The jews aren't White theory doesn't really have a strong basis to be honest

submitted by Salos60000Pragmatic European Nationalism from (self.debatealtright)

I understand how their subversive influence, in group preferences, nepotism and so on however I feel the whole jews aren't White/European is a bit weak.

I know they're origins come from the middle east and the sephardic jews largely retain the complexion,however our people have origins from India and we evolved from that. Ashkenazi jews largely have had their middle eastern genes massively diluted from race mixing with eastern europeans and others.

A common way I've seen of defining race I've seen here is basically through common sense and telling if they're Black,Asia,European etc. This doesn't really work in regards to jews for example Bill Maher or Simon Cowell are both half jewish but no one would say their mixed race.

I do understand their people's subversive influence and all that and I do view them with suspicion however I'd see them more as how a Catholic would say a Protestant or Sunni would see a Shia, a largely hostile sect with their own interests and identity.

all 65 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (45 children)

Our people don't have origins in India you utter retard. The White people whose culture appears to have emerged in the Steppes of what's now Ukraine who spoke proto Indo-European and conquered all the way from Northern India, parts of China, Persia and all the way West to Ireland were Whites and they form a major part of especially NW European ancestry. You're honestly too fucking stupid to even debate. You just babble and say weird random shit I'd expect from a 12 year old.

Jews are Jews. I don't give a fuck if they're 'brown', 'blue', 'green' or 'white' they are their own group with their own identity, religion and interests. That's all that matters. Mostly only morons debate this utterly meaningless question whether they're White or not.

Jews are Jews. I'd be as opposed to the Amish -- who are 100 percent of European origin -- if they acted the way Jews do. It is an irrelevant piece of tedium for philo-semites like you to obsess over.

Also spare me this fake sudden conversion to any hostility to Jews. You're such a slimy fucking liar.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (17 children)

Why so hostile?

Anyhow, seems you missed this day in school:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Horde

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_Empire

Most Europeans are mixed.

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Europeans are a mix of three ancestries for the most part. Ancient hunter gatherers who have been there since before the last ice age, Anatolian Farmers who find their closest representation in modern Sardinians and the Indo-European speaking people who were the last major wave of genetic input -- mostly on the paternal line as they slaughtered the all the men and took the women. So yes we are mixed. What that means in your addled brain I don't know. I guess it means infinity Somalians and Eritreans to White countries forever somehow. For me I can't quite make that logical leap. You're welcome to it though.

Thanks for posting about the Mongol Empire though. Fascinating and totally relevant to the ancestral make up of most modern Europeans.

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Also, you have to keep in mind that, although modern-day whites are technically a mix of three ancestral populations, those three ancestral populations were by no means different races. Based on the archelogical evidence, those three ancestral populations were distantly related to each other and would all fall into the Caucasoid category based on physical characteristics, and were at most different sub-races.

So modern-day whites aren't a mixed people in the way mestizos and and South Asians are for example, and comparing the "mixed" origins of whites to the actually mixed origins of mestizos and South Asians (as "socks" was likely going to do, thinking it's an "own" against us) would be like comparing people who are half German half English to people who are half German half Somalian.

[–]SoylentCapitalist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Europeans did mix with Neanderthals which were far more genetically distant to them than blacks are today.

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I know, but Neanderthals weren't one of those three ancestral populations. Those three (proto-)white ancestral populations emerged thousands (if not tens of thousands) of years after the Neanderthals were still around and the mixing occurred. Those three acestral populations were the Western Hunter Gatherers (Nordic whites, Northwestern Europe), Indo-Europeans/Yamnaya (partially Nordic whites, eastern Ukraine and the Caucasus), and Neolithic Farmers (non-Nordic whites; Southern Europe, North Africa and the Levant/Near East). All three of those ancestral populations of mordern-day whites already had Neanderthal admixture, just like non-white Caucasoids, Central Asians (Caucasoid-Mongoloid hybrids) and East Asians (most pure Mongoloids).

