[Oberrheiner]

My theory is that viking fetishism is the tree that hides the forest and that what people really aspire to is europe before christianity.

Nowadays with the internet it takes only two minutes to read about the christianization of scandinavia, the baltic states, or even germany, (Charlemagne, Irminsul etc).
People basically had the choice between converting or being executed.
And of course the winners write most of the history so we were told our ancestors were weak and degenerate.

It's hard not to see parallels with the currently ongoing islamic invasion of europe .. and if they succeed they will probably also write that we were weak and degenerate in their history books, and it's going to be hard to convince people it wasn't the case.

This combined with the fact that (at least here in western europe) it's simply impossible to find a christian congregation which is not pro-jews and pro-muslims, which means anti white christians.
Ain't turning against your customers a beautiful business plan .. but I digress.
Anyway, many people nowadays simply believe that desert religions can and will only bring you the desert, both physically and morally.

One could also say something about the inherently dysgenic nature of society, or the want for a life more in accordance with your genetics, or whether organized religion can really be anything else but a race to the bottom, but I guess that's best left for another topic.

[Trumpian]

(12-20-2018 05:07 AM)Oberrheiner Wrote:  

My theory is that viking fetishism is the tree that hides the forest and that what people really aspire to is europe before christianity.

Nowadays with the internet it takes only two minutes to read about the christianization of scandinavia, the baltic states, or even germany, (Charlemagne, Irminsul etc).
People basically had the choice between converting or being executed.
And of course the winners write most of the history so we were told our ancestors were weak and degenerate.

It's hard not to see parallels with the currently ongoing islamic invasion of europe .. and if they succeed they will probably also write that we were weak and degenerate in their history books, and it's going to be hard to convince people it wasn't the case.

This combined with the fact that (at least here in western europe) it's simply impossible to find a christian congregation which is not pro-jews and pro-muslims, which means anti white christians.
Ain't turning against your customers a beautiful business plan .. but I digress.
Anyway, many people nowadays simply believe that desert religions can and will only bring you the desert, both physically and morally.

One could also say something about the inherently dysgenic nature of society, or the want for a life more in accordance with your genetics, or whether organized religion can really be anything else but a race to the bottom, but I guess that's best left for another topic.

It's no coincidence that Europe's greatest periods of innovation were in antiquity (Ancient Greece & Rome), and then during the Enlightenment when those civilizations (and their values) were rediscovered.

The desert Semite cult has been our ball and chain. Who knows where'd we be without it. Probably ruling the galaxy.

[Trumpian]

(12-20-2018 03:34 AM)Wutang Wrote:  

(12-18-2018 01:26 AM)Trumpian Wrote:  

(12-17-2018 02:57 PM)Wutang Wrote:  

(12-17-2018 01:38 AM)Trumpian Wrote:  

(12-16-2018 01:06 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

This post made me laugh more than any other on the forum. I can't quite grasp why, maybe because it's so true. The bit about the plane literally had me laughing out loud.

Vikings are still around, bud. They're called scandinavians.

Those countries top the human development index every year, and every muslim salivates at the opportunity to immigrate there and get a welfare check.

My second point from OP:

These white nationalists also have a huge fetish for Northern Europeans but aren't these the people who the most infected with SJWism? Sweden in particular is always pointed out as the prime example of what happens to a country when it buys fully into Cultural Marxism. If Nordics are supposed to be infused with warrior bloodlines why have they more then any other people been unable to resist leftism?

To answer your question, I'm not sure what kind of leftism you're referring too. I don't have any problem with the scandi welfare state. Just doesn't work when you're inviting muslim scum en masse. The SJWism is a big issue there, and throughout the West. Doesn't change the fact they're super developed countries the whole rest of the world is trying to migrate too.

The welfare state was one of the aspects I was thinking about, especially since one of the biggest fears of a lot of people on our part of the internet is the threat of socialism and how so many young people are embracing it.

Is it?

