[Wutang]

Also forgot to add in the OP: the Muslims at least at one point in their history were actually maintaining civilizations and empires. The Vikings never did. It's one thing to be plundering helpless monks and nuns and villagers and then fleeing before the king's men (people that could actually fight back) would show up. It's another to be able to subjugate another tribe/nation and then establish your own on top of it which the Muslims have done. There's been no such thing as a Viking empire. You don't establish an empire or civilization by razing monasteries and remote villages and then running off with the spoils. There's been a Swedish Empire and they had the Caroleans that were fine warriors. If WMs were instead glorying that I wouldn't find it as silly as romanticizing a bunch of guys in mud huts that didn't build anything nearly as impressive to the peoples to the south they kept robbing.

Also there's been a couple of posts in here glorifying might is right as the ultimate law of who should be allowed to survive on the earth. If that's the case, then aren't the descendants of the Vikings failing massively in that regard and have forfeited their right to live on?

[nomadbrah]

Christianity is seen as a jewish cult of multiculturalism by many white nationalists.

It's not really vikings that are popular with white nationalists but Norse mythology. As Christianity spread quite violently Northwards, there was also a concerted effort to destroy the heritage of Germanic paganism and myth, so the only surviving written testament to pagan Germanic lifestyle, religion and myth is what's left in the Icelandic sagas, which are written a few hundred years after the Viking age.

Norse religion and mythology just resonates strongly with many people of Germanic heritage, which is understandable since it is the legacy of their ancestors and their ancestral lands. It hits some spiritual spots in the soul.

[reciproke]

Quote:

The vikings are held up as an ideal that white men should be attempting to live up to with a big part of their appeal being that they are supposed to be exemplar noble savages, fierce warriors that aren't restrained by today's leftist SJW society and are free to live as men

Whoa, that's a massive strawman. I would be surprised if you could explain to me what exactly a Viking was without consulting Wikipedia. I'm not really sure you are genuinely interested in that topic, but just want to throw some shit on White Nationalists or whatever you see as WN. Do you have some personal beef with a WN? What's it to you? Why do you care what "these white nationalists" think and if they "fetishize northern europe"?

Identity Politics and Tribalism will always prevail. And that's okay. Who care's if Germanic Tribes squashed the remnants of Rome (while fleeing from the invading horde), because after an interludum they build glorious empires themselves. It is because the mindset, blood and spirituality of Europeans is compatible and fertile. A semitic cult from the desert like Islam just destroys and absorbs everything in its way and is not able to create sophisticated cultures and societies. The "Vikings" were never genocidal maniacs, but traders, explorers, pioneers and state builders. The history if Europe is to a big degree the history of "Vikings", or more the People they belong to. The equation of Islam and Vikings is ridiculous.

[Fast Eddie]

(04-30-2017 06:12 AM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  

we wuz vikangz

Well, here is the thing. We wuz vikangz. And conquistadors. And redcoats. And crusaders. And explorers. And inventors. And physicists. And titans of industry. And astronauts. And etc, ad infinitum ad nauseum.

What makes black American "we wuz Kangz" braggadocio so laughable is not that it is jingoism, but that it is unjustified jingoism. It's one thing to brag about a game you won back in the day. But when you brag about a game that precedes "back in the day" by a few millennia, and furthermore it's a game that you not only didn't actually win, but in fact lost by the biggest margin in the history of the sport, well, that's when people laugh at your jingoism and coin phrases like "we wuz kangz" for it.

Look at the Mongols. They've been harmless and subjugated for centuries now, and they've only ever had one shining, transient "golden era" but they still have historical street cred as a people because shit, once upon a time they were the motherfucking Mongols and kicked ass.

So the takeway lesson here is that there is no double standard. If you don't want people to laugh at you when you say "We wuz kangz," first you actually gotta be kangz.

