Identity

submitted by Tarrock from media.communities.win

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Psychosomatic 17 insightful - 2 fun17 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 2 fun -  (78 children)

Be proud of your white culture and heritage 🤘 Enough of this bollocks anti-white propaganda

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (77 children)

What, in your mind, is the "white culture and heritage" which unites people in Lapland, Serbia, Ireland, Spain, Belarus? There's no common music, food, heritage, religion, theatre, folk stories, anything at all really other than appearance of skin pigmentation. All those people aren't even all speaking Indo-European languages which would imply a singular heritage. So I think you're just a dumb racist who wants to imply skin appearance is all the culture that you were raised to have...which says a lot about you

[–]NuclearBadger 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (33 children)

You're a racist piece of shit for saying white people shouldn't be proud of themselves.

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (31 children)

Is that what you think I said?

You can be as proud or ashamed as you want to be.

But the level of pigmentation you were born with, shouldn't drive either emotion. That's crazy.

You're a racist piece of shit for saying white people

Well answer me then - what is "white people"? What is this state of peoplehood which unites muslim kosovars and animist suomi, Indo-Europeans andi Finno-Ugric and celts and Romans and Saxons? Because you're attesting it exists, so explain to me what it is

[–]NuclearBadger 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (30 children)

You called someone racist for saying be proud to be white.

So you are, by definition, judging by race.

Hur dur you have different genetics from the person across the street so what's white.

Yes, there are trash white countries. Being white is only 10% genetic. 90% culture. It's been diluted that much because it's the lowest common demoninator.

I'm quite happy to say there are plenty of white cultures that need to die out, but when there's a tsunami coming you don't give a shit that the fences need repainting do you.

[–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (29 children)

So you are, by definition, judging by race

No, by definition, I am judging by the things you're proud of. If you build an elaborate fake worldview about your pigmentation and then draw pride from it, I am not racist to call you an idiot

Being white is only 10% genetic. 90% culture

Wow 90%! Such a large percentage! You'd think, in that case, if it was so large, someone would be able to explain it to me? Please tell me what is this huge percentage of shared culture that unites bosniaks and Irish and Estonians and kosovars and Portuguese and Prussians?

[–]NuclearBadger 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (28 children)

You're living it you retard.

Also stop using English, use your own language. Hebrew perhaps.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (27 children)

Stop using English. That's what your argument has devolved to now that you've ran the course. Great job dipshit.

You're living it

Wow so it's a phenomenon personal to myself which I get to describe? Clearly you're unwilling to impart a definition upon the life i am living, so it's up to me to assess my life and answer, what is this thing which unites bosniaks and Scots but arbitrarily excludes Syriacs and Moors? Well, as long as you're letting me decide, I'll answer - there is no such thing, it's bullshit, you're making it up because you live in a racist colonial mindset

[–]NuclearBadger 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (26 children)

Show me a city made by niggers that is comparable to anything in white majority countries.

I'll wait.

E: Actually I wont, you won't find any.

White culture is the western world. We work for fun. We invent things for fun. We shit on the lowest ranks and fight to be better. There is now far too many leeches so the system that was built by whites is now being destroyed through gluttony and greed. White people are random. We have mass variations in everything, that's why it works. Low potato iq downys to geniuses so everyone can do something to help.

It won't matter soon if you want to be a tosser and say whites don't exist, good for you, but then I'm going to assume you have somali levels of iq, or you're a saboteur.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (25 children)

What a disgusting post.

Maybe the Nigerian ancient city of Eredo - which was the largest in the world in the middle ages, larger than Rome or Baghdad. Maybe Eredo would have been great if the Niger Delta wasn't pillaged by Europeans.

Or what about ancient Zanzibar, with its 20,000 years of beautiful stone structures. Maybe Zanzibar would have been great today, if it wasn't pillaged by Arabs.

Or what about that great home of learning Timbuktu, with its three ancient universities built in a beautiful and unique style? What would that city be today, if Mali wasn't pillaged by foreigners during the scramble for africa?

Or what about Mansa Musa, the richest man in the world, richer than all of Europe put together. What about the empire of Songhay with its high-tech and elaborate speedboats? What would their wonders be today, if not for all the pillaging?

[–]Bonn1770Republican Party 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Shalom, Rabbi.

