This Forum is now inactive and has been replaced by a new Christogenea Forum. You may browse here but there are no updated threads or new posts since January 1st 2017. Forum members please see THIS NOTICE for information concerning your account at the new forum.

Slavs

The attempted jewish destruction of the White race.

Slavs

Postby Nayto » Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:08 am

I'm curious to see what everyone thinks about the Slavic people in terms of their racial purity. I read the following in Procopius, History of the Wars, VII. 14. 22–30 (which I found on Wikipedia):

VII. 14. 22-30). For these nations, the Sclaveni and the Antae, are not ruled by one man, but they have lived from of old under a democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people. It is also true that in all other matters, practically speaking, these two barbarian peoples have had from ancient times the same institutions and customs. For they believe that one god, the maker of lightning, is alone lord of all things, and they sacrifice to him cattle and all other victims; but as for fate, they neither know it nor do they in any wise admit that it has any power among men, but whenever death stands close before them, either stricken with sickness or beginning a war, they make a promise that, if they escape, they will straightway make a sacrifice to the god in return for their life; and if they escape, they sacrifice just what they have promised, and consider that their safety has been bought with this same sacrifice. They reverence, however, both rivers and nymphs and some other spirits, and they sacrifice to all these also, and they make their divinations in connection with these sacrifices. They live in pitiful hovels which they set up far apart from one another, but, as a general thing, every man is constantly changing his place of abode. When they enter battle, the majority of them go against their enemy on foot carrying little shields and javelins in their hands, but they never wear corselets. Indeed, some of them do not wear even a shirt or a cloak, but gathering their trews up as far as to their private parts they enter into battle with their opponents. And both the two peoples have also the same language, an utterly barbarous tongue. Nay further, they do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair are neither very fair or blonde, nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type, but they are all slightly ruddy in color. And they live a hard life, giving no heed to bodily comforts, just as the Massagetae do, and like them, they are continually and at all times covered with filth; however, they are in no respect base or evil-doers, but they preserve the Hunnic character in all its simplicity. In fact, the Sclaveni and the Antae actually had a single name in the remote past; for they were both called Spori in olden times, because, I suppose, living apart one man from another, they inhabit their country in a sporadic fashion. And in consequence of this very fact they hold a great amount of land; for they alone inhabit the greatest part of the northern bank of the Ister. So much then may be said regarding these peoples.


I know from some of Bill's work that he sees Slavs as the Sarmations (http://christogenea.org/essays/race-genesis-10), but it seems that these "Slavs" mentioned above assimilated the Sarmatians and many other peoples around that area.

What is the character of this people though? They exhibit some remnant of the Hebrew religion in their sacrifice and belief in one god, "the maker of lightning". Even the Greeks corrupted God into Zeus, who commanded lightning. On the other hand they seem dirty, primitive and barbaric. Not only that, they are described as being "ruddy". Adam was "ruddy" of course, but I think in the context they are referring to dark skin. This "ruddy" is preceded by the lack of fairness of hair and "nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type". If I had to start describing someone as not inclining entirely to the dark type, it does not bode well at all for their race. Based on this description alone, I would say that they are not White, but do have some ancestors who might have been Israelites.

If this is a people who mingled into much of Eastern Europe and Asia, then surely many, if not most Slavs are not White? If we consider the Slavs today there is nothing very exceptional about them in terms of character or intelligence. Hitler speaks at length about the best of Aryan stock being able to produce the best results, which is obvious in Britain, Germany, USA and other places. Even in ancient times, the most prominent places were the most racially pure. When I look at Slavic countries today, they are not cesspits like the more mongrelized countries, but neither do they show that spark of Aryan ingenuity like the more prominent countries. It's almost like they are White enough to not be completely useless, but they are not White enough to do anything meaningful.