[Aurini]

(04-30-2017 12:03 AM)Wutang Wrote:  

Just like with Hoteps with their "we wuz kangz" ideology we have white nationalists with "we wuz vikangz". The vikings are held up as an ideal that white men should be attempting to live up to with a big part of their appeal being that they are supposed to be exemplar noble savages, fierce warriors that aren't restrained by today's leftist SJW society and are free to live as men.

The things I find strange about this are the following:

- The same people who exalt vikings as noble savage barbarians are the typically the same people who view Muslims as barbarians as well but without the noble part. Vikings are supposed to be bad ass because instead of being tied down by boring civilization andthey spend their time raiding and raping in foreign lands yet when the Muslims were doing so when they began to expand out of the Arabian Peninsula it was an example of a primitive barbaric people wrecking the civilization around them. White nationalists also like to put the Germanic barbarian peoples on a pedestal and point them to them as an example of white warrior ethos but weren't they also a tribal barbarian people that ruined what was once a great advanced civilization (the Roman Empire) and plunged Europe into the Dark Ages? I want to emphasize that I am not a defender of Islam at all but at the same time I also think double standards need to be pointed out.

- 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?

That right there. It's a fetish for cucks who are pretending they're bulls, without realizing that they're both sides of the same coin.

Act like a barbarian? Have your culture turn barbaric. Act like a criminal, who blames institutions for his crimes? Get institutionalized.

[debeguiled]

It seems like the human mind can split between two modes:

Symbolic/Aspirational mode vs. Practical/Administrative mode.

The first mode is closer to the area of the arts and dreams and fantasies.

The second is the everyday analyzing and working out of things.

If you don't distinguish between these two, you will have endless wranglings over the inconsistencies of other people's philosophies.

Look at how inconsistent they are.

Making this distinction in this kind of discussion is about as important as defining your terms at the beginning of an argument; if you don't do it, the conversation will go round and round in circles with each side getting increasingly emotional, and the rhetoric going into orbit.

Just as your emotions can be touched and your aspirations encouraged by a great singer's version of a song you were never really touched by before, so your own life's direction can be inspired and encouraged by a person or a group who have power to make things happen in the world.

But if you tell your friends about the song and why you like it, they would have to be pretty dickish friends to say "Songs never solved anything!" or "How does this song help me pay the rent?"

Applying the wrong mode of thought to a topic creates some very dramatic opportunities for pointing out the inconsistencies of straw comrades, and it probably accounts for a lot of the more entertaining arguments in the world.

It just doesn't get you anywhere.

Me: Oh, look how cute those kids are at the playground.

Them: They don't know shit about Syria!

In fact, one could speculate, that many of the social problems in this world right now come from people who let their symbolic/aspirational mode overwhelm their practical/administrative mode.

Look at trannies. The issue isn't really even gender, it is being misunderstood, which we all can relate to.

Anyone who ever had a parent knows the feeling.

It is just that trannies and their enablers don't make a distinction between the abstract concept of having your "soul" be "allowed to exist," and the everyday practical world of the actual differences between men and women, and the practical aspects of where they go to the bathroom, and the effects on themselves and the rest of society on normalizing hormones and the lopping off of genitals and who is going to pay for it. They have taken the wide and deep idea of being misunderstood and what to do about it, and reduced it all down to an oversimplified gender based formulation. If people do what I say regarding my sex, then I will be understood, and my world will make sense.

They have completely co-mingled these two mental categories, so that if they don't get exactly what they want, the minute they want it, somehow they no longer exist at all.

You could express an idea like that in a poem. In public policy, not so much.

That is why trannies are pretty repellent on a visceral level, because they are forcing their own internal symbols and archetypes, something that should be private, on the world around them, with no idea that is what they are doing. They don't just seem weird because they are usually a poor imitation of what they are pretending to be, they seem weird because they are trying to force the murky world of their mental idiosyncrasies on the world around them by fiat. Hopelessly confused people.

In short, it is okay to be inspired by Vikings, or Egyptians or whatever, as long as you remember that what you are doing is tapping in to archetypal and visceral symbols as sources of insight and inspiration, not presenting a four point plan for running society.