Furthermore, West-African blacks (Congoid Negroids) have admixture of up to 20% of previously unknown "ghost DNA", which has recently been revelead to have been a hybrid of Homo Sapiens and Homo Erectus (a now extinct human subspecies which is known for looking like a racist caricature of a black man, which has been found to have been very lazy and low-IQ), meaning modern day blacks are the closest thing still alive to the Homo Erectus.

[–]SoylentCapitalist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Furthermore, West-African blacks (Congoid Negroids) have admixture of up to 20% of previously unknown "ghost DNA", which has recently been revelead to have been a hybrid of Homo Sapiens and Homo Erectus (a now extinct human subspecies which is known for looking like a racist caricature of a black man, which has been found to have been very lazy and low-IQ), meaning modern day blacks are the closest thing still alive to the Homo Erectus.

I've read about this a few times on this sub. Looking up the source for this it states 2-19% which realistically means 10.5% admixture on average.

[–]outrageousboote 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Socks is back? Yes perhaps there is minute contribution from Mongol invasions in Eastern Europe like there is minute non-native ancestry everywhere around the world, but this doesn't mean that Europeans are some indistinct mongrels, let alone compared to other populations.

You are obviously trying to push a narrative, you are the same person who claimed that Mexicans were akin to Iberians and that admixture with natives was limited ignoring their obvious and phenotypically evident Amerindian ancestry, you never emphasize non-native or "mixed" ancestry in non-European groups.

Or maybe you are getting the Mongols confused with another people?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

To understand European mixed ethnicity, we need to appreciate the extent of human trafficking, rape, conquest, migration, &c especially between 150,000 BCE and 1700 around the Mediterranean and further north. Mixed race groups on the Iberian peninsula are an easy topic, as they were a combination of Arab, Berber, and other groups between the early eighth century and the late 15th century. Note also the mixing of groups that occurred during the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period . Mexicans are 70% - 90% mixed-race, many of whom have Iberian ancestry: https://www.quora.com/How-many-Mexicans-have-at-least-some-degree-of-Iberian-ancestry . An interesting part of Ukranian and Polish ancestry is the Khanate contribution in the 12th - 18th centuries. Scandinavians who traded (&c) along the Volga river and in the Mediterranean in the 8th-12th centuries also had Arab slaves and partners. Turkic groups spread throughout Eurasia, as conquerors and as slaves. There were Africans in Europe, for various reasons. Here's one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camera_degli_Sposi#/media/File:Andrea_Mantegna_-_Ceiling_Oculus_-_WGA14023.jpg

[–]outrageousboote 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I debunked this mixed claim weeks ago, and now you are reneging on the lack of admixture between natives and Iberian conquerors that you claimed originally and are yet again implying Europeans are heavily mixed while not making similar claims about any other group (with the exception of opportunistically reneging your Mexican claim).

I gave links which crush the conception of high levels of admixture with non-European groups to the point of being "mixed" among Europeans, using things like the migration period is irrelevant as the mixing was between the same continental racial group (a German-Swede mix is different from a Nigerian-German mix, a Korean-Chinese mix is different form a hapa).

Even after all the invasions, interactions etc. from non-European peoples Europe has faced admixture has stayed minor and Europeans distinct, so bringing this up does not prove anything.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

yet again implying Europeans are heavily mixed

I didn't say this. It seems your arguments (before and now) focus mainly on predominantly white vs predominantly non-white genes in Europeans. I'm not really addressing this. My main argument is that there is a mixture of ethnicities, albeit less in some and more in others, but naturally Europeans are predominantly white-skinned, and regarding the Semitic or Hebrew groups, one would have great difficulty showing that these people are any different from Medeterranean white-skinned groups, even while appreciating that some Semitic groups try to marry ONLY Semitic people.