Even Hitler, who seems acutely aware of racial corruption, did not have a very high opinion of Slavic peoples. Maybe more so with Russians in particular and less so with other Slavs. Here is what is probably the most obvious quote relaying Hitler's sentiments (from Mein Kampf volume 2):

For the Russian State was not organized by the constructive political talent of the Slav element in Russia, but was much more a marvellous exemplification of the capacity for State-building possessed by the Germanic element in a race of inferior worth. Thus were many powerful Empires created all over the earth. More often than once inferior races with Germanic organizers and rulers as their leaders became formidable States and continued to exist as long as the racial nucleus remained which had originally created each respective State. For centuries Russia owed the source of its livelihood as a State to the Germanic nucleus of its governing class.


This is typical of Hiter's views, which I extrapolated above. Non-Aryan peoples don't have the ingenuity or drive necessary to do anything meaningful and would not even have nations if not for the Aryan German element. Hitler was not specifically anti-Slavic, in that he was willing to work with them and deal with them, but he certainly did see them as inferior. If only Hitler was more exacting in his workings with those he saw as inferior, maybe it would have gone differently. There are definitely exceptions within certain populations where one pure White might be somewhat dull in intelligence and another slightly mongrelized Aryan might be more intelligent and even seem like a genius, but as we know these exceptions do no disproves the overall rules. What matters is not the individuals, but rather a population's capability of producing a higher number of such pure White individuals.

That's my opinion at the moment. What do you all think of Slavs?
Nayto
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:06 am

Re: Slavs

Postby Staropramen » Sun Nov 13, 2016 12:41 pm

The point in illustrating the domestication of these Maltese dogs and their appearance throughout ancient Greece and Rome is that even though these people were called “barbarians” by Luke, they certainly were not savages. They would be called barbarians only if they did not speak Greek and share in Greek customs. Liddell & Scott define the word βάρβαρος (915) as “barbarous i.e. not Greek, foreign … From the Augustan age however the name was given by the Romans to all tribes which had no Greek or Roman accomplishments.” And so the word here does not necessarily imply that these people were aboriginals, or savages, or non-Whites.


http://christogenea.org/podcasts/book-a ... 01-24-2014

Nayto wrote;

When I look at Slavic countries today, they are not cesspits like the more mongrelized countries, but neither do they show that spark of Aryan ingenuity like the more prominent countries.


Well, I lived in the Czech Republic for almost five years. The evidence of Aryan ingenuity prior to 40 years of communism is everywhere. Architecture for example. You rarely hear about the pre-communism/early communist era Czech auto industry but I've been to their museum and was blown away by what I saw. They certainly make better beer than Germans and I've met Germans who agree! Communism damaged the character of these people. I found that I had to be ever wary of everyone and very careful about who I trusted. I really only made one true friend there. Many Czechs are immoral opportunists looking to use you. But interestingly the older generation, folks in their 70's - 80's were not like this so much. Communism made the younger folk psychologically and spiritually base but honestly, no more so than Cultural Marxism has made most White people in the West today blithering retards. What the hell are White Americans or White Germans producing today? Shit.

Living in the Czech Republic between 1998-2003 opened my eyes to the joys of racial homogeneity. The most beautiful women on earth reside there. Best beer, best White women, case closed! :lol:
"If God is a Jew then the only thing left for us to do is commit suicide"
-Dr. Wesley A. Swift
Historical Recordings of interest to Christians;
http://historicalrecordings.net/
User avatar
Staropramen
 
Posts: 2026
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:58 pm

Re: Slavs

Postby Nayto » Sun Nov 13, 2016 1:08 pm

Staropramen wrote:
The point in illustrating the domestication of these Maltese dogs and their appearance throughout ancient Greece and Rome is that even though these people were called “barbarians” by Luke, they certainly were not savages. They would be called barbarians only if they did not speak Greek and share in Greek customs. Liddell & Scott define the word βάρβαρος (915) as “barbarous i.e. not Greek, foreign … From the Augustan age however the name was given by the Romans to all tribes which had no Greek or Roman accomplishments.” And so the word here does not necessarily imply that these people were aboriginals, or savages, or non-Whites.


http://christogenea.org/podcasts/book-a ... 01-24-2014


In the historians which Bill has covered I'm sure this is true, but Procopius elaborates on what he says by adding that they barely wore clothes, were nomadic and had javelins to throw with. I mean, he might as well be describing Zulu niggers in Africa :lol: Not only that, but his description of their appearance is unfavorable as well.