On the other side, as fun as it is to point out the inconsistencies of other people's concepts, it doesn't really apply, in a logical practical way, to figures of aspiration.

[Enigma]

I won't rehash the already good historical and cultural points that have been made, but there's also a strong psychological element at play.

In many ways, the problems in the Western world stem from a societal suppression of modern man's "shadow", the term Jung used to describe the darker, unconscious side of our nature.

Nietzsche, who was a huge influence on Jung, actually foresaw this as the cause of many of the current problems our societies are facing:

Quote:

In this psychical cruelty there resides a madness of the will which is absolutely unexampled: the will of man to find himself guilty and reprehensible to a degree that can never be atoned for; his will to think himself punished without any possibility of the punishment becoming equal to the guilt; his will to infect and poison
the fundamental ground of things with the problem of punishment and guilt so as to cut off once and for all his own exit from this labyrinth of "fixed ideas"; his will to erect an ideal -- that of the "holy God -- and in the face of it to feel the palpable certainty of his own absolute unworthiness. Oh this insane, pathetic beast--man!
What ideas he has, what unnaturalness, what paroxysms of nonsense, what bestiality of thought erupts as soon as he is prevented just a little from being a beast in deed!

Of course, in our case, the ideal is no longer God (who man killed) but the hodgepodge of social justice, white guilt, political correctness, etc. that have been used to replace religion in an increasingly atheist (or just cucked -- we're looking at you Catholic Church) Western world.

But as Jung believed, every man MUST integrate and absorb their shadow to become psychologically healthy.

And you'll notice that the Vikings represent many of the exact same values that modern European men have been repressing, namely violence, sexual aggression, tradition, tribalism, etc. I don't think that's a coincidence.

Far from a contradiction, the soft and brainwashed modern man's embracing of their more primal, warrior nature is the psychologically healthy thing to do. The repressed shadow will only get darker and deeper until it tears us apart or we start killing people in the name of our "values" (e.g. another communist bloodbath).

And as has been pointed out, there's a massive difference between, say, a normal, tax-paying Swede who believes in democracy and "equal rights" getting in touch with his shadow as a way of balancing his personality and masculine nature and an ISIS member who literally beheads people and takes women as sex slaves as part of their daily lives.

Everyone has a shadow, the difference is that not all of us are stoning women to death or burning people alive.

[debeguiled]

Fucking bingo, Enigma. I was trying to say the same thing. I was just gunshy about mentioning Jung.

[nomadbrah]

(04-30-2017 11:35 AM)Aurini Wrote:  

(04-30-2017 12:03 AM)Wutang Wrote:  

Just like with Hoteps with their "we wuz kangz" ideology we have white nationalists with "we wuz vikangz". The vikings are held up as an ideal that white men should be attempting to live up to with a big part of their appeal being that they are supposed to be exemplar noble savages, fierce warriors that aren't restrained by today's leftist SJW society and are free to live as men.

The things I find strange about this are the following:

- The same people who exalt vikings as noble savage barbarians are the typically the same people who view Muslims as barbarians as well but without the noble part. Vikings are supposed to be bad ass because instead of being tied down by boring civilization andthey spend their time raiding and raping in foreign lands yet when the Muslims were doing so when they began to expand out of the Arabian Peninsula it was an example of a primitive barbaric people wrecking the civilization around them. White nationalists also like to put the Germanic barbarian peoples on a pedestal and point them to them as an example of white warrior ethos but weren't they also a tribal barbarian people that ruined what was once a great advanced civilization (the Roman Empire) and plunged Europe into the Dark Ages? I want to emphasize that I am not a defender of Islam at all but at the same time I also think double standards need to be pointed out.

- 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?

That right there. It's a fetish for cucks who are pretending they're bulls, without realizing that they're both sides of the same coin.

Act like a barbarian? Have your culture turn barbaric. Act like a criminal, who blames institutions for his crimes? Get institutionalized.

Exactly what do you mean with this?

Nordics leftism is a result of altruistic naivety to the reality of the non-European world. Even the Nazis remarked upon naivety as a central Nordic trait. High trust, high sharing.