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Is it just too difficult to deal with the content of what I wrote? Try. Give yourself 45 seconds to read and try responding to what I wrote. Let's see if you are capable

[–]Bonn1770Republican Party 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Jesus.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Narrator: he wasn't capable

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

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

    Lol ok boomer

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

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

      I hear there's a special on chicken fried steak at cracker barrel if it's not too late in the day for you to go out, pops

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

      What happened here u/Bonn1770 - why did you hit the delete button on your boomer antisemite nonsense

      [–]TooMuchClay 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

      Roman Christian heritage with the unique benefits of: Charity Rational and Reasoned Intellectual Investigation leading to: secular science metaphysics applied ethics Only significant reduction in use of slavery / involuntary labour (at least until it was reintroduced by Protestantism. Sort of).

      Although the English speaking world refers to the "Byzantiums" that brought Orthodox Christian civilization to Eastern Europe as "Non Romans" that is a lie by Gibbons and other British Empirialist Apologists. They considered themselves the Eastern Roman Empire and just as Roman as any point in history.

      So there is a common cultural root, slowly fading of course.

      Jewish Atheist i.e. Kefir culture rejects most of the above (as well as its own rich heritage) so would have to excluded as not sharing similar culture

      Also, paktun / afgani people can be "pigmented" and look more "white" facial feature wise than most European Latins yet they wouldn't be included in a shared cultural heritage, so your argument falls over a bit there

      [–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

      You're talking nonsense make-believe history

      Poland-Lithuania was pagan a thousand years after Rome

      Norway was a different pagan a thousand years after Rome

      Germany was christianised by the sword by Charlemagne hundreds of years after Rome

      It's simply not true that everyone with pale pigmentation has one single empire, religion, language group, culture, music, food

      There is no such thing as whiteness, outside of a colonial nationalist setting

      [–]Yin 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

      There is no such thing as whiteness, outside of a colonial nationalist setting

      That's like saying there's no such thing as blackness (black people) outside of black slaves: retarded and false.

      [–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

      No it's absolutely true, that there is no single concept of blackness that unites people from Tasmania and papau new guinea and Lesotho and cote d'Ivoire. How is that retarded? Are you suggesting there is a monoculture that unites all those places?

      [–]Yin 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

      There are only about 5 or so evolutionarily diverging core branches of humans.

      Race is a term for what is real and measurable. This is no different from any other set of animal(s) where aspects of the animal present themselves (intelligences, violent impulses, shapes/sizes/appearances, abilities), driven by their brains and bodies, driven by millions of years of very different breeding --- e.g. especially accelerators like blacks who interbred with certain sub-species which whites and asians never bred with and vice versa --- leading to blatantly observable and measurable spectrums of commonalities and differences among the races which are noticeably different on both the general level and tail extremes (intelligence, behaviors), which is the foundation of any potential civilizations and cultures comprised of those people (what those people will/can/may form) inherently.

      If you mean skin color only and strictly nothing else, then it depends. Two people each from different distant evolutionary branches may end up further apart than one is to where "whites" are, yet still both end up with similar skin colors, due to different or parallel effects dictating it so (like the sun, climate, survival of people who happen to have that pigment for tangential reasons). As it happens, someone with a little training can judge, with high accuracy based solely on a person's appearance, what core branch the person comes from at least but usually much more specific than that. You can also have albinos and extremely rare appearances but that doesn't change much else.

      Skin color in isolation is typically not what most people are referring to when they say "whites" and "blacks", especially when it comes to low IQs and globalists waging hatred against whites to reap political leverage.

      [–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

      This is a hate-filled pseudoscience that basically boils down to "X is a ground-based pokemon that evolves into Y. It is weak against bug attack types"

      There are only about 5 or so evolutionarily diverging core branches of humans

      And let me guess....you can determine the 5 based on appearance of pigmentation

      As it happens, someone with a little training can judge, with high accuracy based solely on a person's appearance

      Guessed right.

      So are Finno-Ugric "white" people in the same one of the five as Indo-European "white" people or are they two branches? It's pseudoscience.

      accelerators like blacks who interbred with certain sub-species

      You are horrible. Disgusting racial pseudoscience with zero basis in biology. Let's start with the fact that if two animals can produce a fertile baby, then they are by definition not a different species. So there is no breeding with other species. And there is no such thing as 'blacks' or 'whites', there is no definition which unites dark pigmented people from Tasmania and Lesotho and Chad. Nor any single definition which unites pale pigmented people from Estonia and Albania. What you are describing is appearance, phenotype, which is not a genotype different. And you're painting Pokémon style pseudoscience around it.

      globalists waging hatred against whites

      Wow what a surprise we find your victimhood at the root of all of it. Your desire to be the victim of a world built by colonial racists and foul pseudoscientists just like yourself

      [–]Yin 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

      You deny science.