Socialism works just fine in Scandinavia. They have a higher quality of life and social mobility than the U.S does. The issue is migrants taking advantage of it.

Quote:

What I was mostly thinking of would be the SJW aspects, especially feminism which is seen as both the cause and effect of the worst parts of Western modern society. There's a saying I've heard before: "If Tumblr was a country, then it would be Sweden".

More specifically, I was wondering how to square the image of the Nordic countries being paragon of masculinity with how it's also currently the most feminist part of the world and how it's held up as the primary example of what an ideal society should be like by soy consumers. There's also the Muslim situation you referred to and I'm not sure how to reconcile the Nordic Viking mystique with the refugees welcome stuff that is going on there.

I don't really even know how to dissect this. Yes, Scandinavia and Western civilization as a whole have some serious issues. Whats your point? Should we not celebrate our heroes and legends because their contemporaries have made some mistakes? Really not making much sense here...

[ilostabet]

Just leaving this here:

Technically, the Greeks and others were not pedophiles, who pursue children, for they focused their attention on young men who were well past puberty and ready to begin military training. The ancients regarded homosexual relationships as completely consistent with marriage and family life, and they frowned upon men who formed exclusively homosexual relationships. Homosexual relationships were also bound by a host of rules and taboos. There was nothing of the modern amoral free-for-all. But there is no question that homosexual behavior was not only tolerated by ancient Aryan peoples, it was considered normal, in some cases even ideal. It was ascribed to the gods (Zeus and Ganymede) and lauded by poets, philosophers, and historians. It is hard to maintain hateful Jewish attitudes toward homosexuality if one really understands and appreciates the greatness of classical pagan civilization.

[Mage]

(12-20-2018 05:47 AM)ilostabet Wrote:  

Just leaving this here:

Technically, the Greeks and others were not pedophiles, who pursue children, for they focused their attention on young men who were well past puberty and ready to begin military training. The ancients regarded homosexual relationships as completely consistent with marriage and family life, and they frowned upon men who formed exclusively homosexual relationships. Homosexual relationships were also bound by a host of rules and taboos. There was nothing of the modern amoral free-for-all. But there is no question that homosexual behavior was not only tolerated by ancient Aryan peoples, it was considered normal, in some cases even ideal. It was ascribed to the gods (Zeus and Ganymede) and lauded by poets, philosophers, and historians. It is hard to maintain hateful Jewish attitudes toward homosexuality if one really understands and appreciates the greatness of classical pagan civilization.

First of all one must question the author, his motives his agenda. There is no need to accept what you said as true just because "you just left it here".

Next - homosexuality is a whole different issue then faith. The same with slavery. Clearly even Jewish and Christian people practiced slavery in past. Now we do so no more. Should we denounce Christianity because it practiced slavery in past? maybe Christianity should be denounced because priests engage in homosexual relationships occasionally?

As any modern Christian would take what is good from Bible and abandon slavery and other obsolete things - so should a modern Pagan be able to take what is good from ancient Paganism without universally widespread ancient vices like slavery and homosexuality.

About ancient homosexuality - there were homosexuals in all societies. And just like today - there were opinions of varying strictness for and against this practice. If we label whole cultures and civilizations as homosexual because there existed a minority (at times more tolerated at times less so) that practiced homosexuality then no one escapes this label even the most Christian of societies.

Generally there are two main agendas of people who smear whole societies as homosexual based on action of the minorities in these societies:

1)Homosexuals to justify their actions
2)Believers in another faith, creed, dogma, ideology who do so to discredit the targeted society.

The truth is that any society that managed to survive, prosper and expand for multiple centuries was predominantly heterosexual. Otherwise it would have entered negative birthrates and would be conquered by more aggressive outside tribes. Like modern Europe.

[Aszhaeleos]

I’m not sure why people only associate Vikings with the country Sweden. Icelanders and Russians are said to have Viking blood too.

Further, Vikings weren’t exactly these brainless barbarians. They were quite advanced in some ways and highly proficient mariners.

