Yesterday in a surprising moment of lucidity John wrote “Whiteness is a useless category and it’s toxic now.”
Today he is upbraiding people that would rather not be considered “white”.
There are genetic markers for Jewishness. Jewish RACIAL markers. The overlapping of whatever DNA they accrued during their centuries of wandering around, screwing over their hosts, doe NOT matter. What I take from the Sallis pieces is that their JEW genes are what matter.
Have you seen a picture of that Sirota character? He “looks White”. One of the local Hebes looks more Aryan than Adolf (I know I’m opening a huge can of genetic worms, with that one). He’s a JEW. Scarlett Johanssen is mostly Seedish – but she acts, and identifies, as a Jew. Paul Newman was MOSTLY Slavic – but he was a Jew.
I amd so busy these days. I used to read MacDonald’s site religiously. John – thanksfor posting that link to the Sirota/Shapiro “debate”. I have to remember to make time in my day to read MacDonald.
No Man – John’s [above] post at 3:52AM, is CRITICAL. Fundamental. I read something, year’s ago, in some article about genetics, that most people KNOW what they ARE. No matter how “sophisticated” or “educated” they, or are not – they know. Most people in the world correctly self-identify. They KNOW.
Nordic-looking (sorta) Sirota is TELLING YOU, in that debate, that HE’S NOT WHITE. Stereoptypically Hebe-ish Shapiro is telling YOU the same thing.
WHY are you ARGUING?
Is this one of the chief flaws of Whites, revealing itself on this blog?
WHITES DON’T LISTEN. Whites hear, and see, what Whites WANT to see. This the CLASSIC “Liberal” delusion. WHITES DON’T LISTEN.
We’ll either learn to pay attention – or perish.
No-Man is a troll. A superlative one. He uses big words that he doesn’t understand.
Denise,
On Sirota, he basically outs himself as not being white, but for the most part this critical self identification or exemption. Ben Shapiro, a neocon Conservatard operative doesn’t self identify as white. He knows deep down that he isn’t one of us. He’s one of them and currently a house guest in someone else’s clubhouse. It’s amazing that this exchange is not a gigantic subject of discussion in the MSM. Instead you get Gregory interviewing a couple of Jews about what is good for white Americans, who are quite clearly “other” for these pundits. We may as well just get on with having “Jonas” host Meet The Press.
This is an objectively “white” Swede.
He’s certainly no Swede with a name like that, unless being born in Sweden bestows Swedish nationality (and I don’t mean just citizenship), which is a liberal concept.
He’s a “white” Er “Swede” ah…mmmmm. Right?
In a story about him he’s called a Swede. If he went on Jihad he’d be listed as Swede by the US press, and then be called white.
John says:
April 22, 2013 at 4:51 am
Denise,
“We may as well just get on with having “Jonas” host Meet The Press”.
They will be Americanizing these two in a furious way. They are swallowing the idea that these two were not Jihadi.
Normalizing bombings. Normalizing foreignness (profound foreigness) as American.
This Kid could read Arabic, Cyrillic and identified himself with that world.
Lew,
Thanks for the link. The Left are expanding the definition of white, beyond the confines of the golf clubhouse and into the madrassa. It’s sinister stuff.
“Let me show you the old classification of Caucausian type.”
If there’s a bigger waste of time than this i don’t know what it is.
Race is a tree-structure with branches. Caucasian is one of the main branches and it includes Europeans, Arabs, Jews etc.
Caucasian then branches into European Caucasian and Non-European Caucasian.
European Caucasian then branches into various sub-groups like Nordic etc and those branch into the individual nations.
“White” is a label. You can define it to mean any level of the tree structure. Arguing over who is or isn’t white without first *defining* what *you* mean by the label is a stupid waste of time.
The enemy want to define “white” at the Caucasian level because it includes them (when it suits them) and because it works for divide and rule purposes. It works for divide and rule purposes because the people targeted for extinction are the European Caucasian subset not the whole group.
So WNs should simply define what they mean by “White” to be European Caucasian (or some smaller subgroup of European Caucasian that suits their purposes) rather than denying the wider Caucasian branch doesn’t exist – because it plainly does and denying it makes them look dumb.
The anti-racist Hitler is great.
I think I did point out the double standard. It includes them when they want it to and they (middle easterners, Jews) can deny the label as they wish.
Don’t read more into it than I stated. Sirota clearly meant European, and he clearly wanted it to be an avowed white supremacist.
The correct answer to this problem is that they are white, but they’re not western and they’re not culturally christian so they should be exterminated whenever/wherever they threaten civilized people.
The determination to define the Tsarnaevs as non-white, no matter what the Census Bureau says … proves that in many [sic] ways, Sirota was absolutely right.
Sadly Joan Walsh makes sense here. Goddamn MacDonald and Sirota types read off the same script.
“The correct answer to this problem is that they are white, but they’re not western”
“Western” might have been a better compromise once but i think “White” is too ingrained now. My point is simply that if people want to use White for a subset of Caucasian they still need to accept that the Caucasian category exists and includes Arabs etc. So…
They’re not White – to me – because i choose to define the European Caucasian subset of Caucasian as “White.”
