Hollywood In Danger of Making Historically Unprecedented Returns From Pro-Euroman Movies

Calling something Nordicist doesn’t invalidate it.

No, but it does describe it.

Were the reports of rapes of Christian monks by Vikings themselves in one of the sagas?

By the victims.

its greatest villain is a deformed and physically ugly (repulsive, really) Spartan whose parents refused to discard him at his birth out of a misplaced sense of weakness and sentimentality.

One of my favorite lines was Leonidas speaking to the hunchback just before Leonidas was to knowingly die due to the hunchback’s treason:

“May you live forever.”

Marriage is called an Institution by the Roman Catholic Church.  There is a plethora of references to the “Institution of Marriage” in Roman Catholic written articles and papers.

----------------
Someone on the IMDb boards said Frank Miller and Zack Synder are Jews.

Furthermore, I found out that Frank Miller is an Atheist.  Isn’t that quite funny, The movie 300, disparges religion.  It paints the ephors as syphilitic lepers who are corrupt and sanctimounous.  But in Real LIfe Frank Miller would NOT have been allowed to tread on any part of Spartan soil, this man places HIS prejudices ontop a very pious and religious people.  Frank Miller is spreading his atheism via a movie and comic book, smearing the god-fearing Spartans with impiety and worse irreligion.

It is NO wonder that Socrates, that Philodorian, called for the Poets to be censored!  To Smear the Spartans with Atheism is a lie!  It is a tragic misrepresentation!!!!

the right to marry other homosexuals

Just a quibble (pet peeve of mine): homosexuals do not want the right to marry homosexuals, they want the right to redefine (pervert) marriage.  They either care not a whit, or relish, the fact that what they propose is the destruction of marriage.

We reasonably allowed homosexuals to practice their sexual inclinations without fear of punishment, but our reasonable concession then formed the basis for a series of unreasonable and unacceptable demands.

I refer to this as the compact between normal people, and homosexuals:

Homosexuals agree to keep their deviancy out of the public eye, to discretion, and to keeping their hands off our children (in every sense possible).

Normals agree not to visit their homes with torches and pitchforks.

Homosexuals have been in breach of the compact for at least two generations.  They need to clean house.

Friedrich, yes, the eugenics angle was hard to miss.  Did you notice the treacherous Spartan politician was the swarthiest of the lot?  Lol!  The hits just kept on comin’ in 300.

But, I did see a white or two amongst the Persians: one of the Immortals, and the Ogre (not the hunchback) who almost kills Leonidas.

I didn’t enjoy the movie that much, outside of the political sense.  Politically it was great, but otherwise it wasn’t my cup of tea.  Felt like I was watching Sin City or something (general mood, surreality), the CONSTANT slow-mo was a serious pain in the ass (I frickin’ hate the overuse of gimmicks like slo-mo, if I want to see that shit I can watch MTV), etc.

and to keeping their hands off our children (in every sense possible). ... SVIGOR

Not entirely well said… Although I like the bit about the ‘compact’ with normal society child molesters are typically ‘straight’ males.

Of course in other cultures, it is almost ‘normal,’ but at least in America (and I would assume England) it is married men, sometimes with children, that commit acts of same sex molestation.

I am not having much luck, on the IMDb boards, someone stated that Frank Miller and Zack Synder are Jewish.  I seen one more website with that info--can someone colloborate or deny it with better info?

Site broke the first link:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d5/Frank_Miller_Priest.jpg

I read somewhere now, that recent research is showing that Birth order produces homosexuality.  The third son becomes homo.  Furthermore, dominant Mothers and overly Dominant Fathers also create homosexuality.

There is a huge predominance of homosexuality amongst the Jews because of course you have heard about the “Jewish Mother”.  Jewish boys are mothered to death and that is one big factor.

Someone on the IMDb boards said Frank Miller and Zack Synder are Jews.

I find it plausible they’re quite hybridized—possibly the way Hitler was.  Yes, I find that quite plausible.  As I said, they didn’t really go after the really big market:

Euromen who don’t like being slaves to Jews.

They are merely “playing with ordnance”.

I liked both the movie and this review a great deal. Forward!

How could it be genetic? Wouldn’t evolution have bred out such a ridiculous and ineffective gene?

Maybe.  Sailer’s mentioned some interesting stuff, about how males with older brothers have a much higher chance of being gay themselves.  So, if it is genetic, it might have an environmental trigger for expression.

There are some articles about this on the internet, giving ‘gay’ ‘gene’ and similar stuff into Google should bring up the recent research. I think some of the research is pretty convincing, although I made no effort to retain the information.

Even if there is an environmental trigger, as long as there is some genetic component, creating a favorable environment for gays to live out their desires (i.e. no over-strong social stigma) increases the likelihood that they wont have children. De-gayifying through celebrating gayness, if you like. Its a gene that, if allowed to ‘show itself’ phenotypically, will weed itself out over time.

Ewald is doing some good work with his promotion of the germ theory of disease.  However, a pathogenic explanation isn’t inconsistent with a genetic explanation.  Diseases occur as a result of the interaction of the pathogen and the host.  Because the host is constructed by genes, there is always a genetic component.  Even if homosexuality is caused by a pathogen, there may also be genetic variation among humans that makes some humans more susceptible to the pathogen.  The gene could remain in the population if it conferred an offsetting advantage.

