Is the Nordic Race as Superior as people have made them out to be

It would take a lot more effort than I am willing to exert in order to convince you here, but the autochthonous tribes of Europe never faded out. They were killed or forced out. Those remaining were misnamed and were given false histories which suggest they migrated into Europe later than the so called Nordics.

The history of these tribes and their cultures are readily available, but you would need to employ a modicum of discernment in order to acknowledge them. Take for example this description of a legendary black Gaulish tribe, which has been written out of history:

<< Mandubii

The Mandubii are known only from the writings of Strabo and Julius Caesar (both referring to the Gallic wars). They seem to be a confederation of Gaulish peopled living in the areas of modern-day Burgundy and the Jura. Their chief oppidium (fortified town) was Alesia. It is from this that we know them, for it is at Alesia that Vercingetorix made his last stand. Rather than facing Caesar's armies Vercingetorix decides to re-group and holes himself up in the fortified town of Alesia. This leads to a protracted siege where Caesar only has to starve-out the inhabitants. Indeed, matters become so bad that the Mandubian woman and children are ejected from the fortress (possibly in the hope that the Roman lines will part to let them pass. But Caesar effectively traps them in the no-man's-land between the opposing forces and simply allows them to starve. The Romans over-run the town and slaughter everyone inside. After this all references to the Mandubii cease and it is difficult to know whether they were a real tribe or a political entity conjured-up by Julius Caesar (which is why they are not on the map, above). Even an interpretation of the tribe's name seems problematic. Traditionally it has been interpreted as 'horse people' or 'they who trample underfoot' being related to the Latin mannus (horse) or a verbal form such as the Cymric mathru (to trample). However, the name could also be formed from the reconstructed proto-Celtic elements: *men-/*man- (thought/mind), *dubu- (black) thus the Mandubi could be a 'dark thought'. A Gaulish joke and not a true people at all. >>



The Celtic people did not originate in Switzerland.

The truth about them is perhaps something you're unready to acknowledge.



Assumptions will disprove my assumptions?

Hmm.



Ancient Caucasoid writers meant to appease black posterity with their writings?

I think you're confused about the motives of those writers.



I would never use such descriptions. Culture is something separate and apart from what is original. Thus it only applies to something alien or other than the initial or intended order.

[link to www.youtube.com]



___________

If it expects or demands worship, it is not divine!!

Wow you broke up with your loved one just because of dady, that is so intelligent and mature. LOSER!

Maybe she was more intelligent after all.

Alright now where do we start first off I think some of your point are valid in regards to culture. Culture is a construct that tries to correspond to an original setting and evolves as it progresses creating new fixed societies. That said I think you need to look at the indigenous people's of Europe who tended to be much darker and swarthier then the Greeks or Celtic people. This said just because they denote these people to be dark does not mean they are black in the sense we understand black today. Instead it is hard to grasp what they mean exactly.

Given what we know about history these days and how Europe was constituted not to long ago I think it would be safe to say that there were no negroes who lived on the European Continent. Actually the negroes in North Africa were hardly relevant yes there was some mixing after the Punic wars but for the most part the Celtic people are comprised of indigenous peoples and this is why the celtic race can not be defined today because it is so mixed and diverse in its racial expression. On the other hand some of the Celtic people merged with the Iberian people who were dark and swarthy. These people were dark in the sense they were Mediterrean types.

You can still see these types in Wales and Southern England and Ireland. When you speak of the Celtic people it hard to fix a proper taxonomy on them. Instead I think you need to understand that if there were any black people at all who lived close or proximate to Europe it was near the Black sea. Read about a people there who lived in isolation they were black people who had escaped from Africa and settled in the black sea area as merchants and fishers. This is about as much as we can say about black people getting near to Europe. The Nordic types would have purified the gene pool of Europe to such an extent that even if there was the slightest tinge of negroid element in Europe it would have been wiped out 2,000 years ago. This said the Negro people have created some semblance of culture in the Ghanan Empire, Phut Empire, Axsum Empire and what not but a great deal of these cultures were built and influenced by Islamic elements. You can thank Islam for alot of the developments made in Africa at the same time sadly you can blame them for the misfortunes as well. The thing is there has not been a culture or civilization south of the Sub Sahara and there never will be. By the way the Egyptians were Semites as were the Nubian and Berber people they only mixed with the natives later on.

Numbers? *facepalm*...

The Greeks referred to the Celts as Keltoi or Melanoi, the latter meaning Black Men. Needless to say, the original Celts (who inhabited at one time the entire continent of Europe and much of the Near East) were unlike the pale skinned Greeks; the Celts were Negroes.



