youtube.com
While I can understand "white ethnonationalists" want to preserve "the flavour" or their communities I do not recognize ultimately which traditional culture or phylosophy are they referring with "whiteness". Would any of the populations they claim to come from would call themselves "white" across borders, cultures and creeds?
Seems to me like a poor imitation of the "international jew".
Other urls found in this thread:
bitchute.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
see
USA. First immigration act explicitly stated only white men of good character. Additionally many of the founders expressed that they wanted the USA to be a new europe of sorts.
Ancient civilization...
But does white == British, according to your example?
Also, USA, regardless of stated intentions was definitely not white, at the start with all the natives and with slavery definitely not ever...
>But does white == British
No the first immigration act defined white as european.
>Also, USA, regardless of stated intentions was definitely not white, at the start with all the natives and with slavery definitely not ever.
Those weren't citizens
Sure, slaves weren't probably citizens either, but there they were...
yeah what is your point?
> No the first immigration act defined white as european.
Sounds like already a fallout from the "judeo christian" construct of the enlightenment...
My point is that is not a white society, regardless is non whites are not citizens with equal rights.
not following
It's the exact opposite of what you're saying. It *was* a white society despite not having 100 percent european demographics. Only whites were considered american and only whites had rights.
> Sounds like already a fallout from the "judeo christian" construct of the enlightenment...
So you mentioned America. Not greeks, romans or even later european nations.
Therefore it "white" as you mentioned seems to be a construct that seeks to wrangle all European population, not by nationality or creed, but by origin and average skin tone. Therefore the term would include diaspora jews as well as original Europeans; Masons as well as Catholics or Protestants. I just don't see usefulness for the term then. Because saying "white" in Europe then, has no meaning. Hence I mentioned it goes along side with the "judeo christian" idea.
>I do not recognize ultimately which traditional culture or phylosophy are they referring with "whiteness"
They are refering to the ethnicity of Western European descendants. It's literally just another word to describe an ethnicity dumbass.
Yes, but apparently effective less "white" than Great Britain itself...
>whiteness
Of native European desceant.
/thread
Portugal is the most Western country in European landmass, are they white? Whiter than Slavs or Scandinavians?
See, the other guy said it was "European", now you say "Western European"... This is the issue, they keep referring to something as having central importance but at the same time is not clearly defined to everyone...
>not by nationality or creed, but by origin and average skin tone
Actually no that's not it. It sought to limit people by *race*. White is not a skin color it's a race. Jesus. See pic related.
>Because saying "white" in Europe then, has no meaning
Everybody knows this is horseshit. Many europeans see themselves as white as well as their ethnic identity. Not to mention their governments also categorize them as white in their census. But most importatnly there is the inescapable fact that other people (ie chinese, Africans, Americans, what have you) will see you as white regardless of how you identify.
that makes zero sense
So according to the map, jews are white...
Well, which was whiter? GB or USA?
The reality is "white" in the American context ought to just mean "American" but people aren't really willing to make that leap because that would imply that blacks were somehow deficient in American-ness which would be the greatest of all possible heresies of Americanism, since Americanism is an egalitarian faith in which moral progress is measured by the relative well-being of blacks.
>My point is that is not a white society,
The only people who had a say in what the nature of the society should be like were white Europeans. How is that not a white society?
Jews are not a homogeneous group. But yes ashkenazi jews cluster with europeans though at the border. Most successful jews are overwhelming european to the point where you couldn't even tell. The main problem with those jews is identity not semetic genes.
Well the USA by far because by your logic Great Britain was minority white. It was part of an empire that spanned 75 percent of the globe after all. On a more serious note you're not making any salient points in this regard. White america was white. That's how it was regardless of the presence of nonwhites on the soil. Up until very recently in fact. Even after various nonwhite groups increased their power in white society america was still considered normatively white. American= white. In order to specify another race you would have to say *african* american or *asian* american etc.
Anyone else hate e Michael Jones face? There is just something about it I don't like
1) Jews are white.
2) White as identity came from the enlightenment as a way to refer to Europeans living in the new world. Not clear if that would apply to Portuguese, Italians, Spanish or Greeks... Seems to be pretty British construct...
That contradicts what others said. More over America is a vast continent. And doesn't seem to me the Portuguese or the Spanish saw themselves as White, but as Spanish and Portuguese, while occupying territories in the same continent with different societal structures.
There seems to exist the same neighborhood segregation in the US accordingly to European nationality as there are borders in Europe.I don't see this shared "whiteness" in such...
Chart is missing the color code meaning. Thanks
Maybe... if I... talk like this... I’ll get... my point across...
It's kinda irrelevant to the point i'm making. You can see different hews from different places have different genetic make ups.
White means white, as opposed to red or black or spanish. It was an immediately visible trait.
This is the new kike talking point. Question whether whiteness even exists as anything other than a concept. I don't know why they bother honestly.
The early racialist put north africans as "white" caucasians
white is purely made up, and was used predominately after the age of colonialism
kike
I can understand that, but I just don't see it containing any thing worth of identitarian foundation beyond that immediate triage.