Whether genetic or not, you are right PF....

Giving them “free reign” so to speak should weed out the problem, unless it is some sort of “virus with a trigger.”

Thanks for the wiki link.

Also, I had a question for a friend of mine at AR…

Why is it that some of the people don’t like Sailer here?

I have yet to read him and am unaware of his central thesis-but I remember reading some negative things about him in other posts-and wanted to confirm my statement to my friend that people here don’t like Sailer so much.

thanks gnxp stinks…

“The origin of the idea that Snyder or Miller might be “Jewish” (or, as I said is plausible, “highly hybridized") was a post on IMDB.  I haven’t seen the IMDB post but it is a leap to presume that the original poster was sympathetic to white nationalism.  Such a comment could just as easily come from an Iranian or a Jew with their own agendas...As for Hitler’s hypothesized Jewish hybridization, I did say “possibly”, and this is not something usually admitted as a possibility by those in “the movement”.

Fair enough.  I’m not saying that Jewish ancestry is impossible for any of those individuals - including Hitler - and the Jew/Hitler thing was certainly not my major “beef.” Looking over the thread in its entirety, there seem to be too many comments without factual backing.  This goes back to other posts and of course critiques over some comments made by Mr. von Hoffmeister in his interview.  We need to have as firm a grounding in verifiable evidence as is realistically possible when comments are made that assert something to be true (or very likely).

Now to Sailer.  I certainly agree with James Bowery’s statements with respect to Sailer and his relationship with gnxp.  A major problem with the latter is that they not only oppose “repatriation” of Razib/GC but, and here is the crucial point from the “free association” vantage point, they oppose racial separation within America.

The idea that whites may, for example, wish to split off and form a more homogenous nation, even if Razib/GC can stay exactly where they are, and still live in the remaining portion of a multiracial American state - that is opposed by gnxp and statements were made about “civil war”, “nuclear war”, etc.  Statements were also made approving of government spying and repression of white dissidents.

Giving them “free reign” so to speak should weed out the problem, unless it is some sort of “virus with a trigger.”

Someone should explain to me why it can’t be both genetic and highly resistant to eugenics.  What if essentially everyone carries the genes, and its only expressed under certain circumstances (e.g., correlated with # of hetero male siblings)?

I’m reminded of the stuff I read about how the major psychological barrier to incest is inborn, but triggered by being raised around the relative in question.

Svyetoslav wrote:

*Someone should explain to me why it can’t be both genetic and highly resistant to eugenics.*

Eugenics depends on phenotypic expression for it to work. The environmental trigger that you have postulated, which I find very plausible, doesnt change the reality that one form of the gene (A) gives more likelihood of being gay than another (B)- whether a triggering event occurs or not. Bs are not triggered, or less often triggered, than As, as a result of their genetics.

The only case I can think of in which this doesnt hold true is if we all had the identical copy of the gene- like you said, if there is no genetic variation. I dont imagine that to be very likely, given the tendency to variation that exists in other behavior-linked genes.

This is for PF:

“The enemy has thrown into bandit warfare fanatic, communist-trained fighters who will not stop at any act of violence.  The stake here is more thatn to be or not to be. This fight has nothing to do with a soldier’s chivalry nor with the decisions of the Geneva Conventions.  If this fight against the bands, in the East as well as in the Balkans is not carried out with the MOST BRUTAL MEANS, the forces at our disposal may in the near future not last out to master this plague.

The Troops are there fore Authorized and Ordered in this struggle to take any measures WITHOUT RESTRICTION even against women and children if these are necessary for success. [Humanitarian] considerations of any kind are a crime against the German nation...”

Orders issued by Field Marshal Keitel
(Following instructions from Hitler) 16 December 1942

Murder is a crime against God.  Who determines morality is God---not a nation.

No Spartan would ever have said this, commanded this, or even obeyed this.

James: “I wasn’t aware the gnxp agenda was that vectorist.”

Yes, it is.  Those here (for example, Guessedworker and Fred Scrooby) who remember gnxp and Dienkes’ blog from, say, 3-4 years ago, may remember the strong anti-separatist sentiment from gnxpers, particularly from GC; in fact, I believe that some of GC’s comments were reproduced on this blog.

If memory serves, GC celebrated miscegenation and also vehemently opposed white nationalism in general, and separatism in particular.  He stated that the idea that separatists could carve out their own state(s) in America was a “fantasy”, and, if such were actually attempted, I also believe he stated his own personal willingness to take up arms against the separatists/nationalists.  As well, he stated that any attempt by separatists would devolve into some sort of “nuclear civil war.” He also approved of governmental monitoring of white dissident discussion on the internet.

“Arcane” of gnxp stated, and I believe here in this very blog, that he is against any attempt to break up “the greatest country in the world”, that is, the USA.

Also, relatively recently, Razib discussed his own experiences growing up in the rural Pacific Northwest and his alleged fisticuffs with “rednecks” who objected to Razib’s choice of a white girl as a date for a school dance.  The implication of this essay, from my reading, seems to be that Razib’s choice should have been accepted, and the disapproval was “racist.”