Therefore Jews, Chechens, Arabs etc are Non-European Caucasians – not White by my definition but still Caucasian.
Similarly if people wanted to define it narrower than that e.g. White Southerners or Nordics or whatever they can if they want but it doesn’t stop Caucasian or European Caucasian still existing as part of the tree structure.
They’re not White – to me – because i choose to define the European Caucasian subset of Caucasian as “White.”
Your choice is irrelevant. The word “white” is defined by consensus and the law of the United States. The word becomes meaningless if anyone can define it in any manner they like.
“My point is simply that if people want to use White for a subset of Caucasian they still need to accept that the Caucasian category exists and includes Arabs etc.”
Except you are quite wrong. The Caucasian race essentially corresponds to those ethnic groups that speak a version of Indo-Aryan language group. Their native range emanating from somewhere in the vicinity of the Caucasus Mountains(?) six(?) millennia ago extends from Iceland to Bangladesh (if you don’t count all the places it was transplanted to by England, Spain, and France.)
It most certainly doesn’t include the Laplanders, Basques, Egyptians, Samis & a whole lotta’ Finns, Babylonians, Bedouins, or Jews.
“The word “white” is defined by consensus and the law of the United States.”
What “consensus?” Federal law is nothing but La-La-land when it comes to ethnic categories. Wait for the avalanche of lawsuits based in genetic analysis when it comes to what exactly is a “Native American.”
The resulting court decisions will make the the Third Reich or Apartheid South Africa look downright liberal. There will be no choice but to have the federal courts re-invent the “coloured” classification under then rubric of “multi-ethnic.”
Hahahahahaha!
What “consensus?”
The consensus of large groups comprised of 12-40 y.o. ‘teens’ following natural disasters and rap concerts.
I exited a YMCA today. A black had stonen a basketball. The Chinese/Janaese staffer chased the coon and asked for the ball back and the black called him a crazy white.
Hey, why the fuck not? Fugging coons.
“and the black called him a crazy white.”
Shoot him.
Calm down Rudel.
I didn’t have a gun at the time. Lol.
Put a pressure-cooker in his locker and call the cops.
“Calm down Rudel.”
The time is long past for calming down. All those who said that 9/11 changed everything were right. Shoot them now or you’ll have to shoot even more later.
Chechens are about as white as ashkenazi jews (middle eastern/white mix) are. So, if jews aren’t white, then neither are chechens. You have fair jews and dark jews, just like you have fair chechens and dark chechens.
By the way, Chechens are still whiter than armenians.
Noman
“Your choice is irrelevant. The word “white” is defined by consensus and the law of the United States. The word becomes meaningless if anyone can define it in any manner they like.”
Contesting the government imposed consensus is one of the reasons for defining White differently.
.
Rudel
“The Caucasian race essentially corresponds to those ethnic groups that speak a version of Indo-Aryan language group.”
Nope. The word Caucasian goes back to the original split between Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid.
Caucasoid in this classification is *very* wide and includes Arabs, Jews etc hence why TPTB want to use it as the definition of “White.” There’s nothing logically wrong with that but if for political reasons you want to define “White” as something else – or simply because you want to annoy them – you need to recognize that you’re defining a *subset* of the much wider Caucasian group otherwise you sound dumb.
“Western” might have been a better compromise once but i think “White” is too ingrained now.
If you’d exchange “western” for “white” I want to trade baseball cards with you because you sound like a sucker.
Western men fight to this day for the West – as they have for thousands of years. No army has ever or will ever fight for a “white country”.
Xenophon writes in Agesilaus.
Thereupon it was a sight to see the gymnasiums thronged with warriors going through their exercises, the racecourses crowded with troopers on prancing steeds, the archers and the javelin men shooting at the butts. Nay, the whole city in which he lay was transformed into a spectacle itself, so filled to overflowing was the market-place with arms and armour of every sort, and horses, all for sale. Here were coppersmiths and carpenters, ironfounders and cobblers, painters and decorators—one and all busily engaged in fabricating the implements of war; so that an onlooker might have thought the city of Ephesus itself a gigantic arsenal. It would have kindled courage in the breast of a coward to see the long lines of soldiers, with Agesilaus at their head, all garlanded as they marched in proud procession from the gymnasiums and dedicated their wreaths to our Lady Artemis. Since, where these three elements exist—reverence towards heaven, practice in military affairs, and obedience to command—all else must needs be full of happy promise.
But seeing that contempt for the foe is calculated to infuse a certain strength in face of battle, he ordered his criers to strip naked the barbarians captured by his foraging parties, and so to sell them. The soldiers who saw the white skins of these folk, unused to strip for toil, soft and sleek and lazy-looking, as of people who could only stir abroad in carriages, concluded that a war with women would scarcely be more formidable.
Most modern American “whites” are cowardly barbarians. They’re in rebellion against any authority, from government to God.
Contesting the government imposed consensus is one of the reasons for defining White differently.