[–]RichtoffLud 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Dude, you're confusing immigration with miscegenation, Europa has many ethnic groups? yes, but there was little miscegenation between these groups during the Middle Ages and until the Modern Age. But we now there is more nowadays, due to high forced immigration financing to White Countries.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

So you make assumptions about the migration and Khanate periods that are false, and now want to attach historical research that indicates "miscegenation" did not happen in Europe? Miscegenation is a THEORY, published ahead of the 1864 election in order to scare honkies into voting for a racist. It worked, and helped put in place a number of post-Civil-war racist segregation laws. Until recently I was not legally permitted in my state to marry a person of color (from any other part of the world). States repealed that law as late as the 1960s. Another modern concept is white nationalism. Yes, there were previous groups in Europe who arranged marriages within their own families, their own extended families, their own towns, and so on. But the main approach to selecting a partner was not the selection of skin color. There are no records of referring to the selection of a white man. There are records complementing a woman with nice white skin, but this is merely aesthetic, not about the MASTER RACE. Marrying someone with a different skin color would depend on their wealth, association with the family, or other circumstances. In many cases, women were raped by the invatinding groups from the East and elsethere. Women and children were also traded throughout Europe. The children of slaves were often mixed. Were Europeans predomantly white-skinned and round-eyed? Yes, in the West, but not in Eastern Europe, or in part of Central Europe, where some of these traits are partially mixed. Consider much of Iberia, North Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean. Europeans have always been partially mixed, for many reasons.

[–]EuropeanAwakening14 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Lol. Race and skin color aren't synonyms. Skin color is a feature of Race. Would you say a brown Indian and a brown sub Sahara African are the same Race? No, you dishonest twit. It's an old game anti-Whites like you play that you NEVER apply to ANY other Race of people. And no, actual DNA analysis shows Europeans really aren't that mixed. This idea is pivotal to your narrative to justify European extermination via mass racial mixing and replacement. That's why you keep having to lie.

Miscegenation isn't a "theory". It is when two people from different racial groups breed. Croly coined the term miscegenation. He did not invent the concept. That goes back to the ancient Greeks and even further back than that.

Nice. So, it is OK to attack people for their race by calling them racist honkies? Cool. Good to know you only apply your hatred to White people.

[–]RichtoffLud 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I already get your operation mode. There is no way to compare a period of 100 years (Khanate) with concrete periods that already existed for more than a thousand years, and lasted for more than centuries afterward, Khanate period did not determine the people of Europe. Please, Miscegenation is a theory? this is ONE guy's opinion, because David Goodman Croly says that Miscegenation is a theory, believe without analyzing the facts is very partial.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I already get your operation mode.

There's no 'operation mode'.

There is no way to compare a period of 100 years (Khanate)

Several hundred years (why don't you know this?)

concrete periods that already existed for more than a thousand years, and lasted for more than centuries afterward,

This is not a discussion of history. Compare the Golden Horde with the Huns.

Khanate period did not determine the people of Europe.

That's not the issue. The issue is that these are periods with relatively mixed ethnicities, even if by a low margin.

Miscegenation is a theory?

Yes - for the reasons I mention, and it's unrelated to pre-modern history.

[–]RichtoffLud 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Why these links? I don't get it. Mongol Empire has no connection with the current European population. Before the arrival of the Mongolians in Europe, there were already tribes formed everywhere, many Germans, such as Teutons, Visigoths, Britons and Angles, as well as Celts, Slavs and Latins, all these are Indo-Europeans.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

One of the Visigoth leaders was Attila the Hun. You mention groups that conquered parts of Europe, Africa, and the East during the "migration" period, including Alamans, Vandals, Goths, Huns, Ostrogothsand Bulgars.

The Hun, Ostrogoth, Vandal and Khanate invasions and settlements definitely changed the gene pools of European populations. More links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period

[–]FoxySDTWhite Nationalist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

definitely changed the gene pools of European populations.

Evidence? Because those wiki pages mention nothing like that.

[–]Salos60000Pragmatic European Nationalism[S] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

"Indo-European" does seem to indicate some origin from india.

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Indo-European is a language descriptor because of the common origins of Sanskrit and European languages. The common root for both languages is the same White horse lords who conquered India and Western Europe.

Fucking retard.

[–]Noam_Chomsky 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

The common root for both languages is the same White horse lords who conquered India and Western Europe.

Proto Endo European is far older than is acknowledged by mainstream archeology.

It comes from the same general region as Gobekli Tepe, which is dated to approximately 10,000 years ago (2000 years after the end of the ice age).

This moves the history of ancient megalithic civilizations back in time by at least 4000 years.

The common root for both languages is the same White horse lords who conquered India and Western Europe.