      The only "hate" at present is your hatred of nature and of messengers who talk about nature.

      And let me guess....you can determine the 5 based on appearance of pigmentation

      I said most people can determine it "with high accuracy based solely on a person's appearance". Appearance by definition includes their face/body. However, given skin pigment alone (e.g. a few inch square photo of their skin), that would still be enough to guess with decent accuracy, especially if a trained machine is guessing. Core branches that are leading to races of whites, blacks, asians are also fairly highly correlated with the visual vestiges that are skin colors (it's a spectrum), and assuming the sampling doesn't include distantly mixed races.

      So are Finno-Ugric "white" people in the same one of the five as Indo-European "white" people

      Yes. There is a very large spectrum of breeding and migrations especially in those broad territories.

      You don't understand evolution over small vs. large divergences.

      You are horrible. Disgusting racial pseudoscience with zero basis in biology.

      I tell the truth, measurable by people's DNA, and you call me horrible. And for your ignorance and hatred, you are horrible.

      Let's start with the fact that if two animals can produce a fertile baby, then they are by definition not a different species. So there is no breeding with other species.

      Read carefully. I said sub-species, not species. Hence I implied they had an ability to breed.

      Various forms of "homo" groups/species roamed the earth and died out. Meanwhile, different ones interbred with different subsets of what we're now currently calling "homo sapiens", which apparently comes as a "hateful" shock to you. "Homo sapiens" under the current all-encompassing label are formed from different groups/races having different interbreeding at various levels with various now extinct homo-populations. In the case of sub-saharan blacks generally vs. whites and asians, this all happened to various exclusions of the other --- blacks with some human species ("species vs. sub-species" becomes semantically irrelevant here depending on the function of what's delineated vs. breed-ability) that others did not and vice versa.

      And there is no such thing as 'blacks' or 'whites',

      False. That's like saying there's no such thing as 'men' and 'women' because intersex people exist. It's dumb.

      there is no definition which unites dark pigmented people from Tasmania and Lesotho and Chad.

      Nonsense, and I doubt your claim. I'd have to examine their DNA. I'd wager the Lesotho and Chad people have high genetic similarities. Tasmania aborigines would probably be much further distanced from the other two.

      Nor any single definition which unites pale pigmented people from Estonia and Albania.

      False.

      What you are describing is appearance, phenotype, which is not a genotype different. And you're painting Pokémon style pseudoscience around it.

      No, I'm not. You are in denial about the existence of larger evolutionary divergences.

      You must be a redditor or a troll. Your emotional denialism about this topic is embarrassing yourself.

      [–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

      Ok well you're certain it exists and nobody else here can answer me so -

      Nor any single definition which unites pale pigmented people from Estonia and Albania.

      False.

      Let's hear it then. What is this thing called "white culture" which unites Finno-Ugric and Indo-Europeans. Because all you've said so far is, it's based on their appearance - ie, the appearance of being white. That's a tautology.

      What is the culture, music, food, religion, theatre, literature, language, ancient empire, ancestral origin, what is this thing that all white looking people have in common? Other than looking white?

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

      The Roman Empire only truly died in the 15th century with the Turkish conquest of Constantinople - the then capital. I'd say it was a husk after the Venetian crusade, but that's hardly "hundreds of years" after "Rome"

      Those parts of Europe converted "a thousand years later" were converted by the same Greceo-Roman Orthodox-Catholic culture. Hands down.

      You are showing your ignorance of history and making the same mistakes as those disagreeing with you: you've simplified history to the point of nonsense. But you are correct there is no "white" culture, the particular cultural thread they are grasping for can be found anywhere in any skin colour or ethnicity: to deny that is to betray the core tenants of what they supposedly admire

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

      What you're suggesting is that anyone who had ancestors existing contemporaneously with a fragment of Rome is...therefore white?

      Its nonsense. Virtually anyone who had children 2000 years ago is the ancestor of virtually everyone alive today. There is nothing special that the Baltic Crusaders did to pagan Lithuanians that imparted whiteness on them, at the point of a sword. Whether or not Byzantium stood at the time had no difference to the Baltic Crusade. I am telling you that whiteness is not a factor of being touched by Rome, you cannot bend or falsify history to make that fit

      Edit - just still trying to get my head round what is honestly one of the more retarded takes in this thread.