You suggested anyone should be able to define whiteness however they wish, that’s not “defining White differently”, that’s abuse of language not a courageous stand against the government. If you say “White” is open to interpretation you’re undermining our language and have no ground to stand on to correct Rudel’s (wrong) definition of caucasian.
“Most modern American “whites” are cowardly barbarians.”
– Speak for yourself, Tamer.
“They’re in rebellion against any authority, from government to God.”
– And “God” doesn’t exist.
Xenophon didn’t forget to mention “race”. For hundreds of years the US has DEFINED “whiteness” – for God’s sake, WN is just Americanism without table-manners- the US didn’t flub the definition and try to force it on you. You somewhere along the line in your life decided that you’d take an unhealthy interest in the word “white” and try to carve some social identity out of a biological term.
No-Man,
I haven’t closely read these threads, but from what I’ve seen I think you’ve made some strong points. WNism has to be able to withstand objections like these. I’m still not entirely clear on what you see as the right response for whites in the current context. Whites are being targeted as whites in the sense that you seem to reject not based on culture, ethnicity, region.
If the PC moan and bitch about whites having too much power in the US and elsewhere, someone ought to point out that Moroccans and Indians and Iranians and Jews and Iraqis are potentially listed as white for statistical purposes.
“You suggested anyone should be able to define whiteness however they wish”
I’m saying if people want to use the word “White” to mean a different thing than the government means then they should define it in a clear way in their head first – preferably in the way that most annoys TPTB.
.
“WN is just Americanism without table-manners- the US didn’t flub the definition and try to force it on you. You somewhere along the line in your life decided that you’d take an unhealthy interest in the word “white” and try to carve some social identity out of a biological term.”
In Europe people can simply use their national labels. In the US it’s more complicated. Some White subgroups in the US have enough of a quasi national identity to be able to use that identity label e.g. Southerners, but others need some common label which serves the practical need.
Now only some of the groups included as “White” in the government definition are targeted for genocide so the government definition is no good therefore there’s a practical political need for those people who are targeted for genocide to come up with a group label for themselves to aid in their self-defence. “White” seems like the best available in the context.
“The word Caucasian goes back to the original split between Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid.”
What “original split?” Your antiquated references have no validity to modern ethnography at least not since Cavalli-Sforza’s monumental The History and Geography of Human Genes which has only been more generally confirmed by more recent and detailed genomic and linguistic analysis.
Read some of the basic books on the subject instead of reading politically correct Wiki entries.
The enemy knows exactly what “white” means, and they know it does not include anyone but indigenous Western aka European peoples. Even within this context (which is the real meaning of “white” in America) the enemy tries to break off Italians, Spaniards, and Irish against us (which has mostly been unsuccessful) . We all know who they mean when they blather on about white privilege, don’t we? They are not talking about Jews, “white” Muslims, North Africans or Arabs, are they? When they want to make a white town diverse, they don’t mean to add Irishmen, Poles, Germans or Greeks, do they? No! But adding Jews, Muslims, Berbers, “white” Muslims, etc would do the trick as well as Africans. So it is perfectly clear that the enemy knows as well as we do who is included as “white”. They are being purposefully coy when playing the “white as cuacasian, including Middle East and North Africa.”
No-Man’s argument is as pointless as discussing how many angels fit on the head of a pin. There is really no question about what is meant by white on either side, only the normal deception and misinformation war we always get from the left.
Whatever we choose to call ourselves the left is going to try to destroy. Use Irish and the left will insist it includes legal citizens of Ireland. Ditto for Germany, Greek, etc. Use Western and they will claim Africa is as far West as Europe is. It is what the left does.
What better way to destroy a family or organization than to open up it’s membership to disloyal groups who hate and contradict everything it stands for? This happened to the term “American”already.
There is another aspect to whiteness too–that those carrying it should identify with it. Jews violate this all the time. They are “white” when they are speaking for us, but not part of the white family their policies get implemented to our detriment.
The game is to always keep us divided. We know who we are. They know who we are. White is a perfectly fine term to describe us, add Western or European for clarity, but understand the left’s game. They are undermining us by trying to dilute the meaning of white same as they are trying to destroy the family and marriage by “gay marriage”.
Astounding. Prison is supposed to reduce the frequency of the psycho gene…
French, ah the French.
Heard this song too many times. 1901, never caught the meaning, till now.
The French rioted today over sodomy marriage. Good on them!
BTW, Denise, my best to your kids! 🙂
Viva le France!
Tamer of Savages the anti-WN, pro- Globalist Endless War promoter wrote: “WN is just Americanism without table-manners…. You somewhere along the line in your life decided that you’d take an unhealthy interest in the word ‘white’ and try to carve some social identity out of a biological term.”
“No-Man, I haven’t closely read these threads, but from what I’ve seen I think you’ve made some strong points. WNism has to be able to withstand objections like these.”
“No-Man is a troll. A superlative one. He uses big words that he doesn’t understand.”
“The game is to always keep us divided. We know who we are. They know who we are. White is a perfectly fine term to describe us, add Western or European for clarity….”