Staropramen wrote:
Nayto wrote;

When I look at Slavic countries today, they are not cesspits like the more mongrelized countries, but neither do they show that spark of Aryan ingenuity like the more prominent countries.


Well, I lived in the Czech Republic for almost five years. The evidence of Aryan ingenuity prior to 40 years of communism is everywhere. Architecture for example. You rarely hear about the pre-communism/early communist era Czech auto industry but I've been to their museum and was blown away by what I saw. They certainly make better beer than Germans and I've met Germans who agree! Communism damaged the character of these people. I found that I had to be ever wary of everyone and very careful about who I trusted. I really only made one true friend there. Many Czechs are immoral opportunists looking to use you. But interestingly the older generation, folks in their 70's - 80's were not like this so much. Communism made the younger folk psychologically and spiritually base but honestly, no more so than Cultural Marxism has made most White people in the West today blithering retards. What the hell are White Americans or White Germans producing today? Shit.

Living in the Czech Republic between 1998-2003 opened my eyes to the joys of racial homogeneity. The most beautiful women on earth reside there. Best beer, best White women, case closed! :lol:


I remember your stay there, so I was hoping you'd chime in here. Czech Republic specifically is still close to Germany so they might be far enough away from the East to be unscathed, or less scathed. By the way, which town/city did you stay in?

Now, I wonder if we import Czech beer here...
Nayto
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:06 am

Re: Slavs

Postby wmfinck » Sun Nov 13, 2016 1:10 pm

Firstly, what is meant by "dark type" is relative. I do not think Procopius imagined a negro or even an arab type anywhere in Europe, and more likely had what we may call brunettes in mind. In a White and less-mixed world the "dark type" is not what we today may imagine it to be.

In The Race of Genesis 10 by necessity I oversimplified some things for the sake of brevity, which I probably treated more fully in the German Origins series, especially the expanded versions I did for the podcasts, which are not yet edited for print.

The Sarmatians seem to mostly have consisted of Slavs, but the distinctions between Scythians and Germanic tribes, and Sarmatians and Slavic tribes, seems to have been blurred in ancient times. They have also been blurred in more modern times.

Take the Wends for example. Tacitus referred to them as the Venedi, and did not know whether to classify them as Germans or Sarmatians. He considered the Sarmatians to have a different appearance, even an ugly appearance, and postulated that both the Finns and the Bastarnae, who dwelt around the Danube, were merely mixed between the two groups.

The Wends were settled in the lands east of the Elbe in the time of Otto the Great, when Germany did not extend much beyond the Elbe. They were the subjects of a crusade to convert them to Roman Catholicism in the 12th century, which had both mixed motivations and mixed results. Saxons, Danes and Poles campaigned in Brandenburg, Meissen, Oldenburg, etc. to convert the Slavs dwelling throughout parts of what is now northern and eastern Germany. This is only one example of how many modern Germans descended from tribes which were considered Slavic.

Seeing the ethnic composition of Bohemia and eastern Germany, I do not think Procopius had negros and arabs in mind when he spoke of the "dark type".

Tacitus in Germania, 46 wrote:Here Suebia ends. I cannot make up my mind whether to assign the tribes of the Peucini, Venedi and Fenni to Germany or Sarmatia. The Peucini, however, who are sometimes called the Bastarnae, in language, social habits, mode of settlement and dwelling are like Germans. They are a squalid and slovenly people; the features of their nobles get something of the Sarmatian ugliness from intermarriage. The Venedi have borrowed largely from Sarmatian ways; their plundering forays take them over all that wooded and mountainous country that rises between the Peucini and the Fenni. Nevertheless they are to be classed as Germans, for they have settled houses, carry shields, and are fond of travelling — and travelling fast — on foot, in all these respects differing from the Sarmatians, who live in wagons or on horseback. The Fenni are astonishingly wild and horribly poor. They have no arms, no horses, no homes. They eat grass, dress in skins, and sleep on the ground. Their only hope is in their arrows, which, for lack of iron, they tip with bone. The same hunt provides food for men and women alike; for the women go everywhere with the men and claim a share in securing the prey. The only way they can protect their babies against wild beasts or foul weather is to hide them under a makeshift network of branches. This is the hovel to which the young men come back, this is where the old must lie. Yet they count their lot happier than that of others who groan over field labour, sweat over house-building, or hazard their own or other men's fortunes in the wild lottery of hope and fear. They care for nobody, man or god, and have gained the ultimate release: they have nothing to pray for. What comes after them is the stuff of fables — Hellusii and Oxiones with the faces and features of men, but the bodies and limbs of animals. On such unverifiable stories I will express no opinion.
Image
If a jew is moving his lips, he's lying. If you see a rabbi, there has already been a crime!
User avatar
wmfinck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2775
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:09 am