We also cannot forget the hysterical reaction by gnxp to the work of Frank Salter, which included personal attacks by more than one gnxper against Salter.

This all seems to fit into a general pattern of hostility against racial freedom of association and separatist desires.

This all seems to fit into a general pattern of hostility against racial freedom of association and separatist desires.

The general pattern is there but I was looking for the degree of vectorism demonstrated.  I wasn’t aware they would be hostile to even a compromise solution where territories of the US could be carved out for their kind.  If Sailer can’t distance himself from that sort of rhetoric while at the same time he can’t link to sites like MR because they admit occasional viewpoints that question the ethics and intellectual honesty of Holocaustian Orthodoxy, then he isn’t the “realist” he pretends to be.  The ratio of public awareness of “The Holocaust” to the public awareness of the Holodomor, compared to the number of deaths attributable to “The Holocaust” to the deaths attributable to the Holodomor is clear evidence of an utterly un-"realistic" view of the history of the 20th century that needs to be addressed by addressing not just the lack of attention to the Holodomor, but the unethical use of Jewish occupation of positions of public trust and authority to set themselves up as THE icon of victimhood.  You can’t reasonably do that without questioning the very account of “The Holocaust” that is received “wisdom” nowadays.

Hi Lindsay,

First off, sorry about the tone of some of my previous posts. I dont know what gets into me when I write in that overly critical tone, its really too much.

I disagree with you, that there is some kind of fundamental difference between the Nazi’s and the Spartans, although there are a multitude of fine differences, as one would expect. The Spartans were soldiers, to a man. The job of a soldier is theoretically to police territory, but in practice, it revolves around killing. Sparta was an expansive state- conquering Messenia and surrounding Laconia. This is from Wikipedia:

Nevertheless, it is not probable that without the training introduced by Lycurgus the Spartans would have been successful in securing their supremacy in Laconia, much less in the Peloponnese, for they formed a small immigrant band face to face with a large and powerful Achaean and autochthonous population.

The Spartans have since been glorified, but to the original inhabitants of Messenia, I think they looked very much like the Nazi’s looked to your forebears/relatives. I still fail to see the difference: the fundamental reality is a militarily aggressive State which kills enemy soldier to take over territory. And your implication that the Spartans maintained a strict honor code with reference to civilians, is something I would have to see demonstrated in an original source, and even then I would be skeptical. This whole idea of sparing civilians, or even recognizing their existence as ‘civilians’, is very new: for that insight I refer to Bill Lind’s writings, a military analyst.

I don’t think you should abandon your respect for the Spartans, (not that I could make you) but I’m not sure if a critical assessment of their actual legacy would leave us as much in awe of them as you think we should be. And I think if the Spartans were transported into our modern day, and were able to live out their ethos with modern weapons, they would appear very similar to the Nazis.

So calling the Nazis barbarians while glorifying the Spartans seems inconsistent to me. Did the Spartans conquer Messenia and Laconia politely? Did they do it with High Culture? I have to tell you, the Spartans had far less culture to offer than the Germans, as far as this can be ascertained. I say this because of all the technological and cultural advances that had occured in Germany from 1850 to 1940, whereas Sparta deliberately (as far as I can tell) did NOT keep pace with the advance of Hellenic culture, sticking to their antiquated ways with pride.

Remember Plutarch’s anecdote about how, if you were to enter Sparta, you would be amazed it was called great, because everyone lived in humble looking houses? The flip side of this is: they didnt care about architecture. While artisans across Greece were striving to make beautiful statuary and temples, the Spartans were… doing the same things they were doing 200 years before. Field exercises, marching…

I’m not very interested in pursuing the argument much further, maybe we can agree to disagree? I like the Greeks very much too.

Well, I’d rather be a helot in Sparta than an extinguished race in Palestine.  When the Israelites moved in, they committed several genocides and wiped people off the face of the earth.  Extinguished them wholesale.  The Spartans only subjugated the indigeneous people.  Yes, the Spartans dealt somewhat barbarically with the Helots--but they still managed to breed and have children. 

One can’t have Day without Night, Heat without Cold, Life without Death.  One can’t have great civility without barbarity.  The gods don’t allow it. Though they treated the Helots rather roughly, they were gentlemen elsewhere, especially on the battlefield.

GNXP stinks is being rather charitable to that crew.  The overall pattern is one of complete bad faith in addressing European ethnocentrism and related subjects.

I remember GC flying off the handle at least once.  Can’t remember if it was an email (in response to my questions as to why discussing the issue was so frightening to him - he was regularly deleting my posts) or at the blog, but he was seriously wacko on the issue, vomiting up all sorts of lurid darkie-nightmares (presumably the sort of thing he’d want done to non-subcons if the roles were reversed).  His favorite tactic is to wrestle valiantly with hordes of straw men (WNs by definition want to kill him, nuke non-whites, etc.), when he isn’t deleting real arguments from real WNs, that is.

What really bothers me isn’t the blog’s opposition to racial nationalism for Europeans, but its proprietors’ intellectual dishonesty and WN-baiting (if they don’t want to discuss WNism, a good start might be to stop telling lies about WNism).