Doesn’t really matter now. History has been so subverted by the usual suspects getting a true, fair and balanced depiction to the masses would be nigh impossible at this point and won’t want to be heard by the diversity/victim crowd.

[ilostabet]

@Mage,

I agree with everything you said. I also think it describes pretty well what happened to pagan Europe, but I assume you disagree. But to me it is pretty funny that the common argument (not saying yours, but already repeated in this thread and others) is:

- pagan Europeans were great warriors with strong societies
- Christianity is a cuck religion for the weak
- Christianity conquered pagan societies by force

wait, what? how are these compatible? It's either or.

I also hear the slightly altered version of being conquered by subversion, with Jesus being the first jewish subverter - insert 'dead kike on a stick' joke here. But, assuming this is true (which I don't, being a Christian), just as in our times, subversion is a two way street. You can only subvert someone (or, on a larger scale, a society) if he or it wants to be subverted. That is my view anyway.

Both descriptions, and especially the latter, seem to me a form of avoiding responsibility for one's actions or for one's tribe's actions - on a historical scale and applied to today. I also don't like that my tribe has become a bunch of hedonist weaklings with no conception of Natural Law, but I'm not going to make excuses for them and pass their flaws (and my flaws) as virtues that some other people exploited - something I have alluded to in this thread. You can only exploit a vulnerability if it exists.

I admit, I was trolling with the previous post. The truth is I have no dog in this fight. My ancestors have been Christian for over a millennia - there wasn't a definite nation or people before Christianity. If I go further than that, my ancestors were a bunch of different tribes (goths, celts, lusitanians) with different beliefs, social structures and warring between themselves, that inhabited the westernmost part of the Iberian Peninsula. According to the Romans, when they got here, they were a bunch of uncivilized cunts - and note, they were still Pagan at this point [EDIT: the Romans, I mean]. Were they telling the truth, or is it simply a 'history is written by the victors' kind of thing? I don't know.

What I know is that Portugal has been a definite nation, with established borders for almost a thousand years, and it was created as a Christian kingdom to expell the Moors.

So when I look back, the past that I have to pay tribute to is not Pagan, but Christian. All the great things my people did, they did it in the name of Christ and for His glory.

It might be different for Nordics, Germanics, etc - and well, fair enough. But to me it all sounds like 'right wing wicca' - as the Becthloff, which I don't like, put it.

[Oberrheiner]

(12-20-2018 05:18 AM)Trumpian Wrote:  

The desert Semite cult has been our ball and chain.

Frankly, I don't know.

The version of catholicism which was usual in France after the war seemed like a good compromise.
It had many benefits, even though yes it had some drawbacks too (the biggest one being that it left us extremely vulnerable to subversion from, well, let's say more or less related cults).

What I saw from some orthodoxs in the FSU also looked pretty solid to me.
Well, if you already agreed to the general idea of an abstract religion of course, which can be debated (I'm still not sure myself honestly).

(12-20-2018 05:47 AM)ilostabet Wrote:  

Just leaving this here:

Yeah well considering how it is pretty much impossible to know the definitive truth about something which happened not even 80 years ago, I would sincerely advise caution and critical thinking on any text disparaging our ancestors from thousand years ago.
The objective truth is that we know close to nothing about anything from this time, and that history was rarely more than a propaganda tool.

You are free however to think whatever you want, including that your forebears were gays and pedophiles.
If in 50 years the caliphate says we were all spirit cooking with the clintons or fucking boys on some pedophile island I hope you will be able to be proud of your (grand-)children not believing this bullshit.
And even when they get shown the teen magazines from nowadays teaching how to best get fucked in the ass regardless of your "gender", I hope they will have the balls to say (and believe) that no, their family was not like that.