      So you're saying that if the Turks in Asia minor were faster at capturing istenpolis/Istanbul and wiping out the ERE...that if the Turks did that quicker - say, completing their conquests earlier than the Baltic crusade or the christianisation of the Norse - then because Rome didn't exist any more, neither the Norwegians or Lithuanians would be considered "white" today?

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

      Every European feels proud about the works of Mozart, Beethoven, Leonardo Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Galileo Galilei, Nikola Tesla, Leif Erikson, Christopher Columbus, etc.

      Black people can appreciate these geniuses on some superficial level just as I can appreciate some black people, but you can't really deeply connect to them, these people are "the other".

      Your gay argument fails in most countries too (Croatia, Italy, Belgium, whatever), but more importantly, applying the same logic, how is black culture a thing then?

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

      Ok so let's see.

      You're saying that there are geographical limits to Europe, say, the Urals and the bosphorus. And the humans on the European side have some genetic difference, such that, their genetic nature knows which side of the Urals or bosphorus the host lives. And on one side of the Urals, humans are genetically equipped to feel pride about Mozart, and on the other side, it's just a superficial level.

      So there's a gene (or some fundamental natural difference) that knows about Mozart, knows about geography, and expresses itself in real versus superficial pride depending on those geographical factors.

      Does that make sense to you? Do you feel like that's a good argument which you just made? Are you happy with that as a worldview?

      but more importantly, applying the same logic, how is black culture a thing then?

      As I have said a few times, there is no monoculture that encompasses Tasmania and Papau new guinea and Zimbabwe - places where people live who would be considered "black" in a colonial setting.

      What I think you're asking about, is the culture which arose from shared experience amongst African Americans. It just so happens that the name for that culture is Black - which is what is confusing you. There is no global black culture which is true for all people with certain levels of pigmentation. But there is a culture of African Americans which happens to be called Black.

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

      I don't know what you're babbling about, I didn't mention genetics at all, genetics is only a factor which makes you similar to other people, race is a feeling with the genetic component just underneath it.

      Second part is just delusional, black person living in Germany is far likely to befriend other black person he encounters than a white person and he's more likely to integrate himself in black community inside of German society than German society as a whole (well, until the German society becomes predominantly black, either genetically or spiritually lol).

      Also, even if there isn't a global black culture, so what? Culture isn't some static fundamental thing, they come and go, every modern state which we know of today has come to be as a mix of other tribes. Why can't you, following the same logic, create a pan-African or a pan-European state, without ignoring these basic biological facts which I mentioned in the paragraph above (i.e. that people will always associate with and prefer their own race)?

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

      You earlier told me that part of the fundamental makeup of human nature causes humans to diverge thusly.

      You said that "Europeans" have the biological capacity to feel true pride about Mozart. You contrasted that with what you called black people, who, according to you, are only equipped to feel a superficial pride about Mozart.

      So there's some fundamental part of human nature which is aware of Mozart, aware of whether it's "European" or "black" and expresses itself as either true or superficial pride.

      That's a load of hokum - you're already full of shit, just for suggesting that.

      But let's look at this new gibberish you posted.

      genetics is only a factor which makes you similar to other people, race is a feeling

      Right. It's an unscientific social construct. Finally some sense out of you.

      there isn't a global black culture, so what? Culture isn't some static fundamental thing, they come and go

      Right, so there isn't a black or white culture.

      Why are you arguing against me again? Please scroll to the top of the page and look again at the OP post. Because here you're agreeing that race is a social construct and "white" culture doesn't exist. So you agree with me that the OP post is full of shit.

      Our only disagreement is your theory about the Mozart Particle somewhere in the human body. Plus you seemed to think all Europeans have the same biological heritage. And you contrasted European with black, which is faulty too. So you're only 50% right today, half full of shit, half accidentally agreeing with me that the OP image is wrong

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

      You're just babbling and making shit up, I'll let you continue fighting with yourself.

      [–]Psychosomatic 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

      What makes you think white music, food, religion and theatre must be the same everywhere to be a shared culture? Or that it isn't shared?

      If we take music of white origin, there is a vast history of creating fantastic pieces of classical music, most played on instruments invented in white countries, played in theatres built by white people for the local white populous. In modern times, we have developed a vast array of music interests across genres including EDM, pop, rock, alternative, etc. To say white music is not shared or with any significant historical origin is wilfully ignorant.