Sounds more like British expats in a diverse context clinging to their parents' roots and those roots' History, more than more than an actual identifiable common body of philosophy or culture itself, that one could even imitate or be converted to...
For sure makes sense nowadays to have a census with race in mind because the setting is now also racial diverse, but probably would not make much sense to have such parameters in Europe at that time.
Can't say I understand more what these guys rave on about whiteness, even though I can understand they want, like I said, preserve the flavor of their communities, but whiteness seems too vague of a term...
bullshit yo uknow EXACTLY what white means you fucking faggot sargon
Jones is a civnat faggot jew worshiper.
But... Kikes are White...
More over I'm not trying to say whiteness doesn't exist, just I don't understand what foundation or philosophical bedrock is there for people to cling on. Specially when the setting is already very diverse. Sounds like something that is intensified exactly because of the diverse environment otherwise there would be no necessity for such vague term and they would just stick to the English, Welsh, Scottish, Irish, etc... Things with actual history and culture and with mix and barriers between them.
no you dumb redneck
theres no such thing as "white dna", everyone has different ethnic makeup
Even people in Europe, theres no such thing as a 'pure german', and so forth..
White is a concept that changed throughout time, ask the founding fathers, who didn't considers slavs as white, just like the nazis.
Do you not understand what the term caucasian refers to? North africans are racially caucasian and so are iranians and nirth indians dingus. White/european is a subdivision of caucasian.
>theres no such thing as "white dna", everyone has different ethnic makeup
Ironic that you call him a dumb redneck yet you don't understand that this is such a thing genetic structure
I want you to look at the image I posted and then i want you to fucking kill yourself. I seriously want you to get off Jow Forums head back to sargons channel where you both can suck each other off about liberalism. You are scum and the founding fathers knew EXACTLY what white was they had fucking trials against indians who said they were fucking white when they were not.
NIGGER
I
G
G
E
R
so is david beckham and zac efron white?
"white" is a pseudo identity, its superficial, no one said it only describes europeans, it also describes people from the levant, and north africa, as well as anatolians.
Jones is right that, white is just merely a skin color, genetically we all come from different ethnic groups.
Anglos like obsessing over whiteness, where as in Germany, such of thing, never took root
I thought the founding fathers were product of enlightenment liberalism...
lol triggered incels
Im not sargon faggot
You guys are no different than, black nationalist
MUH genetics make me superior sheeit
>black nationalist
this is a problem? They might be wrong but at least white nationalist are correct.
Yes the ancient greeks called themselves white and so did the romans and the celts.
Stupid christcuck
I love how you faggot far-lefties have ZERO problem defining what and who is white when pushing anti-white policies.
"white people" is just a meme that lets the jew walk free among us
how so?
you both are idiots
Because the negroes, like creating an identity over their blackness, even tho most are mixed race (in america), and the white guys like mark, like making an identity over whiteness, when historically there is no agreement on what is white.
Even the term Aryan was originally a term to describe a linguistic category. Until Madison Grant came around...
I believe Britain is the only country in Europe, where they identify themselveas as white. ie. "white british" I haven't seen that from another country.
read image You are on such a basic level Im fucking surprised you are even on Jow Forums. You are such a fucking newfag it isn't funny maybe you should lurk more before posting.
en.wikipedia.org
Any other questions?
Im not a leftist
I hate the left, im just saying, the Left is playing a game, and you are falling right into it
>You are on such a basic level Im fucking surprised you are even on Jow Forums. You are such a fucking newfag it isn't funny maybe you should lurk more before posting.
keep crying bitch
prove me wrong
What exactly am I proving you wrong on again? I already made it clear what WHITE is.
the concept of race didn't even exist before in Germany like it did in the JewSA during the 20th century
Its PURELY an anglo concept, Hitler unfortunately was a big anglophile and brought allot of those theories home
Germany is Germany because, of its ethnic identity, and LANGUAGE, and the Christian churches preserved and helped build the cultural identities of Modern Europe.
No, YOU are falling for their D&C game. Tell me, how is remaining a lone, detached lemming while every other racial group is allying with YOU as a common enemy a winning strategy?
I'm not far left... I don't define people as white, because I'm european so makes no sense to me to use such term given there's many other markers that differentiate my community from other communities in the european space, like region, country, language, religion.
Although given I'm not African, I'll refer refer to Africans as black because it's easier for me to note such difference. Of course when I get to know some better I refer to them by their nationality as I would with Asians once I know they are from Vietnam, Thailand or China, for example... Or expect them to differentiate the country I'm from, from the neighboring countries after they get to know me...
>I'm not far left... I don't define people as white, because I'm european so makes no sense to me to use such term given there's many other markers that differentiate my community from other communities in the european space, like region, country, language, religion.
>
>Although given I'm not African, I'll refer refer to Africans as black because it's easier for me to note such difference. Of course when I get to know some better I refer to them by their nationality as I would with Asians once I know they are from Vietnam, Thailand or China, for example... Or expect them to differentiate the country I'm from, from the neighboring countries after they get to know me...
Well duh, that's the point of an umbrella term. It's not mutually exclusive.