Whites will be distinguished and united fully when united under the sign of the Cross.
Mosin: Relying on Christianity in this day and age is like insisting on using an old computer running on an old version of Windows infected with viruses to the point that it is slower than molasses and locks up every few minutes. Every leftist “virus” since the Enlightenment has been written to affect and ultimately destroy it. I respect Christianity and believe it is and should be a centerpiece of Western culture, however, we need a new operating system that is impervious to leftist assault and, in fact can infect and destroy the leftist machine. That operating system, in my opinion, is raw unadulterated evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory destroys the concept of equality that has been an excuse for every leftist movement since the Protestant Reformation. It carries weight and reason and logic that blows a smoking whole in the left’s fanatic religious (they are 100%religious) untruths.
Mosin, the left has always hidden behind the idea that they are about logic, reason and progress. They used Darwin to weaken and merginalize Christianity for the purpose of destroying it’s influence, replacing Christ with Equality (talk to any Zio-Christian and you will find their true object if worship is indeed equality, for everyone except the chosen, of course). But Darwin validates inequality and rascism. You see, we cannot allow the left to save their cake and eat it too.
As a uniting force, Christianity can be called a complete and total failure since the French Revolution or even before. All those wars, including WWI and WWII should be proof to that fact.
I don’t mean to say that Christianity caused those wars, I don’t believe it did, but it sure as hell didn’t stop them.
@ Wayne:
Re: the failure in the internecine, inter-European, World Wars: Yes, where WERE the corrupt clergy when it began to become “all quiet on the Western front”? Not leading the resistance against the Instigators of white slaughter, not even joining and supporting the resistance, but colluding with the system, because they ARE part it.
Re: relying on Evolution instead of Christianity: You assume that genetic science and other natural sciences are incompatible with Christianity? Are you among the crowd of commenters here who insist that no one is a REAL Christian unless they believe in a seven-thousand-year-old earth and universe created in six days, and a literal global flood with a pair of all land animal species literally maintained in a boat, etc.? I do not agree at all.
“because they ARE part it” should have been “because they ARE part of it.” No editing possible on this website.
It is a pattern for many “Bible literalists” on Creationism to be NON-literally-scriptural on any MORAL injunctions that pertain to their daily lives, that might hinder their passions or inconvenience them in any way. These Bible literalists also make use of the technological products of science (such as the latest high tech miliary equipment) while denigrating the science itself. This is not Christianity but plain hypocrisy.
Christian faith and evolutionary science are not opposed. Christianity cannot be “a centerpiece of Western culture” under “a new operating system.” It is not respected and replaced, but is either foundational or rejected.
“miliary equipment” is “military equipment” Sorry. Must remember to read twice before posting here.
We must distinguish here between corrupt, false “Christianity” and the authentic that cannot play a supporting role in the anti-Christ system. Otherwise we may only “talk past each other.”
I’m out the door now, cannot continue discussing now.
“The word Caucasian goes back to the original split between Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid.”
“What “original split?” Your antiquated references have no validity to modern ethnography”
The original split in *pre-modern* ethnography – which is what the government definition is based on. As it’s the government definition we want to contest it’s worth being clear where it came from.
Whites will be distinguished and united fully when united under the sign of the Cross.
When you submit to Rome you Welsh-German cowpie.
As a uniting force, Christianity can be called a complete and total failure since the French Revolution or even before. All those wars, including WWI and WWII should be proof to that fact.
The French Revolution was anti-Christian. Luther was a kind of Arminius style traitor to Rome. Rome was Europe in Arminius’s time, the Germans were barbarians. Germans become European when they are Romanized. The Germans had no idea of Europe. No word for it. In Luther’s time Rome was the Church and the Church was Europe. When a German rejects the European solar cults at Teutoberg or Catholicism in Luther’s time he is rejecting Europe, consciously.
The (partial) German rejection of Catholicism led to the Thirty Years war, which left Germany in ruins. The idea of an IMPERIUM EUROPA was a threat to Germans who had slipped back into spiritual barbarism and “common law” practices. As far as the Germans were concerned if this foreign idea of “Europe” was to exist it would have to do so as a German project; a secular German project rooted in the German language and German “race”. The Frenchman would have clowly realize he was a “Romanized German” and relinquish his Latin culture. The thoroughly European Pole would have to reject the west/Catholicism and be “Germanized” because he too was an oppressed German.
German nationalists know this worldview animated Germany for centuries but hambone hyphenated American WNs don’t. They crow about “Brothers War”.
Yesterday in a surprising moment of lucidity John wrote “Whiteness is a useless category and it’s toxic now.”
Today he is upbraiding people that would rather not be considered “white”.
There are genetic markers for Jewishness. Jewish RACIAL markers. The overlapping of whatever DNA they accrued during their centuries of wandering around, screwing over their hosts, doe NOT matter. What I take from the Sallis pieces is that their JEW genes are what matter.