And yes, it is highly annoying and sometimes comedic.

It's from a desire to do good that Nordics share and open their countries. Misplaced goodness, misplaced in many cases because of Christianity, which is why white nationalists are not Christians usually.

Which is also ironic becuase these leftist of course would staunchly deny to be christian, but what else is this desire to save the poor and needy people of the world?

Nordics, unlike Southern Europeans, have not been exposed to the realities of other kinds of people for centuries.

It's ironic, this white guilt which holds them back is because of losing a war, WW2, which was driven by the Third Reich, which was in fact Norse pagan and "savage". Where they bull enough for you? Was the SS (double Sig rune) bulls or cucks?

Historical revisionism.

Norse paganism showed no more than 70 years ago, it was perfectly capable of uniting a people in a show of force of which history has never seen.

I consider the attacks on Wodinism to be similar to attacks on manosphere, likening Roosh etc as "basement dwelling misogynists".

If Wodanism is attacked and ridiculed so much, there must certainly be some kind of strength there.

[Kabal]

I suspect the notion of Vikings is interesting--and even provocative and perhaps frightening to many people--because the thought of a large group of white men just doing whatever-the-fuck-they-wanted instead of poo-poo'ing around with their panties in a twist worried about political correctness and self-flagellating over white guilt... is unfathomable.

Even if modern day whites channeled like 10% of Vikingness, it'd be a game-changer.

No more welfare, no more migrants. No more forced multiculturalism. No more food-stamps, no more free apartments or Section 8. You want some DACA, Title IX or affirmative action? Ha ha yeah right, fuck you.

Many underclass minorities groups in the United States and Europe forget that they and their spawn are only able survive due to some combination of the generosity, naivete, and carelessness of whites.

[the high]

(04-30-2017 11:05 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  

(04-30-2017 06:12 AM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  

we wuz vikangz

Well, here is the thing. We wuz vikangz. And conquistadors. And redcoats. And crusaders. And explorers. And inventors. And physicists. And titans of industry. And astronauts. And etc, ad infinitum ad nauseum.

What makes black American "we wuz Kangz" braggadocio so laughable is not that it is jingoism, but that it is unjustified jingoism. It's one thing to brag about a game you won back in the day. But when you brag about a game that precedes "back in the day" by a few millennia, and furthermore it's a game that you not only didn't actually win, but in fact lost by the biggest margin in the history of the sport, well, that's when people laugh at your jingoism and coin phrases like "we wuz kangz" for it.

Look at the Mongols. They've been harmless and subjugated for centuries now, and they've only ever had one shining, transient "golden era" but they still have historical street cred as a people because shit, once upon a time they were the motherfucking Mongols and kicked ass.

So the takeway lesson here is that there is no double standard. If you don't want people to laugh at you when you say "We wuz kangz," first you actually gotta be kangz.

How much African history have you really studied, though?

For example, even if you argue the original Egyptians weren't Black, (even so there was definitely a Black presence). The 25th dynasty of Egypt was ruled by a group called the Nubians rivals of the Egypt empire and unequivocally Black. This is recognized by historians everywhere.

So if someone did want to say "we wuz kangz" they would technically be right.

[DarkTriad]

(04-30-2017 01:26 AM)TheWhiteWolf Wrote:  

I guess the Viking era appeals for many reasons. First off it was a time when men were free to be masculine and aggressive. The Vikings were not pushovers they went out and took what they wanted whether it be women or gold. Secondly many view the Nordic race as a prime example of human perfectionism.

Including some Islamic travelers. The guy the movie "The 13th Warrior" was based on was considered them perfect physical specimens.

[DarkTriad]

(04-30-2017 12:17 AM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

I think you may be overthinking it.

Vikings are cool as fuck. Every white man has, at one time in his life, wanted to be a Viking, and go sail a longboat across the high seas to plunder villages with a giant axe. So if you're looking for something historical to aspire to, it's a logical choice.