Proto Indo European is a legacy of an advanced pre-ice age civilization.

The fortunate few who survived the cataclysm and subsequent global sea rise, which dramatically ended the ice age (12,800 years ago).

These survivors also retained the technical knowledge to build Gobekli Tepe.

[–]VraiBleuScots Protestant, Ulster Loyalist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

While I have a lot of time for alternative-history theories, I don’t think they’re quite as certain as your post makes them out to be (and perhaps we’ll never know the truth). Of course mainstream historians are prone to do this in the complete opposite direction, where they’ll present their narratives as 100% fact based on one or two archaeological digs or fragments of surviving historical texts.

With that said, the balance of evidence as of now seems to point towards Indo-European peoples originating in the Black/Caspian Sea area ~4th Millenium BC. And I don’t think they conquered because of super-advanced technology, but simply the horse, chariot and the innate drive to expand that is present in many European races.

s/Salos60000 doesn’t seem to realise that the European steppe nomads conquered the Indians. Not vice-versa.

[–]Noam_Chomsky 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

the balance of evidence as of now seems to point towards Indo-European peoples originating in the Black/Caspian Sea area ~4th Millenium BC.

Your misgivings about the actual age of anything that's older than 4000 bce is understandable, given the balance of the bought and paid for academia agree with you.

Fortunately, evidence that Gobekli Tepe is 10,000 years old, or older (8000-9500 BCE) is overwhelming.

So much so, that even the shills at Wikipedia agree.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe

Göbekli Tepe is a Neolithic archaeological site near the city of Şanlıurfa in Southeastern Anatolia, Turkey. Dated to the Pre-Pottery Neolithic, between c. 9500 and 8000 BCE, the site comprises a number of large circular structures supported by massive stone pillars – the world's oldest known megaliths.
Many of these pillars are richly decorated with abstract anthropomorphic details, clothing, and reliefs of wild animals, providing archaeologists a rare insights into prehistoric religion and the particular iconography of the period.
The 15 m (50 ft)-high, 8 ha (20 acres) tell also includes many smaller rectangular buildings, quarries, and stone-cut cisterns from the Neolithic, as well as some traces of activity from later periods.

If you are interested in getting further out of your historical comfort zone, then look into the "sphinx erosion hypothesis"

The erosion on the sphinx body and surrounding enclosure (the sphinx body is carved down, and out of the solid bedrock) is undoubtedly caused by water erosion.

No other mechanism causes this type of wear. It's unmistakable.

The head doesn't match the body, because it's obviously recarved out of the the original monument (material removed).

The severity of the erosion (1.0-1.5m deep or 3-4.5 ft.) suggests that it's probably ten's of thousands of years old.
Imagine the millennia of rainfall that would be required to carve 3 feet into the bedrock.

It easily predates the ice age.

The pyramids are similarly ancient.
They are technical masterpieces that the modern world still couldn't reproduce.

Precision-interlocking stone blocks weighing as much as 80 tons cannot be moved by modern cranes.

The facts, as they are.

[–]VraiBleuScots Protestant, Ulster Loyalist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Thanks for the sources. I know about Gobekli Tepe, but is it linked to the Indo-Aryans? I’ve not heard that before, a culture surviving the best part of 10,000 years seems improbable.

The reason I take alt history & a lot of other more ‘conspiratorial’ ideas popular here with a grain of salt is that I just don’t see a motive for our enemies to cover it up. As a counter example, white genocide or the Holocaust narratives have a clear goal - to justify removing power from white Europeans & placing in the hands of Jews/‘minorities’. It took them untold sums of resources, money, 100 years & two world wars to implant this bull shit into our heads.

When they do cover up history, it’s usually with a specific goals and it’s pretty easy to spot (I.e anything to do with American slavery, ‘diversity’ in medieval Europe etc).

Why would the Jews put so much effort into totally covering up the history of a civilisation in Ukraine, 10,000 years ago? It has no relevance to modern politics

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why would the Jews put so much effort into totally covering up the history of a civilisation in Ukraine, 10,000 years ago? It has no relevance to modern politics

They oppose everything that they think has a logical endpoint in opposing jewish power.