Have you seen a picture of that Sirota character? He “looks White”. One of the local Hebes looks more Aryan than Adolf (I know I’m opening a huge can of genetic worms, with that one). He’s a JEW. Scarlett Johanssen is mostly Seedish – but she acts, and identifies, as a Jew. Paul Newman was MOSTLY Slavic – but he was a Jew.
I amd so busy these days. I used to read MacDonald’s site religiously. John – thanksfor posting that link to the Sirota/Shapiro “debate”. I have to remember to make time in my day to read MacDonald.
No Man – John’s [above] post at 3:52AM, is CRITICAL. Fundamental. I read something, year’s ago, in some article about genetics, that most people KNOW what they ARE. No matter how “sophisticated” or “educated” they, or are not – they know. Most people in the world correctly self-identify. They KNOW.
Nordic-looking (sorta) Sirota is TELLING YOU, in that debate, that HE’S NOT WHITE. Stereoptypically Hebe-ish Shapiro is telling YOU the same thing.
WHY are you ARGUING?
Is this one of the chief flaws of Whites, revealing itself on this blog?
WHITES DON’T LISTEN. Whites hear, and see, what Whites WANT to see. This the CLASSIC “Liberal” delusion. WHITES DON’T LISTEN.
We’ll either learn to pay attention – or perish.
No-Man is a troll. A superlative one. He uses big words that he doesn’t understand.
Denise,
On Sirota, he basically outs himself as not being white, but for the most part this critical self identification or exemption. Ben Shapiro, a neocon Conservatard operative doesn’t self identify as white. He knows deep down that he isn’t one of us. He’s one of them and currently a house guest in someone else’s clubhouse. It’s amazing that this exchange is not a gigantic subject of discussion in the MSM. Instead you get Gregory interviewing a couple of Jews about what is good for white Americans, who are quite clearly “other” for these pundits. We may as well just get on with having “Jonas” host Meet The Press.
This is an objectively “white” Swede.
He’s certainly no Swede with a name like that, unless being born in Sweden bestows Swedish nationality (and I don’t mean just citizenship), which is a liberal concept.
He’s a “white” Er “Swede” ah…mmmmm. Right?
In a story about him he’s called a Swede. If he went on Jihad he’d be listed as Swede by the US press, and then be called white.
John says:
April 22, 2013 at 4:51 am
Denise,
“We may as well just get on with having “Jonas” host Meet The Press”.
Yup.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100208119/with-enemies-like-these-michael-gove-doesnt-need-friends/
Denise,
What does your Jewdar suggest about this toad?
Salon checks in:
Whatever their racial status, they seem to resemble young American mass murderers more than al-Qaida members
http://www.salon.com/2013/04/22/are_the_tsarnaev_brothers_white/
Lew,
They will be Americanizing these two in a furious way. They are swallowing the idea that these two were not Jihadi.
Normalizing bombings. Normalizing foreignness (profound foreigness) as American.
This Kid could read Arabic, Cyrillic and identified himself with that world.
Lew,
Thanks for the link. The Left are expanding the definition of white, beyond the confines of the golf clubhouse and into the madrassa. It’s sinister stuff.
“Let me show you the old classification of Caucausian type.”
If there’s a bigger waste of time than this i don’t know what it is.
Race is a tree-structure with branches. Caucasian is one of the main branches and it includes Europeans, Arabs, Jews etc.
Caucasian then branches into European Caucasian and Non-European Caucasian.
European Caucasian then branches into various sub-groups like Nordic etc and those branch into the individual nations.
“White” is a label. You can define it to mean any level of the tree structure. Arguing over who is or isn’t white without first *defining* what *you* mean by the label is a stupid waste of time.
The enemy want to define “white” at the Caucasian level because it includes them (when it suits them) and because it works for divide and rule purposes. It works for divide and rule purposes because the people targeted for extinction are the European Caucasian subset not the whole group.
So WNs should simply define what they mean by “White” to be European Caucasian (or some smaller subgroup of European Caucasian that suits their purposes) rather than denying the wider Caucasian branch doesn’t exist – because it plainly does and denying it makes them look dumb.
The anti-racist Hitler is great.
I think I did point out the double standard. It includes them when they want it to and they (middle easterners, Jews) can deny the label as they wish.
Don’t read more into it than I stated. Sirota clearly meant European, and he clearly wanted it to be an avowed white supremacist.
The correct answer to this problem is that they are white, but they’re not western and they’re not culturally christian so they should be exterminated whenever/wherever they threaten civilized people.
The determination to define the Tsarnaevs as non-white, no matter what the Census Bureau says … proves that in many [sic] ways, Sirota was absolutely right.
Sadly Joan Walsh makes sense here. Goddamn MacDonald and Sirota types read off the same script.
“The correct answer to this problem is that they are white, but they’re not western”
“Western” might have been a better compromise once but i think “White” is too ingrained now. My point is simply that if people want to use White for a subset of Caucasian they still need to accept that the Caucasian category exists and includes Arabs etc. So…
They’re not White – to me – because i choose to define the European Caucasian subset of Caucasian as “White.”