[ilostabet]

Quote:

(12-20-2018 05:47 AM)ilostabet Wrote:  

Just leaving this here:

Yeah well considering how it is pretty much impossible to know the definitive truth about something which happened not even 80 years ago, I would sincerely advise caution and critical thinking on any text disparaging our ancestors from thousand years ago.
The objective truth is that we know close to nothing about anything from this time, and that history was rarely more than a propaganda tool.

You are free however to think whatever you want, including that your forebears were gays and pedophiles.
If in 50 years the caliphate says we were all spirit cooking with the clintons or fucking boys on some pedophile island I hope you will be able to be proud of your (grand-)children not believing this bullshit.
And even when they get shown the teen magazines from nowadays teaching how to best get fucked in the ass regardless of your "gender", I hope they will have the balls to say (and believe) that no, their family was not like that.

As I said to Mage, I left it for trolling purposes only. The article and the author are not disparaging our pagan ancestors (assuming we have the same, which is doubtful, since pagan Europe was not united, quite the opposite). He is posing it as a good thing, which I find funny, hence the trolling.

Part of the reason I find white nationalism and neopaganism so lacking is that this shared past never existed. As I said in my previous post, the unity in Portugal, for example, is contemporary with Christian conversion - it was not present before - as told by Roman Pagans. And to make matters worse, I don't feel a kinship with, say, Norwegians, more than I do with Morrocans. To me they are both foreign and nothing alike myself as peoples. Not to mention nordicists don't even consider southern europeans white - which is fine, I am not blonde and blue eyed, so I don't consider myself white either. If it means anything, it means blonde and blue eyed, in my opinion. But not much else. Is it a shared European identity? There isn't one outside of Chrisendom. Maybe there is one now among Western Europeans of tolerance, acceptance, inclusion, cuckery, perversion, apathy. But I want no part of it.

If the calyphate says what you refered to, they are not far from the truth. The common man may not engage in spirit cooking or the elite's pedophilia, but he is apathetic towards all the subversion, in fact, he 'loves big brother' and can't get enough of it. He consumes everything he has been fed, and asks for more. He has invited his own destruction and, from all accounts, he is a pervert himself, allowing all of this to take root. He is not concerned when blatant satanic shit gets thrown in his face, or when little girls are sexualized on tv and allows his daughters to partake in this culture, without a second thought. He is not concerned with all the cultural poison, he consumes it himself. The amount of people that see through this and consciously oppose is very small.

So, guilt by complacency, at the very least. And that's all it takes to be conquered.

[Oberrheiner]

(12-20-2018 08:09 AM)ilostabet Wrote:  

- pagan Europeans were great warriors with strong societies
- Christianity is a cuck religion for the weak
- Christianity conquered pagan societies by force

wait, what? how are these compatible? It's either or.

That's easy to explain.
I alluded to it before but was too lazy to write something lengthy, and this will be.
Ok seeing members with hundreds or even thousands of messages getting banned left and right does make you think twice too

Anyway, here's the story :
I once met a guy who was trying to start his own cult/army.
He made lengthy speeches, and most of it made a lot of sense.
However from time to time he would intersperse some things which did not, maybe a little flat earth here, water/blood memory or whatever .. it seemed strange but I didn't think much of it at the time.
Why didn't I think much of it would be interesting but it would probably dilute the point too much.

Anyway, at some point it occurred to me : what the guy was going for was selection bias.
He was trying to filter his followers to get the most "open-minded" ones (or gullible .. or stupid maybe), so that they would follow his orders without questioning them too much.
That's the story (well the interesting part of it anyway), please keep it in mind for what follows.

Now imagine you were a pre-christian european.
You are living with your (smaller than dunbar's number) tribe in the wilderness, you fought hard to keep the wolves and the bears in check, you selected your wives for the best genes and made many strong and smart sons - you succeeded basically.
For you it's normal that weaker people died, it's part of what is needed to keep your bloodline strong and you were ready to die for your family just the same.
Except you didn't, because you're the baddest motherfucker of them all.