Little things like "their descendants are SJWs" and "they were brutal raiders, just like Muslims" just don't matter because nobody is thinking about things at that level.

“Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”
― H.L. Mencken

[SamuelBRoberts]

(04-30-2017 12:31 PM)DarkTriad Wrote:  

(04-30-2017 12:17 AM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

I think you may be overthinking it.

Vikings are cool as fuck. Every white man has, at one time in his life, wanted to be a Viking, and go sail a longboat across the high seas to plunder villages with a giant axe. So if you're looking for something historical to aspire to, it's a logical choice.

Little things like "their descendants are SJWs" and "they were brutal raiders, just like Muslims" just don't matter because nobody is thinking about things at that level.

“Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”
― H.L. Mencken

The pirate comparison is a good one, because whites love pirates way more than they love vikings. OP's question is very similar to "How come you think pirates are cool? Pirates were brutal raiders who raped, stole, and murdered! How can you condemn ISIS for burning villages and murdering people when you all went to see Pirates of the Carribean and wanted to be Johnny Depp?"

It's just being silly.

EDIT:
OP seems to think that this:

And this:

Are no different than this:

And this:

[Aurini]

(04-30-2017 12:10 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(04-30-2017 11:35 AM)Aurini Wrote:  

(04-30-2017 12:03 AM)Wutang Wrote:  

Just like with Hoteps with their "we wuz kangz" ideology we have white nationalists with "we wuz vikangz". The vikings are held up as an ideal that white men should be attempting to live up to with a big part of their appeal being that they are supposed to be exemplar noble savages, fierce warriors that aren't restrained by today's leftist SJW society and are free to live as men.

The things I find strange about this are the following:

- The same people who exalt vikings as noble savage barbarians are the typically the same people who view Muslims as barbarians as well but without the noble part. Vikings are supposed to be bad ass because instead of being tied down by boring civilization andthey spend their time raiding and raping in foreign lands yet when the Muslims were doing so when they began to expand out of the Arabian Peninsula it was an example of a primitive barbaric people wrecking the civilization around them. White nationalists also like to put the Germanic barbarian peoples on a pedestal and point them to them as an example of white warrior ethos but weren't they also a tribal barbarian people that ruined what was once a great advanced civilization (the Roman Empire) and plunged Europe into the Dark Ages? I want to emphasize that I am not a defender of Islam at all but at the same time I also think double standards need to be pointed out.

- 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?

That right there. It's a fetish for cucks who are pretending they're bulls, without realizing that they're both sides of the same coin.

Act like a barbarian? Have your culture turn barbaric. Act like a criminal, who blames institutions for his crimes? Get institutionalized.

Exactly what do you mean with this?

Nordics leftism is a result of altruistic naivety to the reality of the non-European world. Even the Nazis remarked upon naivety as a central Nordic trait. High trust, high sharing.

And yes, it is highly annoying and sometimes comedic.

It's from a desire to do good that Nordics share and open their countries. Misplaced goodness, misplaced in many cases because of Christianity, which is why white nationalists are not Christians usually.

Which is also ironic becuase these leftist of course would staunchly deny to be christian, but what else is this desire to save the poor and needy people of the world?

Nordics, unlike Southern Europeans, have not been exposed to the realities of other kinds of people for centuries.

It's ironic, this white guilt which holds them back is because of losing a war, WW2, which was driven by the Third Reich, which was in fact Norse pagan and "savage". Where they bull enough for you? Was the SS (double Sig rune) bulls or cucks?

Historical revisionism.

Norse paganism showed no more than 70 years ago, it was perfectly capable of uniting a people in a show of force of which history has never seen.

I consider the attacks on Wodinism to be similar to attacks on manosphere, likening Roosh etc as "basement dwelling misogynists".

If Wodanism is attacked and ridiculed so much, there must certainly be some kind of strength there.

You're missing my point. The bull and the cuck are two sides of the SAME coin; both rely upon the other - they need the other. Both are incomplete men, echoing one another.