Therefore Jews, Chechens, Arabs etc are Non-European Caucasians – not White by my definition but still Caucasian.
Similarly if people wanted to define it narrower than that e.g. White Southerners or Nordics or whatever they can if they want but it doesn’t stop Caucasian or European Caucasian still existing as part of the tree structure.
They’re not White – to me – because i choose to define the European Caucasian subset of Caucasian as “White.”
Your choice is irrelevant. The word “white” is defined by consensus and the law of the United States. The word becomes meaningless if anyone can define it in any manner they like.
“My point is simply that if people want to use White for a subset of Caucasian they still need to accept that the Caucasian category exists and includes Arabs etc.”
Except you are quite wrong. The Caucasian race essentially corresponds to those ethnic groups that speak a version of Indo-Aryan language group. Their native range emanating from somewhere in the vicinity of the Caucasus Mountains(?) six(?) millennia ago extends from Iceland to Bangladesh (if you don’t count all the places it was transplanted to by England, Spain, and France.)
It most certainly doesn’t include the Laplanders, Basques, Egyptians, Samis & a whole lotta’ Finns, Babylonians, Bedouins, or Jews.
“The word “white” is defined by consensus and the law of the United States.”
What “consensus?” Federal law is nothing but La-La-land when it comes to ethnic categories. Wait for the avalanche of lawsuits based in genetic analysis when it comes to what exactly is a “Native American.”
The resulting court decisions will make the the Third Reich or Apartheid South Africa look downright liberal. There will be no choice but to have the federal courts re-invent the “coloured” classification under then rubric of “multi-ethnic.”
Hahahahahaha!
What “consensus?”
The consensus of large groups comprised of 12-40 y.o. ‘teens’ following natural disasters and rap concerts.
I exited a YMCA today. A black had stonen a basketball. The Chinese/Janaese staffer chased the coon and asked for the ball back and the black called him a crazy white.
Hey, why the fuck not? Fugging coons.
“and the black called him a crazy white.”
Shoot him.
Calm down Rudel.
I didn’t have a gun at the time. Lol.
Put a pressure-cooker in his locker and call the cops.
“Calm down Rudel.”
The time is long past for calming down. All those who said that 9/11 changed everything were right. Shoot them now or you’ll have to shoot even more later.
Chechens are about as white as ashkenazi jews (middle eastern/white mix) are. So, if jews aren’t white, then neither are chechens. You have fair jews and dark jews, just like you have fair chechens and dark chechens.
The President:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_QfVWU-2pVL4/SeiHkT-I0zI/AAAAAAAAFeA/yThF1bc1x98/s400/GROZNY,+CHECHNYA,+RUSSIA+Chechen+President+Ramzan+Kadyrov+(C)+during+his+swearing+ceremony+celebrating+his+near-total+control+of+the+southern+Russian+province+April+5,+2007+.jpg
The Former Prime minister (stereotypical pale ashkenazi looking):
http://www.theglobalunity.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/akhmed-zakayev.jpg
By the way, Chechens are still whiter than armenians.
Noman
“Your choice is irrelevant. The word “white” is defined by consensus and the law of the United States. The word becomes meaningless if anyone can define it in any manner they like.”
Contesting the government imposed consensus is one of the reasons for defining White differently.
.
Rudel
“The Caucasian race essentially corresponds to those ethnic groups that speak a version of Indo-Aryan language group.”
Nope. The word Caucasian goes back to the original split between Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification)
Caucasoid in this classification is *very* wide and includes Arabs, Jews etc hence why TPTB want to use it as the definition of “White.” There’s nothing logically wrong with that but if for political reasons you want to define “White” as something else – or simply because you want to annoy them – you need to recognize that you’re defining a *subset* of the much wider Caucasian group otherwise you sound dumb.
“Western” might have been a better compromise once but i think “White” is too ingrained now.
If you’d exchange “western” for “white” I want to trade baseball cards with you because you sound like a sucker.
Western men fight to this day for the West – as they have for thousands of years. No army has ever or will ever fight for a “white country”.
Xenophon writes in Agesilaus.
Thereupon it was a sight to see the gymnasiums thronged with warriors going through their exercises, the racecourses crowded with troopers on prancing steeds, the archers and the javelin men shooting at the butts. Nay, the whole city in which he lay was transformed into a spectacle itself, so filled to overflowing was the market-place with arms and armour of every sort, and horses, all for sale. Here were coppersmiths and carpenters, ironfounders and cobblers, painters and decorators—one and all busily engaged in fabricating the implements of war; so that an onlooker might have thought the city of Ephesus itself a gigantic arsenal. It would have kindled courage in the breast of a coward to see the long lines of soldiers, with Agesilaus at their head, all garlanded as they marched in proud procession from the gymnasiums and dedicated their wreaths to our Lady Artemis. Since, where these three elements exist—reverence towards heaven, practice in military affairs, and obedience to command—all else must needs be full of happy promise.