DS, glad to see you have re-emerged as an active spokesman in pro-western forums (such as this blog), although I think “...you sir, are a Nationalist fuck-tard.  Now go hang yourself...” is a bit harsh.

I think the byplay between Wheeler, PF, and Braun has been unfortunate.  Although let us also admit that the original comment, “When will the Germans be civilized?” , was ludicrous.  Is there any other group that has done more for western civilization, since the fall of Rome, than the Germans?  They are the pivot of Europe.  Not that one has to excuse or support all of their actions, or participate in the mindless Hitler worship that one often observes, but still, German-bashing is at least as bad as Greek-bashing, no?

Actually, a question for Mr. Wheeler: are there any Greek nationalist parties/organizations that you support?  If so, are you in communicatiuon with any?  You could do the Greek people a service by convincing the brightest of the Greek nationalist leaders to become familiar with the work of Frank Salter.

Actually, DS, if you do not mind a suggestion, when you have the chance, look into Salter yourself as well.  After all, if the bio-oriented people can read Yockey and Nietzsche and Spengler and Evola, certainly the High Culture-oriented activists can read Salter.

There needs to be a solid biological foundation to pro-western viewpoints.  Certainly, a cultural structure can be built on that foundation, but without that solid foundation, the structure may falter under pressure.

There is actually no excuse for any pro-western activist to be unfamiliar with Salter.  Even if they are economically unable to purchase “On Genetic Interests”, they can certainly read the academic paper linked to at this blog, as well as read reviews of Salter’s work on this blog and elsewhere on the internet.

And by “reviews” I mean honest attempts at analysis, and not hysterical people making self-described “vulgar attacks” on Salter, or whining that their “beautiful” African-American nieces will be discriminated against by Salterism.

I continued in another post:

You know for all this talk about the “evil” nazis and the “Never again” and all this Holocaust 24/7 in America, I find it very disturbing and very sickening that a Jew would Nazify the Spartans and then promote it in a film.

Jesus said to the Jews, “Hypocrites”. You people can’t stop being hypocrites. His subconscious literally reproduced upon the Spartans the Nazis. Right now, this film is INFLUENCING PEOPLE especially young impressionable young men. The same thing is being done by the TV Series Jack Bauer who is also BEING PRODUCED BY A JEW who is a Catholic. But the Catholicism is not preventing the Jewish mentality from reproducing itself and exhibiting itself in Jack Bauer---who goes around breaking all the rules!!!!

That is NOT the Western Way. What you are doing, both Frank Miller and Joel Surnow--is that they are Semitizing the West with your lawless thoughts and mentalities. What “24” and “300” is doing is re-barbarizing the West!!! Nobody reads anything anymore--everything is IMAGE driven. Knowledge now comes by IMAGE. And what are the images that “24” and “300” teaching?

To be ruthless------------like a F#$%%$# Nazi.

To have NO compassion------Like an Ayn Randian.

To have total disregard for Law-----Like the Nazi.

To have a scorn for religion-----Like the Nazi, like the Ayn Randian, like the Communists, like Atheist Jews.

These shows are teaching un-Western Values. Karl Marx, a Jew, created, almost singlehandedly, Communism and its adjunct, Social Democracy. Hitler as a Young man was influenced and taken with the strategy and direct action of Social Democracy in Vienna. National Socialism is a reaction against Communism and Social Democracy therefore it is formed by them as well. Hypocrites, you are re-forming the mindset and mentalities of Communism and National Socialism. “300” is about re-barbarizing Western man into making him into the animal beast of Nietzsche and his Ubermensch. You people are idiots to the Nth degree!!!!

This is why Socrates called, asked, pleaded, that the Poets be Censored in the Republic!!! Why, Because the Poets teach bad things!!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE; The office desk of Joel Surnow—the co-creator and executive producer of “24,” the popular counterterrorism drama on Fox—faces a wall dominated by an American flag in a glass case.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE; The twisting story line forces Bauer and his colleagues to make a series of grim choices that pit liberty against security. Frequently, the dilemma is stark: a resistant suspect can either be accorded due process—allowing a terrorist plot to proceed—or be tortured in pursuit of a lead. Bauer invariably chooses coercion. With unnerving efficiency, suspects are beaten, suffocated, electrocuted, drugged, assaulted with knives, or more exotically abused; almost without fail, these suspects divulge critical secrets.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE; Not long after September 11th, Vice-President Dick Cheney alluded vaguely to the fact that America must begin working through the “dark side” in countering terrorism. On “24,” the dark side is on full view. Surnow, who has jokingly called himself a “right-wing nut job,”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MY RESPONSE; Cheney is of the Dark Side, he is a Christian Heretic--Christian Zionist. And this is the man responsible for the War against Iraq. This man is a War Criminal!!!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE; Since September 11th, depictions of torture have become much more common on American television. Before the attacks, fewer than four acts of torture appeared on prime-time television each year, according to Human Rights First, a nonprofit organization. Now there are more than a hundred, and, as David Danzig, a project director at Human Rights First, noted, “the torturers have changed. It used to be almost exclusively the villains who tortured. Today, torture is often perpetrated by the heroes.” The Parents’ Television Council, a nonpartisan watchdog group, has counted what it says are sixty-seven torture scenes during the first five seasons of “24”—more than one every other show. Melissa Caldwell, the council’s senior director of programs, said, “ ‘24’ is the worst offender on television: the most frequent, most graphic, and the leader in the trend of showing the protagonists using torture.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MY RESPONSE; And now we have the film “300” in order to barbarize young men in order so that they now act like Nietzsche Ubermensch on the battlefield.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE; This past November, U.S. Army Brigadier General Patrick Finnegan, the dean of the United States Military Academy at West Point, flew to Southern California to meet with the creative team behind “24.” Finnegan, who was accompanied by three of the most experienced military and F.B.I. interrogators in the country, arrived on the set as the crew was filming. .....