You're not very spiritual, but you worship the big river running in the middle of your territory (because it gives you water to keep you alive), the mountains around (which keep your territory safe from most intruders), the forest (which gives you game to hunt for sustenance), and probably some of the huge carnivores which roam there .. and that's it basically.
So it's not that you are related to your gods like mage said somewhere else, more that you walk among them and they walk among you.

I know, nice fantasy.

Anyway, now some guys with strange accents come and tell you that you are wrong, you need to stop your ways and submit to the one and only god which you can't see and can't speak to, otherwise bad things are going to happen to you and yours.
They also tell you that god made everything on earth and only he can give life, except you know that's bullshit, midwives helped your pregnant wife for a couple of hours and your sons came out, you know perfectly who gives life and how.
They say bad things will happen if you don't worship their god, but what happens if you stop worshiping the river and the forest and suddenly there is nothing to eat and drink anymore because they were the real gods ?
You can't really risk that, can you ? I mean come on, Pascal's wager and all

Honestly from your point of view these people look weak and crazy, so what do you do ?
Feed them to the wolves, right ?

However your problem is that these people work like the cult guy I told you about.
Instead of being alphas and building their own tribe, they know they don't stand a chance in a world where nature makes the laws, so they recruit the subhumans, have them believe in a mixed doctrine with some good (who can argue with the 10 commandments ? rhetorical question, I could but that's besides the point) and some requiring suspension of disbelief (invisible god, virgin birth, life after death, etc).

The hard to believe part is not important, it's just there to get the not too smart ones.
First they need to believe in something bigger than themselves and/or their tribe, preferably something nobody can prove or disprove easily.
Once they accepted that they need to serve it, it's easy to brainwash them to make them serve somebody else (the pope, the caliph ..).
After all they accepted already that since they couldn't talk with god it was acceptable to believe that you could substitute his actual words you can't hear by some texts which humans wrote.
Yeah, you can't speak with god but some people were more equal than others and they did, good thing they were kind enough to put it on paper.
After that the next step would be to do the same but orally : the priest tells you what you should do and how, and you do it.

So now you religious guys have an army of morons which you can send to kill the neighbouring tribes.
Ok they'are all badasses, but what can they do against an army 10.000 strong ?
As someone once said (can't remember who but will gladly take references), above a certain threshold quantity has a quality of its own.

So to me it's really a question of which kind of society we want to have.
This is also what I meant when I said any civilization is dysgenic by definition, nothing great and imperishable was ever accomplished without an army of slaves as far as I can tell (counter-examples welcome).
And an army of slaves implies that the few alphas have to die to make place for innumerable betas.

TLDR quantity over quality.

[ilostabet]

@Oberrheiner

My reply regarding the process of subversion is already in my post just above it. I don't buy into that explanation (surprise) and I see the same contradiction (you simply mixed the physical conquering with the subversion conquering).

Speaking for myself and my national circumstances (again, for Germanics and Nordics it might be different), I don't need to resuscitate an identity. My identity as Portuguese is alive and well, and as I explained, it does not exist without Christianity. I could, theoretically, go back to a mix of celtic, lusitanian, gothic, etc, but it wouldn't be an identity, because such unity as it exists in my blood and culture did not exist before.

For the thousand years my country has existed, it was Christian, and knew what it was - ethnically and culturally, in spirit and in blood. Ever since it abandoned Christianity in practice, it has lost a big chunk of its identity, replacing it with consumerist crap (the same one that has taken root everywhere else in the West).

[Oberrheiner]

Ah ok, you posted while I was typing all this so I missed your post, but I understand your position.
Just to be clear, I am not a white nationalist or a neopagan, and I have nothing against christians, I'm just trying to figure out whether it makes sense at all (the christian doctrine itself).

And I am also not trying to resuscitate an identity for myself, I am half german half russian (to make it very short, in reality it's much more complicated than that but who cares) so what would my identity be anyway ?
What would be the land my ancestors fought for ?
Some polish friends said well duh, poland - I love that kind of black humor by the way .. cheers to them.