The oldest swastika is from Ukraine, 12,000 years ago. The people of the swastika that spread the symbol around the world was, as we know, the Aryans. Jews have tried a lot to suppress the Aryan/Indo-European conquests but archaeological evidence has proven the racial theorists of the 19th and 20th centuries correct. If the symbol of this people has been found from 12,000 years ago then there's the possibility of continuity and pre-Yamnaya Aryans being a thing in other civilisations, even if it's extremely unlikely and could never be proven it's something jews are scared of.

People who are into comparative mythology, alt-archaeology surrounding Egypt and ancient civilisations all end up thinking along the same lines as the Volkisch, NS etc guys did eventually. If literally everyone who ever looks into ancient civilisations comes to the same kind of ideas as the racial theorists of the 19/20th centuries did then obviously jews are aware of this and would see it as a threat, as it already did become a threat to them when it culminated in National Socialism the first time. It makes perfect sense why they would be scared of it, even if it's not true.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

it's like how they covered up the epic of gilgamesh for many years, because it describes a flood myth and they didn't want people to realize they copied that for the old testament. Hurts their religion. If world was created 6 thousand years ago, they don't want to talk about evidence of civilization existing 10,000 years ago.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

the word india came to represent anything to the east like how they also though native americans in the new world were indians.

[–]Salos60000Pragmatic European Nationalism[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

I've never been pro jewish, literally my first comment on the subreddit was a triple bracket.

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

So defend your fucking retard comment that White Europeans -- assuming that's what you mean by 'our people' -- 'have origins from India'.

[–]Salos60000Pragmatic European Nationalism[S] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

My sole basis on it is the terms indo european or indo aryan and the migrations. I'm probably wrong so don't fucking eat me.

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Well so your entire point is dead and you should delete this shitty, low effort and ill thought out post just like you did your last one you mentally ill freak.

[–]Salos60000Pragmatic European Nationalism[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

I want to see what more discussion and points can be raised from it.

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Yeah and as always people will make points aside from me without insulting you and you'll just ignore them and come back to the next discussion as if nothing ever happened.

Why don't you answer Markimus or outrageousboote? You never actually address people who make arguments against your utter vomit and constantly make these posts where people respond and then if the topic comes up again you act as if nothing ever happened. One is left thunderstruck.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

Wow you two certainly seem like you have a history. Would you like a private sub for your BDSM?

[–]VraiBleuScots Protestant, Ulster Loyalist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I’m not sure if you’ve encountered Salos before but he’s a known, prolific troll who must have burned through a dozen banned accounts at this time.

s/literalotherkin is absolutely correct in calling him out.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I have not.

[–]Salos60000Pragmatic European Nationalism[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Because I agree with their points and don't have much of a comeback to them. I'm under no obligation to address anything and you have none to comment on my posts.

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Which comment?

Can't see any triple brackets in your history but I sure can see half a dozen denying Jewish power and influence.

[–]Salos60000Pragmatic European Nationalism[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

On the subreddit, it got removed, you can maybe see it in the archive.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

is that on reddit, cuz this ain't reddit

[–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The White people whose culture appears to have emerged in the Steppes of what's now Ukraine who spoke proto Indo-European and conquered all the way from Northern India, parts of China, Persia and all the way West to Ireland were Whites and they form a major part of especially NW European ancestry. You're honestly too fucking stupid to even debate.

Typically European traits (blonde hair, blue eyes, etc) come from native hunter gatherer populations, some would say the Yamnaya invaders don't define the European phenotype.

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I just said they were a significant part of our ancestral make up. Don't really mind if the phenotypes you describe came from them or ancient HG.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

some would say the Yamnaya invaders don't define the European phenotype.

What did they look like then?

[–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yamnaya originally didn't have blonde hair and blue eyes, every projection I've seen makes them look definitely caucasian but not nordic.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The jew formed his we-feeling outside of Europe and has remained hostile and unassimilated everywhere. Jews have actively genocided their own people who did assimilate along with the other groups.

The jew has nothing but hatred for everyone who isn't a jew, they are not part of a broader white race they are their own race that exists in total hostility to everyone who isn't jewish.