In fact, Finnegan and the others had come to voice their concern that the show’s central political premise—that the letter of American law must be sacrificed for the country’s security—was having a toxic effect....

AND HERE COMES THE RUB

Finnegan, who is a lawyer, has for a number of years taught a course on the laws of war to West Point seniors—cadets who would soon be commanders in the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. He always tries, he said, to get his students to sort out not just what is legal but what is right. However, it had become increasingly hard to convince some cadets that America had to respect the rule of law and human rights, even when terrorists did not. One reason for the growing resistance, he suggested, was misperceptions spread by “24,” which was exceptionally popular with his students. As he told me, “The kids see it, and say, ‘If torture is wrong, what about “24”?’ ” He continued, “The disturbing thing is that although torture may cause Jack Bauer some angst, it is always the patriotic thing to do.” FROM http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/02/19/070219fa_fact_mayer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You think we have problems with Abu Ghraib, wait it will get worse, “300” teaches you to dispatch wounded soldiers, teaches you to torture victims i.e. the impaling of “300” aka Assyrian style, teaches you to desecrate the dead, teaches you to scorn religion------Every thing OPPOSITE of what the Spartans--the Archtype of Western Man and Western Civilization stands for!

Hitler would be proud of this film!!!! I on the other hand was sick to my stomach! You are desensitizing and denuding Western Man from any concept of the rule of law. The Rule of Law is a Western Construct most famously put forward by the Spartans themselves. And yet, “300” shows them to have total disrespect and disregard for the written and Unwritten laws.

The “Free-thinking”, the scorn for laws, to be free of restrictions--is the heart of rebellion nestled in the hearts of Jews. Ephors didn’t wear cowls nor did they have any religious duties other than to enforce religious precepts but the cowl is a symbol for something---who wore cowls---Roman Catholic Monks. What are the Ephors in “300” a symbol of the scorn, the innate hatred, the Jew has for the Catholic Church. And it shows the Ephors as diseased and lecherous and duplicitous, another goyem for the Jewish mind.

It’s sick.

What you are doing, is just like, Maximos said in the Movie “Gladiator”,

You are UNLEASHING HELL ON EARTH.

Out of all the reviews I have read, Friedrich Braun, hit the nail on the head--I want to thank you.

The Mistake of National Socialist Ideology.

The communists were trying to effeminize the German male.
Hitler and others saw the danger.

But for a bunch of nationalists/racists, you miss the boat.

The Spartan dictum is “Know thyself”.  Did they know German character?  Erik von Kuenhelt-Leddihn writes;

“The Germans inside and outside of the “Reich” have a tradition of thinking in absolutes, of gravitating towards extremes, of disdaining compromises, and thus of being basically allergic to the demo-parliamentary system. [I]Liberty or Equality[/I], pg 232.

In another place, Von Kuenhelt-Leddihn, writes that environment also shapes German mentality in that it is in the middle of hostility without any natural barriers thus making inevitiable the German psychological need for One Leader.

Hitler feed off this behavior.  But again, the Spartans have a dictum that was also carved on their wall at Delphi, “Nothing too Much”.  That means, “EVEN A GOOD TAKEN TO AN EXTREME BECOMES EVIL”.

The German character is to take things to an extreme.  German mentality, culture knows nothing about the Golden Mean.  The Aristocracy of Greece, a very masculine ethic and culture, developed the concept of Virtue.  Manliness tempered.  To be a Strong Man doesn’t require ruthlessness and lawlessness or atheism or a disregard for God.  The German mind, in of course a reaction to communist effeminizing social re-engineering, went to the other extreme!!!

The Good lies in the Golden Mean.  This is a principle of Nature!  All of Nature exhibits the Golden Mean.  German National Socialism exhibited German racial characteristics unlike Italian National Socialism that exhibited Italian racial characteristics.

This is why the Spartans and Classical Education is soooo important.  The Spartans were Manly without cruelty, lawlessness, or impiety.  The True Spartans show the way, the techniques, the true Wisdom necessary for a winning European culture.

The four Virtues are Manliness, Righteousness, Prudence, and Temperance.  That is the excellence of a Man.  That is how one counteracts Communist/Jewish Mentality.

DS, Salter discusses the problem of “kinship overlap” in his book.  That’s another reason why wars between highly related peoples is a bad idea - a given “German” or a given “Frenchman” may in fact be more of the opposing ancestry and their national identity more cultural and political than ethnic.