Anyway, to me it is clear that we will never get back to a tribal society, whether that would be desirable or not.
So the question is more :
- do we try and fix the dysgeny (and then how)
- or do we accept that things won't change (and then how do we avoid becoming cynical nihilists).

[ilostabet]

Quote:

I'm just trying to figure out whether it makes sense at all (the christian doctrine itself).

All you can do is read the Bible, the Church Fathers and talk to intelligent Christians. But in the end, you either have faith or you don't, and it's not something that comes all of a sudden (for most people anyway), it certainly wasn't for me.

[Wutang]

(12-20-2018 05:34 AM)Trumpian Wrote:  

(12-20-2018 03:34 AM)Wutang Wrote:  

(12-18-2018 01:26 AM)Trumpian Wrote:  

(12-17-2018 02:57 PM)Wutang Wrote:  

(12-17-2018 01:38 AM)Trumpian Wrote:  

Vikings are still around, bud. They're called scandinavians.

Those countries top the human development index every year, and every muslim salivates at the opportunity to immigrate there and get a welfare check.

My second point from OP:

These white nationalists also have a huge fetish for Northern Europeans but aren't these the people who the most infected with SJWism? Sweden in particular is always pointed out as the prime example of what happens to a country when it buys fully into Cultural Marxism. If Nordics are supposed to be infused with warrior bloodlines why have they more then any other people been unable to resist leftism?

To answer your question, I'm not sure what kind of leftism you're referring too. I don't have any problem with the scandi welfare state. Just doesn't work when you're inviting muslim scum en masse. The SJWism is a big issue there, and throughout the West. Doesn't change the fact they're super developed countries the whole rest of the world is trying to migrate too.

The welfare state was one of the aspects I was thinking about, especially since one of the biggest fears of a lot of people on our part of the internet is the threat of socialism and how so many young people are embracing it.

Is it?

Socialism works just fine in Scandinavia. They have a higher quality of life and social mobility than the U.S does. The issue is migrants taking advantage of it.

Quote:

What I was mostly thinking of would be the SJW aspects, especially feminism which is seen as both the cause and effect of the worst parts of Western modern society. There's a saying I've heard before: "If Tumblr was a country, then it would be Sweden".

More specifically, I was wondering how to square the image of the Nordic countries being paragon of masculinity with how it's also currently the most feminist part of the world and how it's held up as the primary example of what an ideal society should be like by soy consumers. There's also the Muslim situation you referred to and I'm not sure how to reconcile the Nordic Viking mystique with the refugees welcome stuff that is going on there.

I don't really even know how to dissect this. Yes, Scandinavia and Western civilization as a whole have some serious issues. Whats your point? Should we not celebrate our heroes and legends because their contemporaries have made some mistakes? Really not making much sense here...

For the first point, read the Trump thread which I'm sure you do considering your name. A constant fear expressed on there is that immigrants coming to the US will bring the failed policies of their original nations, socialism specifically, and transform the US into what their mother nation is originally like.

As for the second, you don't see the incongruency to hold a certain peoples as being the ideal of the warrior noble savage that is destined to rule and to look at the actual people in these times and not to only see that they are living up to that ideal, but going in the completely opposite direction? It's not just a case of making a few mistakes here and there but rather a completely transformation of the character of the people, you could say it's a degeneration if you want to use stronger language. With white nationalist circles there's typically a lot of talk about blood lines, blood memory, and racial archetypes unique to each different people. Surely the Viking blood, if it's as hardy and with the unique properties that some people are fetishizing about should be able to resist this?

There's also the incongruency of celebrating the vikings for their hardy, heroic culture and lifestyle but then also celebrating the modern social democratic Nordic nations which is built around minimizing risk and not being a hero (see Jante law) and being the epitome of the globalistic, neo-liberal society that so many on this forum despise. Modern Scandinavian society is basically a secular Christian Lutheran one, hardly the type of society a viking would want to live in.