Enigma rightly pointed out the importance of integrating the shadow self. Neither the bull nor the cuck have done so. Both are but half of a man, lacking agency. The cuck can't satisfy his wife, and the bull is nothing but a stunt cock. Being half a man, being half-formed men, they still worship at the altar of the divine feminine, and thus they subject themselves to her capricious wiles.

This is the root of the "White Women are Magical!" nonsense coming out of WN circles. They approach women like boys approach their mothers. The Madonna/Whore complex rules them, women are either saintly virgins, or despicable whores.

A man breaks away from his mother to establish himself as a man, to integrate his shadow; and thus is able to return to woman and rule her justly, to love his wife utterly as the mother to HIS children. She is both Madonna and Whore for him, instead of one or the other.

The viking symbolism is worship of the Muslim; it demands the Muslim. Without the Muslim, it cannot survive, it lacks all meaning. So rather than resisting the Muslim, it calls for him to invade - it needs outrage so it will get outrage. Instead of integrating the shadow self, it's about becoming the shadow self. Watch Apocalypse Now; the protagonist in that film destroyed his life because he "wanted a mission"; and at the end of the film, through Colonel Kurts, we see where that mission leads. The protagonist is offered the opportunity to become the new Kurts, but instead he embraces what Kurts means, and finally integrates he darkness, returning at the end of the film with the Elixir of wisdom.

[AFS]

There is certainly a romanticism related to the Vikings (and similar groups, like Tatars, Mongols, etc). Personally, there are often times when I have a deep-seated feeling that my life is completely wrong - living indoors, going to work, living in a city, putting up with idiocy from idiots. Perhaps there is a genetic component to this, as a result of my ancestors traveling, raping, and pillaging for thousands of years.

Having said that, there is nothing logical about putting vikings on a pedestal or their violent actions. It's just an easy motif for right-wing groups to use, as it's simple, powerful, and widely known and understood by everyone. Crusaders are another symbol I see popping up all the time, even though some of these knights (such as the teutonic knights) were extremely violent and brutal, even to fellow Europeans. Torturing and maiming women and children wasn't unheard of.

[Mage]

Vikings>>>>Muslims

This video explains why vikings are awesome pretty well. (I know cracked is liberal but if even they say that the white vikings were cool then you just cannot dismiss it)

http://www.cracked.com/video_20422_why-e...s-lie.html

The basic misconception on this forum seems to be that Vikings were just raiding barbarians - that is some centuries old Christian propaganda.

While Vikings did raid they also did other things - like farm their land like all normal people, trade, sail from North America to Constantinople to Caspian Sea trough Volga river, they were the most advanced seafarers of their age and they knew a larger portion of the world map then any other civilization at he time.

Vikings were great traders and majority of their seafaring was for trading - they only raided when they saw weakness in the locals and it was all but too easy to take it all instead of trading. Vikings were perfectly capable of peaceful trading and negotiating - they were in fact best in this trade.

Vikings were much better at building civilizations then anybody at the time - They became first noticeable nobles in many western countries as well as in what is called Russia today, they united the Slavic tribes and tough statehood to them.

Also please remember that the so called (((History channel))) depiction of Vikings in the titular show is full of lies.

The show shows Vikings ruled by authoritarian Earls - this is false. Vikings were much more democratic than even Greeks of Athens. Vikings attended a weekly meeting where most major quastions were decided and the Chieftains and Kings were more like Military commanders only.

Paganism is much more democratic then monotheism, because in paganism any man can be close with God who dwells in nature in many forms - any man can go to nature unite with divine and be free mentally and physically, any man can hear the voice of God/nature and scriptures and temples are unnecessary.

Monotheism is authoritarian because it's God lives in stone buildings (churches, mosques, temples), separated from nature. These buildings require taxes to be built so they require society to be divided into classes of tax payers and tax collectors. Monotheism also requires a priest class to run the churches and interpret the scriptures in a way favorable to one King who represents the authority of the one God.