But seeing that contempt for the foe is calculated to infuse a certain strength in face of battle, he ordered his criers to strip naked the barbarians captured by his foraging parties, and so to sell them. The soldiers who saw the white skins of these folk, unused to strip for toil, soft and sleek and lazy-looking, as of people who could only stir abroad in carriages, concluded that a war with women would scarcely be more formidable.
Most modern American “whites” are cowardly barbarians. They’re in rebellion against any authority, from government to God.
Contesting the government imposed consensus is one of the reasons for defining White differently.
You suggested anyone should be able to define whiteness however they wish, that’s not “defining White differently”, that’s abuse of language not a courageous stand against the government. If you say “White” is open to interpretation you’re undermining our language and have no ground to stand on to correct Rudel’s (wrong) definition of caucasian.
“Most modern American “whites” are cowardly barbarians.”
– Speak for yourself, Tamer.
“They’re in rebellion against any authority, from government to God.”
– And “God” doesn’t exist.
Xenophon didn’t forget to mention “race”. For hundreds of years the US has DEFINED “whiteness” – for God’s sake, WN is just Americanism without table-manners- the US didn’t flub the definition and try to force it on you. You somewhere along the line in your life decided that you’d take an unhealthy interest in the word “white” and try to carve some social identity out of a biological term.
No-Man,
I haven’t closely read these threads, but from what I’ve seen I think you’ve made some strong points. WNism has to be able to withstand objections like these. I’m still not entirely clear on what you see as the right response for whites in the current context. Whites are being targeted as whites in the sense that you seem to reject not based on culture, ethnicity, region.
If the PC moan and bitch about whites having too much power in the US and elsewhere, someone ought to point out that Moroccans and Indians and Iranians and Jews and Iraqis are potentially listed as white for statistical purposes.
“You suggested anyone should be able to define whiteness however they wish”
I’m saying if people want to use the word “White” to mean a different thing than the government means then they should define it in a clear way in their head first – preferably in the way that most annoys TPTB.
.
“WN is just Americanism without table-manners- the US didn’t flub the definition and try to force it on you. You somewhere along the line in your life decided that you’d take an unhealthy interest in the word “white” and try to carve some social identity out of a biological term.”
In Europe people can simply use their national labels. In the US it’s more complicated. Some White subgroups in the US have enough of a quasi national identity to be able to use that identity label e.g. Southerners, but others need some common label which serves the practical need.
Now only some of the groups included as “White” in the government definition are targeted for genocide so the government definition is no good therefore there’s a practical political need for those people who are targeted for genocide to come up with a group label for themselves to aid in their self-defence. “White” seems like the best available in the context.
“The word Caucasian goes back to the original split between Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid.”
What “original split?” Your antiquated references have no validity to modern ethnography at least not since Cavalli-Sforza’s monumental The History and Geography of Human Genes which has only been more generally confirmed by more recent and detailed genomic and linguistic analysis.
Read some of the basic books on the subject instead of reading politically correct Wiki entries.
The enemy knows exactly what “white” means, and they know it does not include anyone but indigenous Western aka European peoples. Even within this context (which is the real meaning of “white” in America) the enemy tries to break off Italians, Spaniards, and Irish against us (which has mostly been unsuccessful) . We all know who they mean when they blather on about white privilege, don’t we? They are not talking about Jews, “white” Muslims, North Africans or Arabs, are they? When they want to make a white town diverse, they don’t mean to add Irishmen, Poles, Germans or Greeks, do they? No! But adding Jews, Muslims, Berbers, “white” Muslims, etc would do the trick as well as Africans. So it is perfectly clear that the enemy knows as well as we do who is included as “white”. They are being purposefully coy when playing the “white as cuacasian, including Middle East and North Africa.”
No-Man’s argument is as pointless as discussing how many angels fit on the head of a pin. There is really no question about what is meant by white on either side, only the normal deception and misinformation war we always get from the left.
Whatever we choose to call ourselves the left is going to try to destroy. Use Irish and the left will insist it includes legal citizens of Ireland. Ditto for Germany, Greek, etc. Use Western and they will claim Africa is as far West as Europe is. It is what the left does.
What better way to destroy a family or organization than to open up it’s membership to disloyal groups who hate and contradict everything it stands for? This happened to the term “American”already.
There is another aspect to whiteness too–that those carrying it should identify with it. Jews violate this all the time. They are “white” when they are speaking for us, but not part of the white family their policies get implemented to our detriment.
The game is to always keep us divided. We know who we are. They know who we are. White is a perfectly fine term to describe us, add Western or European for clarity, but understand the left’s game. They are undermining us by trying to dilute the meaning of white same as they are trying to destroy the family and marriage by “gay marriage”.
Good stuff, Wayne.
Even in jail the Gremlins multiply.
http://www.vdare.com/posts/daily-mail-has-tavon-whites-picture
Astounding. Prison is supposed to reduce the frequency of the psycho gene…
French, ah the French.
Heard this song too many times. 1901, never caught the meaning, till now.
The French rioted today over sodomy marriage. Good on them!
BTW, Denise, my best to your kids! 🙂
Viva le France!