Only the shallowest materialistic interpretation of human groupings could possibly conclude the jew is European, even that is shaky considering their non-European origin that makes up the majority of their DNA.

[–]wuzizname 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

If the Jews are white then the holocaust was the most catastrophic mass genocide of white people the world has ever known.

[–]RichtoffLud 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

https://i.imgur.com/lMhD3rj.png

[–]proc0 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

From what I've seen a lot self-hating "whites" are really jews. Their customs and values are different and are often based on whether someone else is a jew or not, and of course they will not disclose that detail. For starters having a matriarchal society is opposite than the traditional patriarchal for whites (and Europeans in general, which are not all white). That alone is already incompatible, but the list is long.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

our people have origins from India and we evolved from that

Whites don't have origins in india. There's evidence a group of ancient proto indo Europeans conquered northern India, china, and may have gone as far as Japan. Conquering and setting up a caste system is not 'originating' from.

Where did these indo Europeans come from? Most likely the caucus mountains but we are getting lied to from modern academia about almost everything that happened more than 11k years ago. There's reason to believe that there was an intelligent race of humans that lived before 11k years ago and they experience a near extinction event. Most likely an event that effected most of the earth and caused flooding. IMO there are two groups of people that survived the flood. One group survived the flood through planning and going in caves or building boats. Another group/race survived the flood through accident (isolated on floating islands or in rare areas that did not flood). These two groups set the tone for modern racial groups. I think all the more intelligent races have some amount of genetics from the 'planners' that survived the flood. Jews are from the planners but they are a malicious group that have degenerated their blood lines away from the original stock to such a degree that they are basically devolved into a people predisposed to lying and deception. So Jews are white in the most broadest sense of the definition but by every metric of what white people have been for the last 2k years or so Jews are not whites. This hatred of whites has gotten so bad in Jews that they actively breed with all other racial groups in the hopes of using their networks to destroy whites. When a good chunk of your tribe has outbred with non white genetics AND you actively try to genocide whites then you destroy your claim to being white IMO.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The ones you're referring to are the Yamnaya people from 5300 years ago (3300BC), they came from Ukraine and did the conquests, they most likely called themselves Aryans which is why Arya(n) is common meaning noble in all religions and languages they founded.

Civilisations that predate 3500BC may or may not have a continued lineage with these people, I think they probably did but there's only speculation really not conclusive evidence like there is of the Aryan conquests.

[–]Salos60000Pragmatic European Nationalism[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What would you say to my argument regarding the likes of Simon Cowell or Bill Maher, both mixed jewish, the average would see both as White or someone who's fully jewish like Stephen Miller, it's pretty difficult to distinguish jewish racial traits.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've said this before, but if you change the definition of white to include everyone, you end up with Brazil which is a failure.

Why stop with Jews? Add the Chinese, Mexicans and Africans too!

Only Two European parents can create a White baby. That is what Whiteness will always be.

[–]outrageousboote 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

our people have origins from India and we evolved from that

What, this must be based in some profoundly outdated anthropology or fringe theory.

middle eastern genes massively diluted from race mixing with eastern Europeans and others.

They are 40-60% ME with the next largest components being Southern European, Eastern European and maybe NW Euro such as German making up the rest. Diluted they have been but they were endogamous and are ethnocentric, they have also been changed by selection of things such as verbal intelligence at the expense of other types of intelligence and ethnocentrism.

A common way I've seen of defining race I've seen here is basically through common sense and telling if they're Black,Asia,European etc. This doesn't really work in regards to jews for example Bill Maher or Simon Cowell are both half jewish but no one would say their mixed race.

Jews are viewed as white by the general public even if they are usually ME/European hybrids.

I do understand their people's subversive influence and all that and I do view them with suspicion however I'd see them more as how a Catholic would say a Protestant or Sunni would see a Shia, a largely hostile sect with their own interests and identity.

They definitely act an ethnic group apart from Europeans as well.

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What, this must be based in some profoundly outdated anthropology or fringe theory.