Also, one must distinguish between the way people behave and the way they should behave, if they wish to act adaptively.  National conflicts may not always follow the lines of genetic interest; the point is, they should.

There really isn’t much to fight about any more within Europe.  The threat, both genetic and cultural, is coming from outside.

Note as well that Salter is a political scientist, not a biologist.  He uses the genetic data to make his points, but his ultimate approach to the problem is political and moral-ethical, and hence his work would lend itself even to those who are more “culturalists.”

After all, he believes that anything that motivates for the defense of genetic interests can be adaptive, and that includes “high culture.”

By the way, I agree with your overall attitude.  This infighting is highly destructive and does nothing but aid the common enemy (or enemies...).

D.S. wrote:

I am a pan-European—I’d like to drag the anti-German or anti-Greek forum posters outside and beat them ... I have zero tolerance for Jinogist Nationalists.  They are more filthy and poisonious than any Jew.

If you’re anything like me you look back on posts where you intimated violence or grew angry and cringe. I think everyone under 24 on this board could take a page out of the more mature posters’ books and write ‘in cold blood.’ Even looking at these words on a page is disgusting.

D.S., your lack of tolerance for Jingoist Nationalists, and the extreme terms in which you condemn them, seems to me contradictory on some level to the other dictates inherent in WN or Nationalist thinking. If I knew more about your philosophy, I could perhaps say more than this. But if you are prepared to demonize the defense of historic European nationalities, by restraining what you view as excessive nationalism - not, as is implicit today, for the purposes of cooperation - but because you view individual nationalism with contempt, and view every nation somehow subject to your pan-European whims, then I think your thinking would diverge sharply with that of some other people here, myself included. Pan-Europeanism is perhaps most comfortably at home in the European diasopra, I think, where nationalism is generalized and racial.

And just to be real for a second here. As you were physically pummeling the anti-Greek German nationalist, (a rare bird in todays world..), as you were beating him bloody, would you with each punch reiterate ‘Pan-Europeanism’, ‘integrationism’, ‘Pan-Europeanism’. I think I recognize in your attitude some aspects of the very monster we are trying to combat. Correct me if I’m wrong.

As many mainstream criticisms have observed, the movie suffered mostly from it’s writing. The narration was redundant and hackneyed and its grotesque, macabre violence (not to mention an odd border soft porn scene toward the beginning) revealed an adolescent’s mentality.  And in general there was something very vulgar, dingy and inappropriate about the film.  War porn? But what is to be expected from a film derived from a comic book? 

On the other hand, it was explicitly and consistently, anti-multiculturalist perhaps more so than any film since Birth of a Nation. 

Still the treatment was unserious (the Spartans were “evil-cool” much in the way protagonist vampires might be in another comic book movie) and the theme is hardly one upon which we can afford to be unserious. 

Though I’ll have to admit, in the end-despite being a poorly written movie (though a well written comic book) it may have done us more good than harm: it puts a foot in the door. 

And does anyone really care if these two comic dorks are Jews?  Its possible the quality and nature of the film makes them Jews whether they were born that way, officially converted themselves or not.  Even being Anti-Semites would not preclude them.

The problem with D.S. and David Stennett is they do not concede the legitimacy of intra-European “universal nationalism.” Their stance, aside from being wrong in and of itself, opens the door to refusing to concede the legitimacy of world-wide universal nationalism.  The reason is the principles underlying the two are the same:  to reject them in one case is to reject them in both.  One-Europism is an inevitable precursor to one-worldism.  Give David Stennett a little power and come back in five years — sorry, but chances are excellent he’ll be warmly endorsing Alon Ziv.

I don’t think Norman Lowell or even Hoffmeister is as wrongheaded on the question as D.S. is — again, someone please correct me if I’m wrong.  Furthermore, I have the feeling Mr. Lowell and Herr Hoffmeister can be reasoned with.

That should be:

“any more than the racial characteristics Euros share in common with each other should be.”

We don’t want wars among Europeans.  We also don’t want total pan-European racial/ethnocultural homogenization imposed with a mailed fist by pig-ignorant totalitarian E.U. bureaucrats.  And we’d like to be able to say so without being arrogantly shouted down by D.S.

Flemings and Walloons:  different Euro races.  Prod and Catholic Ulstermen:  different Euro races.  English and Welsh:  different Euro races.  True Euros and True West-Central African Negroes:  different human species.

“Let’s have ds come back here and explain his views on intra-European distinctiveness.”

He has no views on it.  His views on it are that it’s an annoying anachronistic nuisance that should be done away with or, at the very least not respected in any way, shape, or form.  Anyone know the utter asshole “NuSapiens” who comments over at Dienekes’ blog?  D.S. is sort of a NuSapiens type:  thinks he’s creating a new and improved race.  Thinks a new racial age is dawning and he’s in on the ground floor.

Fred, one wonders as to why you have so much venom toward DS.  One wonders. 

Can you actually quote DS as saying that he disrespects and wants to do away with intra-European distinctiveness?

All I read was somewhat inflamed rhetoric against intra-European hostility, outbursts which can be explained, and perhaps justified, looking back at the wreckage left behind by the conflicts of WWI and WWII.