Descriptions of the indigenous people in these regions are quite specific.



On the contrary. The whole of the Eurasian land mass was inhabited at one time exclusively by Negroes.

This discussion cannot move forward until you accept this.

I looked up the Melanoi and there is no mention of these people in so far as it has been referenced. I would like for you to point out which source you got this from. By the way the Celtic people were light skinned also on top of that the word Celtic has a very broad definition these days as I said because the Celtic people mixed in with so many other peoples.

I think you are sorely mistaken the Negroid people in so far as I have been taught originated in southwestern part of India. There are many people in this area including the island areas especially the nicobar island and the maldives that have negroid traits. The negroes used primitive modes of travel and were then transported to somewhere north of the Sub Sahara. From here on out they spread out to the south and to the west in Africa. There is no mention ever of the European peoples coming out of Africa or the negroid people immigrating from Europe to Africa. If anything your rather groundless assumption that the negroid people lived in Europe is unsubstantiated and if you are saying this for to advance the posit

ion of a race you are not doing yourself a benefit. I do not see any scholarly references where can I find clear cut evidence that the black people once lived in Europe. As we know most of the primitive negroid people today in Africa barely have the means to travel over a small trace of land much less a large expanse of land which was traveled over by the ancient ancestors of the white people.

Only the strong and superior were able to survive the cold over the years, Any and all low-lifes were able to survive in the tropics being stupid as a box of rocks

Check out the traditions of Demeter with regards to the men who live in the land of the golden apples (a reference to the Celts); the term used is Melanoi.

I cannot brooch your condescending assumptions about the technical prowess of the post-diluvial blacks. Perhaps you should take a look at the findings at Morenjo Daro and Harappa. They developed sewerage, plumbing and all manner of pottery and metallurgy. They even had central heating.

While the time or patience to present all of the evidence I've found is inadequate, if you visit this site you might learn a few things which could soften your convictions:

[link to realhistoryww.com]

There are lots of errors and extensive use of exorbitant dating and nonsensical pre-history theorizing donated by white academia, but there are many nuggets of valid information which you will find useful.

Arthur Schoepenhauer said something similar to this. He said the cold harsh brutality of the nordic world caused the nordic people to live less of a life of luxury which caused them to be more focused on real and practical achievements instead of the dreamy and delusions feeling created realities of the southern people which tended to be too nonsensical at times. The environment in a sense shaped them at the same time they shaped their environment in a reciprocating way.

Hegel it was too hot and humid in the tropics for people to do much labor, hence they were unproductive and regarded as lazy. The perennial vegetation also provided sustenance without the need for labor

If anything that site seems to me like a disinformation site. You need to be careful what you read and how you interpret it. There are many prime examples of ignorance in there which I would like to go into further detail such as the claim of the Black British Royalist which is outright nonsense!

The other thing is that there is a blatant racism towards white people on there which I find highly disturbing. I think we need to try to aim at a perspective that gives both races a chance to be right and wrong. Unfortunately all I see there is a bunch of blatant lying and untruths. I can not trust that site because it is based on African Nationalism. I understand if you feel like you have been suppressed by the white man. This I will say the Morenjo Daro and Harappa cultures although they are closely linked to the negroid population they are separated by a couple generations.

Also the negroid people are a very primitive people who broke off from the original and initial crew of civilization much earlier then the others did. There is suggestions that they are related in some way to the Amerinids family as well which would link them to the monogloid branch of humanity. If this is the truth this would explain the similarity in facial structures between blacks, Native Americans, and the Mongolian people. This said the Native people broke away from the Mongoloid people around the year 10,000 B.C. in a slight break so to speak there was still connections all the way up to the time period of 2000 B.C. The break between the negroid people and these branches was much earlier this means there was less mixing in the negroid people as there was in the Mongoloid people and even more so in the Amerinid people.

The Amerinid people are more closely linked to the white man then the Mongoloid or Negroid subdivision. Actually the second branch between the European people's who are the sons of Japeth would be the Sons of Shem who compose the Arabian and Jewish people. The Arabian people broke off later then the previous hamitic peoples and they maintained their locality primarily to the area in which humanity originated. At the same time this would explain that the intermediary gap between the white race and the black race is the Arabic, Mediterrean and Jewish races. Now we can go on further but it would not suffice me to because you clearly won't get it. The earlier a break from the original fixed location of a species the more primitive the features will be in those figures that break away from the species. The Negroid, Mongoloid, Amerinid people features are more primitive as can be seen as their facial structure which is less developed.