It's true that part of our ancestry comes from people who conquered both Northern India and Western Europe but in his brain it's become 'hurr Europeans have their origins in India durr'. You've got to remember you're dealing with a mentally ill freak with many alts who likes to pretend he's a British actress in his spare time.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

An actress who's like 70 or something now too lol

[–]Erasmus 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ashkenazi jews largely have had their middle eastern genes massively diluted from race mixing with eastern europeans and others.

Whites are the aboriginal peoples of Europe. Our evolutionary history there goes back tens of thousands of years. Ashkenazi Jews are a recent hybrid and only about 700 years old:

https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-ashkenazi-jews-dna-diseases-20140909-story.html

Despite their close ties with Europe, no more than half of their DNA comes from ancient Europeans, the researchers found. Only 46% to 50% of the DNA in the 128 samples originated with the group of people who were also the ancestors of the Flemish people in the study.

The rest of the Ashkenazi genome comes from the Middle East, the researchers reported.

[–]Nombre27 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nonsense.

They have their own ethne and work to advance and protect it with in-group preference while they don't do the same for White people.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think they do look white and are a sub group of whites and they themselves often say they are not white, when it benefits them like trying to say they are a minority and face discrimination. If they never did that and the whole history of being antagonistic didn't happen they would be gladly excepted as white. Many did want to just get along and they changed their surnames and integrated within white societies over the years. That's probably what happened with Bill Maher's and Simon Cowell's parents, they didn't want to be part of the rigid jewish religion that only lets you marry other jews, they just wanted to live their lives so married a non jew out of love.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Obvious troll strikes again

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

White people are an amalgamation of three main biological groups: Neolithic hunter-gatherers of Europe, Early European farmers who came in after the ice age receded, and Indo-European(Aryan) invaders from the Pontic Caspian steppe.

Since Europe was conquered by the Aryans, they imposed their language, customs, and religion on the continent. Most European Y-Chromosomal aka male line comes from one of the Aryans. R1b dominates in Western Europe and R1a dominates among the Slavic peoples.

The R1b faction of Aryans arrived in Europe earlier and settled the rich Western European farmlands. Later the R1a faction coalesced in the pontic-Caspian steppe and from there spread out in all directions. A large portion invaded and settled central Asia. From Central Asia, one group went to Iran and another went to India.

Europeans today boast the largest amount of ancestry from Aryans because the land in ancient times was largely uninhabited in contrast to Iran and India which were heavily populated. Thus, those lands while speaking Aryan languages and having or had Aryan faiths mostly descend from their pre-Aryan populations.

Jews were originally a tribe of Levantine people, genetically similar to Iraqis, Syrians, and western Iranians. After the Romans destroyed their Kingdom and slaughtered them during the bar kobka revolt, a small amount migrated to Northern Italy.

There, these Hebrew men took Italian wives and converted the children to Judaism. From this act, the Ashkenazim were born. The Ashkenazi Jews then settled the Rhine region after Charlemagne gave them permission but were expelled from Western Europe after pogroms during the black death. They then settled Poland which was the most religiously free and liberal state in Europe in the 15th century. There their populations grew to large numbers.

So the Ashkenazi Jews are effectively a hybrid race of Levantine and European. They spent 1500 years in genetic isolation due to endogamy and have developed unique traits, effectively becoming a different race from either.

So no, they are not Europeans.

Mizrahi or Sephardic Jews otoh are genetically similar to Arabs, particularly the Mizrahim and they have IQs similar to Arabs as well, around 87 or so.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Do you have sources for any of this?

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is all common info available on the net. But if u want sources I can find them for u

[–]88BitSorelianism 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

however our people have origins from India and we evolved from that.

No we don't if you're talking about Indo Europeans (Aryans) no credible academic that studies their origins today believes they are from India, the Indo Europeans (Aryans) are from Eastern Ukraine and it's an indisputable fact. Ashkenazi are the ones usually considered "White" by people who don't know better or are intentionally subversive, but their origins are in turkic people, not in a European ethnicity. If it only mattered what someone's skin color was to be White then many north east asians would be White, but they aren't because skin color isn't the determining factor it's what ethnic group their origins are in.

[–]Richard_Parker 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Some but very Jews have a vast majority of are almost entirely if Western European genetic stock. Then you have the Ostjuden...