“Guy doesn’t know his ass from his elbow.”

Do you?

First you write that:
“He has no views on it.”

Then you decide to discuss his “views” that you just said he doesn’t have:

“His views on it are that it’s an annoying anachronistic nuisance that should be done away with or, at the very least not respected in any way, shape, or form.”

Quote? 

“We also don’t want total pan-European racial/ethnocultural homogenization imposed with a mailed fist by pig-ignorant totalitarian E.U. bureaucrats.”

Is that what DS proposes?  Quotes?  Evidence?

Interesting that a person who consistently defended John Jay Ray - who openly promoted mass Asian immigration as well as miscegenation (including in his own family)- is so vehement in denouncing DS, who merely asks that Europeans learn the lessons of the two world wars and approach their problems in a reasonable spirit of accomodation and shared interests.

Let’s see.  A guy who wants the West swamped with East and South Asians, a guy who supports the Mexican influx into the USA, a guy who celebrates his own son’s involvement with an Asian (different species, Fred?) is A-OK and “one of us.” But, another guy, who has spent his adult life fighting for pro-western causes, and who believes that the infighting on this thread is counter-productive, is somehow a dire threat, and a budding Alon Ziv totalitarian.  Really Fred.  Who do you think is more likely to support Ziv- DS or your buddy JJR?

What does all of this say about you?  Why the “pass” for JJR and the pure venom toward DS??

Thanks for your reply.  If I’m wrong about D.S., that will emerge.

“Commonly accepted definitions” (—Andy Wooster)

There are lots of “commonly accepted” categorizations that are wrong.

We know all about the “modern evolutionary biology definitions,” Bohnson.  Here’s one:  by the modern American Anthropology Association definition, races don’t exist but are artificial social constructs:  a Chinaman, Negro, and white have no inborn distinguishing characteristics that justify grouping them severally.

So much for “the modern evolutionary biology definitions.” Now here’s “the modern Fred Scrooby biology definition”:  Negroes and Euros are properly classified as different human species, not different races of the same human species. 

They’re not the same human species. 

Now don’t bore me please, Bohnson.

Members of different species do not normally produce fertile offspring.

When interbreeding.

Fred, in biology, “species” is defined as the taxon within which interbreeding produces fertile offspring.  Looking at the fertility rates of Euro-African hybrids, there can be little doubt we’re looking at the same species.

You might look at the way subspecific taxons (or taxa) are used in biology.  In particular the trinomen.  The first in the three-part name is the Genus, e.g. “Homo”.  The second is the Species, e.g. “sapiens”.  The third is the Subspecific name—the name of the subspecies, e.g. European, African, Asian, Australian, etc.

Getting these taxa correct is challenging no matter which branch of the tree of life you’re looking at.

There is even controversy over whether humans should be called “Homo sapiens” or “Pan sapiens”.

Boy, do we need a little “Classical” knowledge around here!

Andy Wooster wrote:

Flemings and Walloons: different ethnicities or nationalities. 
Europeans and Negroes: different races. 
Humans and Lemurs: different species. 

Europeans and Negroes are NOT of different species.

The first business in discussing anything should be philology and words.

First “Ethnicity” Comes from the Greek and is the same word “Nation” in Latin.  Ethnicity in the Septuagint and in the New Testament written in Greek is translated into the Latin word in English--Nation.  Ethnicity and Nation which have been adopted into the English language come from two different language groups BUT mean the same thing. 

Then English adopted another word meaning the same thing as Ethnicity and nation===Race. 

I know Greek History pretty good.  All Hellenes speak a form of Greek but there are different Tribes.  Ionians are not Dorians.  I have more commonly seen “Ionian Race” and I have a book with “Dorian Race”.  One can say “Dorian Ethnicity” or “Dorian Nation” or “Dorian Race”.  In English, “Race” just fits better.

Ethnicity, Race, Nation, all mean the same thing.  Subgroups of a race or Nation or Ethnicity should be called Tribes.

American Indians describe themselves either as Tribes or Nation such as the Comanche Tribe or the Comanche Nation.

English is a terrible language.

Prof. Ernst Mayr, 1996:

Hybrids between species, particularly in animals, are almost always of inferior viability and more extreme hybrids are usually even sterile.  ‘Almost always’ means that there are species interpreted to be the result of hybridization, particularly among plants, but except for the special case of allopolyploidy, such cases are rare.  Among the attributes members of a species share, the only ones that are of crucial significance for the species definition are those which serve the biological purpose of the species, that is, the protection of a harmonious gene pool. These attributes were named by Dobzhansky (1935) isolating mechanisms. It is immaterial whether or not the term isolating mechanism was well chosen, nor is it important whether one places the stress on the prevention of interbreeding with non-conspecific individuals or the facilitation ("recognition") of breeding with conspecific individuals. The concept I have just developed is articulated in the so-called biological species definition: “Species are groups of interbreeding natural populations that are reproductively isolated from other such groups.” The isolating mechanism by which reproductive isolation is effected are properties of individuals. Geographic isolation therefore does not qualify as an isolating mechanism.