Re: Slavs

Postby wmfinck » Sun Nov 13, 2016 1:22 pm

PS: Allen* and Nayto were posting back and forth as I was writing my last post here.

Nayto, I have read Procopius, and was simply not alarmed by any of his language, which is probably due to our different interpretations of some of his terms. He is cited 11 times in my papers, according to the search feature at the main website, including German Origins, Part 6:
http://christogenea.org/essays/classical-records-and-german-origins-part-six-who-are-english

Piecing together exacting physical descriptions and the relationships of the people of Europe has always been problematical. Political biases seem to always have existed. Some of Tacitus' descriptions are biased and politicized. Some of Herodotus' descriptions were politicized and fantastic. Procopius said on many occasions that the Goths and Huns both descended from the Massagetae, and I think he is correct. But Jordanes, who wrote maybe a hundred years later, would strongly protest, and Cassiodorus described Atilla as a squat monster, which I think is a tale.

*fixed :D
Image
If a jew is moving his lips, he's lying. If you see a rabbi, there has already been a crime!
User avatar
wmfinck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2775
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:09 am

Re: Slavs

Postby Staropramen » Sun Nov 13, 2016 1:58 pm

Nayto wrote:I remember your stay there, so I was hoping you'd chime in here. Czech Republic specifically is still close to Germany so they might be far enough away from the East to be unscathed, or less scathed. By the way, which town/city did you stay in?

Now, I wonder if we import Czech beer here...


I lived in Přerov. Let me see if I have some pictures........

Image
Image

Favorite pub;

Image
"If God is a Jew then the only thing left for us to do is commit suicide"
-Dr. Wesley A. Swift
Historical Recordings of interest to Christians;
http://historicalrecordings.net/
User avatar
Staropramen
 
Posts: 2026
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:58 pm

Re: Slavs

Postby CIman » Sun Nov 13, 2016 3:08 pm

Oh dang! I guess I'm screwed then.. :oops:
CIman
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 1:13 pm

Re: Slavs

Postby Fenwick » Sun Nov 13, 2016 3:13 pm

I was in the Czech republic earlier in the year and they all looked white to me. Same with most Poles. The Russians I've met looked as white as anybody else too, but I suppose in the old vassal states on the borders of Russia there would be more mixing. I know some WNs seem to think that the mongol invasions turned everyone east of Berlin into Chinamen, but I don't see that to have been the case.

Certainly there are a lot of gypsy types and jews hanging around eastern Europe, but that would be like saying white Americans are all mixed because of all the mulattoes hanging around. Racial aliens don't necessarily blend into the white population, but keep themselves separate, ghettoized.
User avatar
Fenwick
 
Posts: 431
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 12:21 am

Re: Slavs

Postby Nayto » Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:47 pm

In a way I regret using the term "Slavs". It's so loaded that it's not a good point of reference to start with. I do believe that many of the original tribes in Slavic regions were White, like the Sarmatians for example.

It's not simply that they are described as being slightly darker not only in hair (which is fine), but they are also described as having ruddy* skin. Maybe that by itself might not be cause for alarm, but when put together with how primitive they are, I find it difficult to imagine that they could be fully White. As I say, walking around with barely genitals covered and javelins for weapons might as well be describing Zulus. Those Fenni from Tacitus seem to be in a similar situation, maybe even worse. We even know from the most ancient times in Scripture that they were already more civilized than that and in Procopius' case it's already around 550AD. I find it difficult to believe the ancient prophecies and blessings could apply to a bunch of half-naked primitives. It's the kind of intellect which can only be elevated as far as Whites elevate it.