[Mage]

@ilostabet
@Oberrheiner

Regarding how Chritianity overcame Paganism:

Basicly Oberheiers explanation holds many truths on which I would like to expand.

Christianity functioned a lot like leftism by subverting both the very top and the very bottom.

To subvert the Top - kings and nobles considering joining Christianity were convinced with:
1)Joining the "union" of Christian lands - pretty much in the simlar fashion how today European Union forces it's policies by saying "you don''t wanna be the one strange loner left out do you?
2)Marriage proposals.
3)Displaying riches and splenodr of Rome (often nobles were taken to brainwashing tours into Rome) and explaining the remains of the great Rome as achievements of Christianity.
4)By demonstrating how monoteistic religion gives much more tighter control over population then polytheistic and panteistic one. In polytheism and panteism any man can unite with gods in nature, by praying in forests, mountains, rivers. Under Christianity you must come to Church to pray - there you can be brainwashed. Also you can now introduce the tax for building the Church. Also since there is only one God, the idea of one absolute ruler representing the will of that God, also suddenly starts making much more sense then a tribal voting system and chieftains with smaller power.

Then when the top nobles got corruped by the power and affiliations conversion to Christianity would bring - they would do what Oberrheiner described. Basily they would make some sort of midieval analogue to welfare to convert the most weakest members of society. They would give to charity, call themselves defenders of the poor, the widows, bastards, the disinherited. Church would do charity to feed these poor people and evangelize to them. Then gradualy some unloyal pagan landowner could get stripped of his riches and these could be given to a converted bastard.

The middle class was the last to be converted. Christianity spread from the top and the bottom. It was spread by those who needed slaves and by those who wanted to be slaves. The free, the self-sufficient, the honourable, the proud (this word go subverted by Christins too), the industrios, the wise, they got subverted last and they kept the pagan lore covertly alive and thank's to them some of it has reached the present day, altrough it had gone much more cryptic and hard to decypher to survive the Christian oversight.

[Cobra]

I think everyone has a We waz Kangz ideology about their particular group.

The issue and problems come when you start restricting some of the groups and allowing others.

[nomadbrah]

Honestly the vikings are fairly boring compared to previous Nordic/Germanic expansions. What do we know about the Goths and their rampage around half the known world? Vikings are just previous norse with better ships. The Vikings are most interesting through the Normanns who shaped modern Europe in very dramatic ways and left a lasting legacy in what became the British Empire begat the US.

This is the interesting part of history, that it connects us as people, and what the enemy wants to take from us. They want to remove the understanding that a Swede is an American is a Brith is a Normann. These links go far and wide, we're connected with Russia through Greece (they from christianity, we from philosophy). We're cousins way back with the Persians and the Armenians, some of the Indians have our eyes, while the Buddhists in Japan worship the Indo-European Swastika. The world is connected through history and only a few stand out as enemies and truly incompatible cultures.

[infowarrior1]

The Pagans believe it or not also converted due to what that they saw as miraculous signs and wonders. Seems to happen pretty frequently when Christianity is entering new ground.

[infowarrior1]

(12-20-2018 06:57 AM)Mage Wrote:  

(12-20-2018 05:47 AM)ilostabet Wrote:  

Just leaving this here:

Technically, the Greeks and others were not pedophiles, who pursue children, for they focused their attention on young men who were well past puberty and ready to begin military training. The ancients regarded homosexual relationships as completely consistent with marriage and family life, and they frowned upon men who formed exclusively homosexual relationships. Homosexual relationships were also bound by a host of rules and taboos. There was nothing of the modern amoral free-for-all. But there is no question that homosexual behavior was not only tolerated by ancient Aryan peoples, it was considered normal, in some cases even ideal. It was ascribed to the gods (Zeus and Ganymede) and lauded by poets, philosophers, and historians. It is hard to maintain hateful Jewish attitudes toward homosexuality if one really understands and appreciates the greatness of classical pagan civilization.