Reproductive Isolation. The Biological Species definition includes the statement that the populations of one species are “reproductively isolated” from the populations of all other species. Typologically conceived, this would mean that no individual of species A would ever hybridize with any individual of species B. Botanists soon pointed out that this did not correctly describe many situations in nature. They discovered case alter case of occasional (sometimes even rather frequent) hybridization between seemingly “good” sympatric species. Anderson (1949) went so far as to claim that this was the normal situation with closely related sympatric species and that through such “introgressive hybridization,” as he called it, either species would be enriched by genes from other species. Other authors minimized the frequency of such hybridization and considered parallel variation in sympatric species as the residues of ancestral polymorphisms. Recent molecular analysis has, however, confirmed the frequency of clandestine introgression. However, if the two species continue their essential integrity, they will be treated as species, in spite of the slight inefficiency of their isolating mechanisms.

There is at least one case among oaks (Quercus) and one among birches (Betula) where such introgression has apparently been going on for millions of years without leading to a fusion of the parental species. Similar cases apparently occur also in animals. After the destruction of much of the southern periphery of the habitat of the gray wolf, the area was invaded by coyotes and, owing to the fertility of the hybrids, the crossing of male wolves with female coyotes led to an introgression of alien genes into both wolf and coyote populations. The same was shown by Templeton and associates (1989, 12) for the sympatric Hawaiian species Drosophila silvestris and D. heteroneura. The fact that the mitochondria are inherited only through the females greatly facilitates the discovery of such cases of hybridization.

It is thus well established that a leakage of genes occurs among many good “reproductively isolated” species. This induced me to revise the definition of isolating mechanisms to “biological properties of individuals which prevent the interbreeding [fusion] of populations” (1970, 56). Thus, isolating mechanisms do not always prevent the occasional interbreeding of non-conspecific individuals, but they nevertheless prevent the complete fusion of such species populations.

There is no “fertility-of-hybrid-offspring” criterion.  Furthermore, with all due respect to Prof. Mayr, if “the occasional interbreeding of non-conspecific individuals” doesn’t invalidate their “non-conspecific” status, neither can “the complete fusion of such species populations.”

Bohnson, you’re boring me, but most of all you’re boring yourself.  You’re a crashing bore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid

In some cases (e.g., dog-wolf) the relationship is redefined by some as “subspecies” in order to explain the fertility of ofspring; however, this seems to be a pan-Canid phenomenon and not so easily explained.  The article cites other examples as well.

Fred, I agree that there may be a case for “geographic races” to be called different “species” if we look at all inter-continental transport of humans as “artificial”, since biologists do try to define “species” in such a way as to exclude artificial hybrids—hybrids resulting from human transport with breeding in captivity.

As always, with humans, the definition of what is “natural” and what is “artificial” is problematic.

It is scientifically valid to use the definition of “species” and “subspecies” and “race” that has the most utility in terms of parsimoniously describing the world.  Picking such optimal definitions is half of the problem of science.  Outside of measures like Kolmogorov Complexity, it is virtually impossible to even state the issue let alone resolve it.

James you’ve put your finger on exactly what the problem is:  the artificiality, where humans are concerned, of the dismantling of what for animals are natural isolating mechanisms — so the criteria have to be bent slightly to take this into account.  Furthermore, where Prof. Mayr says,

This induced me to revise the definition of isolating mechanisms to “biological properties of individuals which prevent the interbreeding [fusion] of populations” (1970, 56) [Scroob note:  he’s talking here about properties of individuals such as natural aversions between groups, different courtship preferences, different preferred ways of copulating, etc, as opposed to mere passive isolation through geographic distance and so on]. Thus, isolating mechanisms do not always prevent the occasional interbreeding of non-conspecific individuals, but they nevertheless prevent the complete fusion of such species populations.

— when the professor is talking about the above “refinement” of the species definition which he felt compelled to introduce (the late Prof. Mayr was the leading authority on species in the world), we must take into account artificial ways in which societal forces counter what would otherwise indeed be, for example, natural barriers to Negro-Euro mating due to innate aversions of various kinds, aversions that are skillfully de-conditioned by pro-miscegenation propaganda from the tenderest age in schools right through the non-stop Hollywood, mass-media, and governmental/political exaltation of the Negro as the only fitting mate for white women, the forcing of hordes of Negroes and other non-whites on white populations that don’t want them but can’t get their governments to stop (in other words, white populations that normally would maintain a distance-and-familiarity barrier between themselves and the non-whites), and so on, and so forth.  So the short-circuiting or undoing or de-conditioning of what otherwise would indeed be natural reproductively-isolating mechanisms (arising, per Prof. Mayr’s refinement, out of “properties of individuals themselves, not out of geographic isolation") consistent with Negroes and Euros being distinct human species can’t be adduced as evidence against their status as distinct species.  There are no “animal governments” forcing polar bears and grizzlies together and propagandizing all the bear cubs from the tenderest age in school that they should mate only with the other species, artificially weakening whatever natural preferences the bears have for their own kind, and whatever aversions may be built into their psychologies for the other kind, and so on.  So, where humans are concerned some of these rules have to be considered with a bit of elasticity in any case.  But even without any bending, there are no rules that keep Negroes and Euros from being classified as different species and all the evidence points strongly toward their being exactly that:  distinct humans species.