Discerning the race of each people in that time will surely always be difficult (especially for me who is still quite new to it LOL), but at least if some bad fruits can be isolated then its a start. If they turn out to actually be White then that's fine too. Good for them.

From another angle, on the other side of the continent we have the Russians. Hitler considered them to be of inferior genetic stock. What does that even mean though? Does it necessarily mean that they are not fully White? I would be inclined to believe so when considering Hitler's rhetoric on non-White admixture reducing the race's ability to function at a level pure Whites might be able to function. Almost like all blessing and providence leaves them to their own devices. We also know there is Asian influence in a much of their genetics. Then between Russia and Germany in these modern times there must be a continuum of genetics to some extent.

*Just as a point of reference from my own perspective, I can't imagine describing any White person as "ruddy" except to mean red, or "swarthy" except to mean tanned. In either case skin untouched by the sun is pale. This goes for those with dark hair and dark eyes as well, just like my great grandmother whose eyes and hair were dark, yet she had skin as pale as one might expect from a White person. I also think back to the Song of Solomon as well where skin is described as being pale. I know that even some jews have pasty pale skin, but in my opinion to go there is to go to the wrong end of the logical stick.

EDIT:

Fenwick wrote:I was in the Czech republic earlier in the year and they all looked white to me. Same with most Poles. The Russians I've met looked as white as anybody else too, but I suppose in the old vassal states on the borders of Russia there would be more mixing. I know some WNs seem to think that the mongol invasions turned everyone east of Berlin into Chinamen, but I don't see that to have been the case.

Certainly there are a lot of gypsy types and jews hanging around eastern Europe, but that would be like saying white Americans are all mixed because of all the mulattoes hanging around. Racial aliens don't necessarily blend into the white population, but keep themselves separate, ghettoized.


I haven't been to Poland or Russia, but I don't have good experiences with the likenesses of those who I have actually met and seen. Maybe I've just been unlucky though...

CIman wrote:Oh dang! I guess I'm screwed then.. :oops:


It's not an exact science, so I wouldn't go worrying about it. I'm not about to hold back thoughts on race for the sake of others' feelings either ;)
Nayto
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:06 am

Re: Slavs

Postby Fenwick » Sun Nov 13, 2016 5:00 pm

Nayto wrote: Maybe that by itself might not be cause for alarm, but when put together with how primitive they are, I find it difficult to imagine that they could be fully White. As I say, walking around with barely genitals covered and javelins for weapons might as well be describing Zulus. Those Fenni from Tacitus seem to be in a similar situation, maybe even worse. We even know from the most ancient times in Scripture that they were already more civilized than that and in Procopius' case it's already around 550AD. I find it difficult to believe the ancient prophecies and blessings could apply to a bunch of half-naked primitives.


You have to remember that some of these writers were making this stuff up to make their own people look better in comparison. The Romans maintained that the Germans to the north were savages dressed in fur cloaks and nothing else, but these people had superior metallurgy to the Romans.


*Just as a point of reference from my own perspective, I can't imagine describing any White person as "ruddy" except to mean red, or "swarthy" except to mean tanned. In either case skin untouched by the sun is pale. This goes for those with dark hair and dark eyes as well, just like my great grandmother whose eyes and hair were dark, yet she had skin as pale as one might expect from a White person. I also think back to the Song of Solomon as well where skin is described as being pale. I know that even some jews have pasty pale skin, but in my opinion to go there is to go to the wrong end of the logical stick.

It really depends on where you are living. In northern Europe, someone who spends a lot of time outdoors might not tan very much, but their skin will coarsen and redden from the wind. "Adam" does roughly mean ruddy or reddish after all.
User avatar
Fenwick
 
Posts: 431
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 12:21 am

Next

Return to Diversity or Deception?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 0 guests

cron