At the same time there is less of a broad forehead structure and it tends to slope more inwards instead of jutting outwards this is in large part because they did not have to endure as harsh as climates to reach their destination point. The Native American people have more of a jutted forhead and sometimes do not have a rounded skull but a higher forehead as is the case amongst the chiefs in the tribal system. At the same time as these people's move northward they tended to lose any color because their melanin levels decreased thus leading to them becoming fairer. At the same time the Native peoples remained colored to an extent because their break from the pack was rather early. This is why we have documentations of Native people in the America's during the time period of 10,000 B.C. The factors behind them fleeing early is quite unknown perhaps they were kicked out by the other two brothers and this then lead to in a decrease in the darker components of the race. This then allowed the fairer members of the race to proceed outwards instead of having to deal with the internal conflicts which the darker races inflicted upon them.

I believe they might have been kicked out for their savage and primitive mentalities which was not tolerated by the upper class which was composed primarily of the Japethic people. At the same time once they were kicked out the current European people immigrated slowly over a span of about 4000 years until they reached Europe. The Celts being the earliest to leave the herd of the European people traveled northwards near the black sea and then branched out from there to settle in most of Europe with some random scattered out people's who potentially have relations to the Amerinid people. This is merely a hypothesis and this is based simply on what we theoretically try to posit about the Basque people.

At the same time the less primitive people still retained a certain sense of primitive behavior which in large part because of having to deal with other primitive people's. Once the melting pot had dispersed and found there separate places it allowed the white people to develop a sense of civilization alongside the Semitic people's. There was also internal conflict between the Semitic people's who were semi savage semi cultured as is evidenced by Judaism and Islam. This means the Japathetic people got distanced from the two other branches of humanity in large part of internal conflicts between the two lower classes of the caste system. The caste system actually is the original design of nature and it that which nature has designed from its conception. The Hindu and Buddhistic religion are largely conceptions made by people who could be said to have Indo European qualities. They were adopted by the Natives who sharing similarities with the Negroids, Mongoloids, and Amerinids decided to subdue themselves to Indo Ayran rule. These people in large part integrated Indo Ayran traditions and customs into their own and this fusion created the ancient culture of India. It is debated as how to big the original melting pot was but I believe at first it was tightly clustered when the population of the world was less then 200. Then as the numbers grew people had to branch out to find room to breathe and settle. At first there was relatively little difference between the three different types. The Australoids by the way is the ancestral type of the Modern Indians especially in Central and Southern India.

At the same time the White people moved to the north they developed a high sense of culture creating a sense of agriculture, trade, language, and they also developed the first means of advanced transportation which was the chariot. The Semitic people adopted this means of transportation which is seen in the people of Egypt, the Philistines and the Hebrews as well multiple others. Now the White man domesticated the horse to make his necessary journey across the middle east to Europe. As they progressed westwards some decided to settle down in ancient Persia, Anatolia, and northern Iraq. These people expressed a high sense of culture. Although if anything the highest sense of culture originally was found amongst the semitic people who are related closely to the Mediterrean people. The Egyptians, Babylonians, and ancient Greeks expressed these higher and more refined elements of culture.

At this time the Japathetic people who were striving to find a place further north to settle met with little to no opposition and if they did they struck fear into most of the primitive people's they encountered such as the mongoloid peoples. The Semitic people were always constantly fighting amongst each other this led to poor communicability between and caused the Semitic people's to isolate themselves from each other and to settle down in tribal or nomadic settings. This is something the early model of the Indo European people but actually what this did was it caused them to progress even more so and compete as they moved into Europe.

The Celtic being an early break and thus the Celt is the original model of the white man actually there is a close connection between the Celtic people and the Ayran race. As the Indo European people progressed there were different branches the Semitic people's who decided to break off and join with the Indo European people created a fusion which is known as the Mediterrean race. The Mediterrean race came through Anatolia and then proceeded from northwards. They either settled in Italy amongst the Etruscans who were actually closely related to peoples who came from Anatolia during the year 1200. Actually there is a connection made between the Etruscans and the pre classic Greeks. The Classical Greeks were not as Mediterrean as the Homeric Greeks instead they were a mix of Baltic and Celtic roots.

The Baltic roots are closely related to the Germanic people they branched off from the Germanic people and some of them got mixed with Uglaric peoples and what not. In a sense the Germanic people are the purest to be found in the world because there are so many elements of existence that can be found in the Germanic people because they were the last to split from the last elements of the melting pot. This includes the Slavs as well but the Germanic people broke off from the Slavic people who mixed in with either Mongoloids or Baltic peoples. The Germanic people on the other hand remained pure other then the fact they mingled with some Celtic and Indigenous peoples especially in the South and Central part of Germany and most of France. But in the northern sectors of Europe that is the Nordic sector the Germanic population is primarily not tainted this includes Northern Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Parts of Scotland, part of North Western Netherlands this including the Frisians, part of North West Poland.