Snip

I think you missed the laughable part. That of the fact that opposition to homosexuality is inherently Jewish.

[Wutang]

(12-20-2018 07:53 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

Honestly the vikings are fairly boring compared to previous Nordic/Germanic expansions. What do we know about the Goths and their rampage around half the known world? Vikings are just previous norse with better ships. The Vikings are most interesting through the Normanns who shaped modern Europe in very dramatic ways and left a lasting legacy in what became the British Empire begat the US.

I think the Lutheran Christian societies that the Scandinavians transformed into from their Pagan Viking roots are superior. If Northern Europeans want to engage in we wuz kangz type cheerleading, then I think it would be better for them to look to sort of societies kings like Gustavus Adolphus or Carolus Rex created.

It's a personal bias on my part since I never found tribal, barbarian noble savage type societies to be appealing the same way a lot of men do. When I read about the conflicts between Americans vs Native Americans, I always cheered for the Americans. Same with the Romans fighting off the Germanic tribes or the Han Chinese fighting the Xiongnu and Mongols, I always found the empire side to be more appealing.

[66Scorpio]

For anyone who considers themselves Anglo-Saxon, there you go. The Angles and the Saxons were Vikings who took over Britain in the 5th century. The name England comes from Angland as Wessux and Sussux mean West Saxony and South Saxony. The Norwegian Vikings got into the act a good three centuries later. The Normans, who conquered England in 1066, were named after North (Norse) Men who had conquered Northern France. Over the next 800 years or so Britain became the greatest empire the world has ever seen, controlling over a quarter of the earth. America, the former colony of Britain, took over during the first half of the 20th century.

It's been downhill since then. China will be the leading superpower by the end of the 21st century. The Anglosphere is collapsing in the wake of mass immigration - both legal and illegal - from non-northern-european countries. The term WASP is used pejoratively as the values of today's Anglo-Saxons do not fit with the "inclusive" multicult narrative.

So some people naturally look back to the cultures and the peoples who started the ball rolling down the road to make Britain and then America great. It's not a surprise that "Make America Great Again" attracts a certain element who fetishize Vikings.

[nomadbrah]

(12-20-2018 08:36 PM)Wutang Wrote:  

(12-20-2018 07:53 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

Honestly the vikings are fairly boring compared to previous Nordic/Germanic expansions. What do we know about the Goths and their rampage around half the known world? Vikings are just previous norse with better ships. The Vikings are most interesting through the Normanns who shaped modern Europe in very dramatic ways and left a lasting legacy in what became the British Empire begat the US.

I think the Lutheran Christian societies that the Scandinavians transformed into from their Pagan Viking roots are superior. If Northern Europeans want to engage in we wuz kangz type cheerleading, then I think it would be better for them to look to sort of societies kings like Gustavus Adolphus or Carolus Rex created.

It's a personal bias on my part since I never found tribal, barbarian noble savage type societies to be appealing the same way a lot of men do. When I read about the conflicts between Americans vs Native Americans, I always cheered for the Americans. Same with the Romans fighting off the Germanic tribes or the Han Chinese fighting the Xiongnu and Mongols, I always found the empire side to be more appealing.

It's hard to sympathize with these kind of people unless you've lived a lifestyle that at least somehow approximates their way of life. If you want an understand of vikings, go live in Iceland for a year or in a Norwegian fjord.

I think you'd probably change your mind.

You live a place like this and you want to talk about roman gossip?

[Jozi]

(12-20-2018 05:34 AM)Trumpian Wrote:  

Socialism works just fine in Scandinavia. They have a higher quality of life and social mobility than the U.S does. The issue is migrants taking advantage of it.

It only ever "worked" because they were homogenous societies. The Scandinavian countries weren't always socialistic. In fact, their wealth was created before socialism got a foothold.

You can't compare Scandinavian countries from the past to America today. The reason America isn't great now is not because of pseudo-capitalism, it would be even worse with Scandinavian-type socialism.

It's all about demographics.