Tamer of Savages the anti-WN, pro- Globalist Endless War promoter wrote: “WN is just Americanism without table-manners…. You somewhere along the line in your life decided that you’d take an unhealthy interest in the word ‘white’ and try to carve some social identity out of a biological term.”
“No-Man, I haven’t closely read these threads, but from what I’ve seen I think you’ve made some strong points. WNism has to be able to withstand objections like these.”
“No-Man is a troll. A superlative one. He uses big words that he doesn’t understand.”
“The game is to always keep us divided. We know who we are. They know who we are. White is a perfectly fine term to describe us, add Western or European for clarity….”
Whites will be distinguished and united fully when united under the sign of the Cross.
Mosin: Relying on Christianity in this day and age is like insisting on using an old computer running on an old version of Windows infected with viruses to the point that it is slower than molasses and locks up every few minutes. Every leftist “virus” since the Enlightenment has been written to affect and ultimately destroy it. I respect Christianity and believe it is and should be a centerpiece of Western culture, however, we need a new operating system that is impervious to leftist assault and, in fact can infect and destroy the leftist machine. That operating system, in my opinion, is raw unadulterated evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory destroys the concept of equality that has been an excuse for every leftist movement since the Protestant Reformation. It carries weight and reason and logic that blows a smoking whole in the left’s fanatic religious (they are 100%religious) untruths.
Mosin, the left has always hidden behind the idea that they are about logic, reason and progress. They used Darwin to weaken and merginalize Christianity for the purpose of destroying it’s influence, replacing Christ with Equality (talk to any Zio-Christian and you will find their true object if worship is indeed equality, for everyone except the chosen, of course). But Darwin validates inequality and rascism. You see, we cannot allow the left to save their cake and eat it too.
As a uniting force, Christianity can be called a complete and total failure since the French Revolution or even before. All those wars, including WWI and WWII should be proof to that fact.
I don’t mean to say that Christianity caused those wars, I don’t believe it did, but it sure as hell didn’t stop them.
@ Wayne:
Re: the failure in the internecine, inter-European, World Wars: Yes, where WERE the corrupt clergy when it began to become “all quiet on the Western front”? Not leading the resistance against the Instigators of white slaughter, not even joining and supporting the resistance, but colluding with the system, because they ARE part it.
Re: relying on Evolution instead of Christianity: You assume that genetic science and other natural sciences are incompatible with Christianity? Are you among the crowd of commenters here who insist that no one is a REAL Christian unless they believe in a seven-thousand-year-old earth and universe created in six days, and a literal global flood with a pair of all land animal species literally maintained in a boat, etc.? I do not agree at all.
“because they ARE part it” should have been “because they ARE part of it.” No editing possible on this website.
It is a pattern for many “Bible literalists” on Creationism to be NON-literally-scriptural on any MORAL injunctions that pertain to their daily lives, that might hinder their passions or inconvenience them in any way. These Bible literalists also make use of the technological products of science (such as the latest high tech miliary equipment) while denigrating the science itself. This is not Christianity but plain hypocrisy.
Christian faith and evolutionary science are not opposed. Christianity cannot be “a centerpiece of Western culture” under “a new operating system.” It is not respected and replaced, but is either foundational or rejected.
“miliary equipment” is “military equipment” Sorry. Must remember to read twice before posting here.
We must distinguish here between corrupt, false “Christianity” and the authentic that cannot play a supporting role in the anti-Christ system. Otherwise we may only “talk past each other.”
I’m out the door now, cannot continue discussing now.
“The word Caucasian goes back to the original split between Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid.”
“What “original split?” Your antiquated references have no validity to modern ethnography”
The original split in *pre-modern* ethnography – which is what the government definition is based on. As it’s the government definition we want to contest it’s worth being clear where it came from.
Whites will be distinguished and united fully when united under the sign of the Cross.
When you submit to Rome you Welsh-German cowpie.
As a uniting force, Christianity can be called a complete and total failure since the French Revolution or even before. All those wars, including WWI and WWII should be proof to that fact.
The French Revolution was anti-Christian. Luther was a kind of Arminius style traitor to Rome. Rome was Europe in Arminius’s time, the Germans were barbarians. Germans become European when they are Romanized. The Germans had no idea of Europe. No word for it. In Luther’s time Rome was the Church and the Church was Europe. When a German rejects the European solar cults at Teutoberg or Catholicism in Luther’s time he is rejecting Europe, consciously.
The (partial) German rejection of Catholicism led to the Thirty Years war, which left Germany in ruins. The idea of an IMPERIUM EUROPA was a threat to Germans who had slipped back into spiritual barbarism and “common law” practices. As far as the Germans were concerned if this foreign idea of “Europe” was to exist it would have to do so as a German project; a secular German project rooted in the German language and German “race”. The Frenchman would have clowly realize he was a “Romanized German” and relinquish his Latin culture. The thoroughly European Pole would have to reject the west/Catholicism and be “Germanized” because he too was an oppressed German.
German nationalists know this worldview animated Germany for centuries but hambone hyphenated American WNs don’t. They crow about “Brothers War”.