This is where the Nordic race primarily resonates the most strongly. Also the as they settled in and became more cultured they tended to absorb other culture and usually they absorbed other high cultures themes such as the Roman culture and the Greek culture that was imbedded in Roman Culture and they they surrounded it with a Germanic Paganism and Mythology. In this sense the Germanic people were expansive oriented because they were the last to separate this means they were probably one of the last people's to be settled for good definitely in an area which also allowed for less mixing. At the same time this meant they tended to be less civilized then their mediterrean brethren who had an advantage over settling earlier then they did.

On the other hand now the Germanic people spread all throughout Europe. The word Germans practically comes from the latin meaning seed. The Germanic people being the last people to definitively settle in Europe became the seed of Europe they spread their purity across Europe mixing in with other mixed subspecies even mixing in with the Berber people of North Africa. After this time period they then proceeded to contain themselves to their northern sphere keeping in check any Slavic expansion. The Slavic people's figure has been much maligned from their original figure because they have become so mixed actually some parts of where the Slavs are tends to be heavily influenced by Nordic elements such is the case with the north eastern parts of Europe including Russia. The Slavic peoples are actually some of the most mixed peoples in Europe the eastern part of Europe has become a melting pot of sorts after all the invasions of people including the Mongoloid people's. The Germanic people then again set on another rampage of sorts during the 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th centuries. During this time period the far western extent of Europe which was mixed with Celtic Roman and Indigenous peoples became influenced heavily by Nordic genes especially in Northwest England, Most of Scotland, the coast line of Ireland especially the Eastern part and the North East Coast of Europe.

This said the Germanic people spread out and mixed with various people's in Europe from Spain, Italy, North Eastern Europe, parts of Albania and Greece, and then the purer elements settled in and thus we have Christianity. As you can see the two races the Japethic and Semitic peoples contributed to religion. The Hindu, Buddhist, Persian religions, and Christianity can all be accredited to the white man. The Semitic people on the other hand developed Judaism and Islam later on as we can see the primary influences in history have been the Sons of Japeth and the Sons of Shem.

Some races are intelligent, some aggressive, but that group tends to be both intelligent and aggressive.

Agreed the Semitic race is full of intelligent people who can be aggressive although not to the extent of the Nordic race and the Hamitic people aka the Negroid and Mongoloid people tend to be very aggressive not as much as the Nordic people but very violent and brutal and they are the least intelligent of the three groups. The Nordic race expresses the best and most noble elements of humanity for the most part with some exceptions in between other races.

I did offer you a comprehensive disclaimer assuming you would take the time to read through as much of the material as you can; a good researcher even one deigning to consider content he dislikes, would reserve judgment until he has digested the whole article.

[[wretching noises]]

they probably are.

what people think and believe is always correct.

I wonder how his wife would feel if she secretly observed her husband's uninhibited delusional architecture. She might feel she's made a terrible mistake in marrying this sociopath.

I believe you are foolish.

He was right tho, they do have lower IQ's, but the real kicker is, no nations collectively is THAT high. I mean it's really just a ten point spread. It's not like 50 or anything.

I must be, then, considering the strength of your belief.

I wonder how much longer you people can keep this charade going?

:snicker:

At least you're honest.

Celts have the lightest skin of all the Europeans. I suspect that any reference to blackness, was because of the hair colour. The term "black-Irish" is used today, and for the same reason.

The original "Keltoi" as denoted by white Greeks were Negroes.

You have to remember that white "Germanic" invaders took on the identities of the people they supplanted and in some cases mixed with.

This page has extensive information which you should consider.

[link to realhistoryww.com]

It has been conjectured that these and other varieties of external character depend merely on original difference between races of men A great part of the of Europe is supposed to descend the mixture of two great tribes or nations the Celtic and the German stock and it has often been asserted that families of light complexion and red or flaxen hair inherit these peculiarities from Gothic Danish or Scandinavian that is from German ancestors while those who are swarthy and dark haired derive their complexion from forefathers who were of the Celtic race.

