of course. And the witch burnings under James VI and I, and the anti-reformationists executed by Henry VIII and Edward VI...

1- First, that is quite interesting. Would you say you would support an "Enlightened Despot"'s rule?

I don't much like arbitrary power, and much prefer a government in which power is divided between different institutions; I oppose tyranny by minority or by majority. However, I do admire the ideals of the enlightened absolutists, and I consider an enlightened despotism to be a preferable form of government than democracy in less developed nations. Voltaire is one of my main political and philosophical influences.

Also, the fight is rather lost. The monarchy is quite done. Supporting it now is akin to supporting the return of the Roman Empire.

Monarchy is far from done. I live in a monarchy. I also know quite a few French monarchists, and even a few American monarchists. Monarchy is the most successful form of government in the history of the world.

2- All nothing in comparison to Germany. Or us for that matter.

Makes me glad we're not joined to you lot anymore. Thank God for the English Channel.

[Olerand]

1- I don't much like arbitrary power, and much prefer a government in which power is divided between different institutions; I oppose tyranny by minority or by majority. However, I do admire the ideals of the enlightened absolutists, and I consider an enlightened despotism to be a preferable form of government than democracy in less developed nations. Voltaire is one of my main political and philosophical influences.

2- Monarchy is far from done. I live in a monarchy. I also know quite a few French monarchists, and even a few American monarchists. Monarchy is the most successful form of government in the history of the world.

3- Makes me glad we're not joined to you lot anymore. Thank God for the English Channel.

1- Interesting. An "enlightened bureaucratic monarchy" then?

2- Well, by monarchy, I meant ours of course. The French monarchy is not coming back. As for those French monarchists, they are fighting a lost fight too. The Republic is heavily ingrained in our country today, and support for the retrograde Bourbons is quasi-non-existent.

3- Anymore? When were you ever?
And you got off lucky. So much of your history is just due to you being across the Channel.
You didn't go through what we did because your distance from Rome made you less influenced by the Church's power, and thus not as interested in massive witch hunts and Catholic vs. Protestant slaughters.

[Conserative Morality]

Aren't you the redheaded young man with partial Japanese ancestry? If I'm remembering correctly you look like a typical redhead -- meaning you look white , which means you pass (with flying colors) as white -- which means for all practical purposes you are white.

I'm deeply insulted! Just because I pass for white doesn't make me caucasian!

Nah, I'm kidding. Racists, for some reason, seem to care about more than phenotype, so it's fun to bandy around my ancestry at times like this.

[Immoren]

3- Anymore? When were you ever?

Ice ages IIRC

[Olerand]

3- Anymore? When were you ever?

Ice ages IIRC

Oh.

[Ifreann]

Again, leave the rest of us out of your emulation of dogs.

You and your ilk give up Bonobos as your idols and I'll stop my worship of dawgs.

I wasn't aware I had an ilk.