Those guys were dumb as fuck. How was Greece "European civilization" when a unified Europe didn't exist at the time? The Greece barely spread Greek culture into Europe, only into Italy and Sicily, the one colony in southern France, Illyria and so on. This is where the white guy bullshit falls apart. Trying to claim Greece as a "white civilization". Trying to claim that Europe had the wheel, when the wheel was invented in Mesopotamia. Of course, the we wuz Aryans retards will move in and claim that every high civilization was "white people" using doctored and cherry picked evidence Ancient Aliens style.
Which is what I'm trying to unpack, because like "jew" seems to be an unclear term many times.
And apparently it's not just an umbrella term is also a black-box term.
i couldnt help but notice you didnt address my post
>Which is what I'm trying to (((((((unpack)))))
I'm sure you are.
>because like "jew" seems to be an unclear term many times.
Not really, you can ask any rabbi. The government of IsraHELL also has a clear definition for who counts.
this was my post
not sure why ID changed
What post? You haven't made any besides that one in this thread.
Stop trying to weasel out of the lack of truth in your words. Every time you realize that what you said can't be defended you just try to pretend that it was all a part of some elaborate "Gotcha!" verbal trap.
I'm not so worried as to deny them that there could be some distribution among some subset of humans where some developments took place more than others, but more to actually try to understand what is there in terms of concise identitarian value that would replace or transverse nationality and religion.
But yes, I can understand your point that it almost comes of as "We wuz apex humanz and shet" which I don't see how is it different from jewish exceptionalism that USA embodies.
Racialism is old 18th, 19th century science, which spiraled out of control in America and has been exported in recent decades into Europe and elsewhere. Even in South Africa, where whites were a tiny minority, Boers and British didn't get along and had ethnic enmity.
If there was a single language and culture among Europeans, then yes, a white or European race would be real and identifiable.
I expanded more what I meant with this short question here:
And fair enough about ruling classe being white, it just doesn't seem to be widely european to wanting to use "white" in repleacement of "european", like another post said, seems like a strongly anglo construct and therefore not of use outside of such context. Even though I can agree that nowdays with the amount of immigration to Europe we all become "white" by contrast, but there's still no common identitarian inherit value or philosophy, other than "the people that were around there the longest", which doesn't seem to be enough to cling on as an european unity initiative, if nation states can't do it already.
It wasn't a matter of what you meant. You made a false statement and then tried to defend it fallaciously. When your faulty logic didn't work, you shifted to a false dilemma and then, when you weren't taken up on it, you simply didn't respond to what was said against you.
Your inexperience in argument is causing you to act like a dishonest opportunist. You're trying to get people to ignore the line of dialogue in which you got BTFO and instead look to another moment where you typed out a paragraph in response to an easier post.
Right, so I wonder how the same professed goal they have, that is "keeping their nations' flavor", which I think a big portion of the population can get behind (because people don't like to have the idea of "hamburger" shift to something that is shaped like a hotdog, containing a sausage and mustard and still have to call it hamburger) without falling into the pitfall of racialism. I wouldn't mind if when I visit Paris I mostly see French, alike for London for English.
I already conceded the point, regardless if the UK would be more white than colonial USA.
I think you don't need to call the fallacy police...
You didn't concede the point to the one you were talking to, you snake.
Which I thought it was you, but now indeed I noticed the memeflag.
Here. I concede the point, even though the UK would be whiter than colonial USA anyway.
Anything else to add? Or more policing and snake-calling to do?
Interesting. Very modern.
Libido Dominandi?
Oh, Politics of Obedience, missed the title. Thanks for the reference.
"whiteness" is a uniquely american construct.
the term was invented in the early 20th century by immigration officials as a way of allowing mass european immigration while still reserving the right to discriminate against specific individuals or countries.
hence why irish and italians were generally rejected, but exceptions could be made for "white" italians, or "white" irish.
in america it refers to the unique american cultural identity produced by mixing aspects of the various european cultures as well as entirely new cultural practices produced by the settlers of the new world.
this is also why "assimilation" was historically such a big point in the immigration debate.
the fear has always been of a gradual erosion of the unique colonial spirit and sense of americanism that was born after the revolution and during the westward expansion.
sadly, we are so far removed from it that most people will have no fucking idea what i'm even referring too.
this country died in 1965
You have to go back
Discourse on Voluntary Servitude
by Etienne de la Boétie.
So 1549 (!)
Literally proto Libido DOminandi
Use "ethno-European" instead if you must. We need a rallying point because most "white" people, no matter where they live, are facing basically the same civilizational threat. Banding together would be ideal. This doesn't mean we're all the same or should all live together, but we should work together.
Also, no kikes allowed. There's a reason for their pattern of victimization.
>British construct
The Spanish and Portuguese (and the French) had their own colonial caste systems. What name did they use for themselves in these systems?
As far as immigration into the USA goes, southern Europeans were not always considered "white" because their skin was a bit darker and they were foreign to the American population at the time. They are considered white now because they mostly assimilated. Most black people didn't and don't properly assimilate, the same is true of Jews. Thus, they remain out-groups. This is true of many mixed-race Hispanics as well. Arabs and Persians may be white on the US Census but they usually don't even think of themselves as white.