THE CYCLOPAEDIA OF PRACTICAL MEDICINE ... IN THE LONDON UNIVERSITY

VOL IV

SOF YAW

SUPPLEMENT

LONDON SHERWOOD GILBERT AND PIPER AND BALDWIN AND CRADOCK PATERNOSTER ROW WHITTAKER TREACHER AND CO AVE MARIA LANE 1835

The Silures were the most ancient inhabitants of Britain. (The Theosophical Path, vol. 3 by Katherine Tingley, California: The New Century Corporation, 1912, pg. 136) The Silures possessed south Wales and western England, and their chief cities were Sariconium, Magna, Gobabeum, and their capital city, Venta. The land of the Silures was only thirty miles from Ireland.

That the Silures were black does not need to be questioned. They were described as short in stature, with brown complexions, and black curled hair and dark eyes. In the second century A.D., the Roman historian Pliny described the Britons complexions as “Ethiopian.” (African Presence in Early Europe by Ivan Van Sertima, ed. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 2007, pg. 225) In his book, Memoirs of the Celts of Gauls, Joseph Ritson gives this assessment regarding the Silures origins:

“The swarthy complexion of the Silures, and their hair, which is generally curled, with their situation opposite to the coast of Spain, furnished ground to believe, that the ancient Iberians had arrived from thence, and taken possession of the territory.” (Memoirs of the Celts or Gauls by Joseph Ritson, London: Payne and Foss, 1827, pg. 114)

The Silures were identical with the small, dark, long-headed Basque-speaking people found in the western Pyrenees, who were a fragment of the Iberians. (Our Earliest Ancestors in Britain by Boyd Dawkins, London: John Heyward, 1879, pg. 104) The Iberians were the early inhabitants of Spain. Wesley John Gaines insists that the Iberians came from North Africa. (The Negro and the White Man by Wesley John Gaines, Philadelphia: A.M.E. Publishing House, 1897, pg. 11) It is important to note that Iberia and North Africa are separated by a mere thirteen kilometers at the narrowest point of the Strait of Gibraltar. Pliny described the Iberians complexion as aethiopium, i.e. black as an Ethiopian. (Ancient and Modern Britons: a retrospect, Vol. 3 by David MacRitchie, London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co., 1884, pg. 45)

The Roman historian Tacitus also noted that the Silures were a dark complexioned people. (The Anthropological Review, Vol. 8 by Anthropological Society of London, London: Asher & Co., 1870, pg. 202) J.A. Rogers believed they were very likely of Phoenician or Egyptian descent. (Nature Knows No Color Line by J.A. Rogers, St. Petersburg: Helga M. Rogers, 1980, pg. 71)

The Silures were the strongest and most organized state in Britain. They were considered “one of the bravest of the ancient British nations, and defended their country and their liberty against the Romans, with the most heroic fortitude.” (A New History of Great Britain from the Invasion of Julius Caesar to the Present Time by Rev. John Adams, London: T.N. Longman & O. Rees, and T. Hurst, 1802, pg. 13) They were known to be “stubbornly independent.” (The Foundation of England, Vol. I by Sir James H. Ramsay, London: Swan Sonnenschein & Co. LTD, 1898, pg. 57) It was because they refused to be dominated by outsiders that they fought so hard for their freedom. Julius Caesar led a Roman invasion of Britain in 55 BC. It took the Romans more than thirty years to subdue the Silures.” (Origins of English History by Charles Isaac Elton, London: Bernard Quaritch, 1890, pg. 138)

Interestingly, in the many books and movies made about King Arthur, very few mention that King Arthur was the king of a group of black people. In the legend of King Arthur, he was the king of the Silures who held back the advances of the Saxons for a time.

Another group of blacks in the ancient British Isles were the Picts. David MacRitchie called the Picts “Moors” (i.e. black), and then states that it was clear that the Silures were Picts. (Ancient and Modern Britons: a Retrospect, Vol. 3 by David MacRitchie, London: Kegan Paul, Tench & Co., 1884, pg. 187) The Picts are acknowledged as the earliest inhabitants of Scotland. They ruled Scotland for more than 500 years. The term Pict means “painted or tattooed.” The term was used by the Romans to describe inhabitants in the second century AD. The first documented appearance of the term was in a work by Eumenius in 297 AD. They were the inhabitants of the highlands of Scotland who lived in northern and eastern Scotland between 200 and 850 AD. Joseph Ritson was quite specific about his description of these highlanders:

“The Highlanders are generally dimunitive, with brown complexions, and almost always with black curled hair and dark eyes.” (Annals of Caledonian, Picts, and Scots by Joseph Ritson, Vol. II, Edinburgh: Ward D. Laing, 1828, footnote pp. 7, 27)


[link to saggigga.wordpress.com]

I'll leave here for now.

I wouldn't want to be responsible for highlighting every resource on this topic so as to allow them to be removed.