      White culture has given rise to great advances in technology, philosophy, science and understanding of the universe. There have been stories told for hundreds of years of hero's and villains, and fairy tales such as Robin Hood or tales from the Brothers Grimm.

      The majority of white nations language stems from Latin, Slavic or Germanic, and have all crossed over in one way or another. The majority of the world now speaks one of these as a first or a second language.

      Colonialism itself stems from the European nature of exploration and curiosity, without such there would have not been such a rich and diverse interest in food, spice and shared culinary delights.

      You have no right to dismiss the thousand years of ansestry that I have traced back to the Viking conquests of the British Isles in the early 11th Century. To do so is vile and racist, and to deny any white culture and history is some 1984 shit.

      [–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

      What makes you think white music, food, religion and theatre must be the same everywhere

      Because I'm not a moron? And I know that European bosniaks have a very different religion to norse pagans which is very different again to Catholic Irish. And I know that Indo-Europeans languages have common ancestry which is different to Finno-Ugric. Both would be considered "white" in the colonial setting. So I am telling you for a fact that there is no monoculture of white music food religion and theatre

      If we take music of white origin

      No such thing as "white"...I think you mean, music from someone whose ethnicity would be considered "white" in a colonial setting

      there is a vast history of creating fantastic pieces

      The creation of music, is not the shared culture. All humans everywhere create music

      To say white music is not shared or with any significant historical origin

      There's no such thing as "white music" and there is no single historical origin of music created across Indo-European and Finno-Ugric people who would be considered "white" in a colonial setting

      White culture has given rise to

      There's no such thing. Every human's culture all over the world has given rise to the same things

      The majority of white nations language stems from Latin, Slavic or Germanic

      Well hold on now - because that actually sounds like three "white" cultures you're aware of. Why are Slavs the same culture as the Latin nations? Of course they are different cultures. Slavs eat different foods to French or Spanish, different music, religion, ancestral religion, experience with ancestral empire, different food, theatre, literature etc etc. Yet both are derived from Indo-European! So the Finns are stranger still and even more different than Slavs!

      Colonialism itself stems from the European nature

      There is no single European nature - how did African Carthage and Asian Tyre have so many colonies if colonialism is European in nature?

      You have no right to dismiss the thousand years of ansestry that I have traced back to the Viking conquests of the British Isles in the early 11th Century

      Bruh you dumbo everyone alive today has thousands of years of ancestry. Virtually everyone alive during the Viking conquests who had children is the ancestor of virtually everyone alive today

      [–]Psychosomatic 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

      Ah, you believe there is no such thing as the concept of humans, race, history, ancestral origins, or any relevance of such. Got it, you're an imbicile. Take a white thumbs up, imbicile 👍

      [–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

      No, just race. Race is a social concept and not grounded in science. The good thing about science is that it has actual evidence you can point to - so if you think race is scientific, you can easily demonstrate that.

      Humans, history, ancestral origins - I don't think I said anywhere that these don't exist. I think if you really thought I was saying that humans and history don't exist, your response to me would be a bit different. That's how I know you're a histrionic whining baby

      [–]Psychosomatic 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

      I see. We are continually told to acknowledge black culture and black history, this too must too must also be incorrect as black would be unscientific, they are merely human culture and human history? My original comment would still be valid as I denounced anti-white propaganda.

      [–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

      I am telling you that there is no monoculture of blackness which encompasses Tasmania and Lesotho and Senegal.

      What I think you're referring to is the shared experience of African Americans. It so happens that the name for that shared culture is Black, which happens to be the name of the perception of skin pigmentation. Black culture exists for African Americans. But there is no singular culture for papau new guinea and somalia.

      [–]Psychosomatic 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

      Behold my pride in the shared experience of being White British 🖕

      [–]Site_rly_sux 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

      Oh ok. So would that be the saxon-speaking english or the gaelic-speaking highlander or the brythonic-speaking cornish. Because those are three separate cultures with different ancient history, ancestry, religion, experience of Rome, food, language, literature, theatre, political organisation, ethnicity, haploid genotype, etc etc. It's not a monoculture except for in your imagination maybe. There is still a border between the Brits and the Celts. They kill each other, today, because they don't think they're the same people, like you seem to.

      And of course. None of those are the same as Slavic or Finno-Ugric. Which is what I've been saying this whole thread: that there is no common whiteness. And you seem to be agreeing with me, here

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

      I've seen many of your posts and it is obvious you have a deep hatred towards white people. Are you jewish or what?