This is why Vikings and other pagans like Greeks were much more free people then Christian monotheists and certainly Muslims who have their critical thinking ability eradicated at a very young age by the most monotheistic religion ever - Islam.

What little Viking literature survives the Christian purges holds much more poetic and philosophical value then anything the whole Muslim world has produced combined. The Character of Odin is one of father of Gods sitting in heavenly throne and a wandering traveler on earth seeking wisdom trough adventures and hardships at the same time - a very powerful image for a man to identify. It depicts how masculine power comes trough wisdom gained in a life outside comfort zone.

The Viking age ended with Vikings undefeated in any significant militarily conflict by Monotheists, it ended because their kings wanted as much power as the Christian kings had so they tricked their nations into accepting Monotheism - Christianity. This killed the free pagan spirit, enslaved the mind and prepared these countries to became cucked in favor of (((the tribe that holds origins and covert masterhood over all of all monotheism))).

[nomadbrah]

(04-30-2017 12:39 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

(04-30-2017 12:10 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(04-30-2017 11:35 AM)Aurini Wrote:  

(04-30-2017 12:03 AM)Wutang Wrote:  

Just like with Hoteps with their "we wuz kangz" ideology we have white nationalists with "we wuz vikangz". The vikings are held up as an ideal that white men should be attempting to live up to with a big part of their appeal being that they are supposed to be exemplar noble savages, fierce warriors that aren't restrained by today's leftist SJW society and are free to live as men.

The things I find strange about this are the following:

- The same people who exalt vikings as noble savage barbarians are the typically the same people who view Muslims as barbarians as well but without the noble part. Vikings are supposed to be bad ass because instead of being tied down by boring civilization andthey spend their time raiding and raping in foreign lands yet when the Muslims were doing so when they began to expand out of the Arabian Peninsula it was an example of a primitive barbaric people wrecking the civilization around them. White nationalists also like to put the Germanic barbarian peoples on a pedestal and point them to them as an example of white warrior ethos but weren't they also a tribal barbarian people that ruined what was once a great advanced civilization (the Roman Empire) and plunged Europe into the Dark Ages? I want to emphasize that I am not a defender of Islam at all but at the same time I also think double standards need to be pointed out.

- 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?

That right there. It's a fetish for cucks who are pretending they're bulls, without realizing that they're both sides of the same coin.

Act like a barbarian? Have your culture turn barbaric. Act like a criminal, who blames institutions for his crimes? Get institutionalized.

Exactly what do you mean with this?

Nordics leftism is a result of altruistic naivety to the reality of the non-European world. Even the Nazis remarked upon naivety as a central Nordic trait. High trust, high sharing.

And yes, it is highly annoying and sometimes comedic.

It's from a desire to do good that Nordics share and open their countries. Misplaced goodness, misplaced in many cases because of Christianity, which is why white nationalists are not Christians usually.

Which is also ironic becuase these leftist of course would staunchly deny to be christian, but what else is this desire to save the poor and needy people of the world?

Nordics, unlike Southern Europeans, have not been exposed to the realities of other kinds of people for centuries.

It's ironic, this white guilt which holds them back is because of losing a war, WW2, which was driven by the Third Reich, which was in fact Norse pagan and "savage". Where they bull enough for you? Was the SS (double Sig rune) bulls or cucks?

Historical revisionism.

Norse paganism showed no more than 70 years ago, it was perfectly capable of uniting a people in a show of force of which history has never seen.

I consider the attacks on Wodinism to be similar to attacks on manosphere, likening Roosh etc as "basement dwelling misogynists".

If Wodanism is attacked and ridiculed so much, there must certainly be some kind of strength there.

You're missing my point. The bull and the cuck are two sides of the SAME coin; both rely upon the other - they need the other. Both are incomplete men, echoing one another.

Enigma rightly pointed out the importance of integrating the shadow self. Neither the bull nor the cuck have done so. Both are but half of a man, lacking agency. The cuck can't satisfy his wife, and the bull is nothing but a stunt cock. Being half a man, being half-formed men, they still worship at the altar of the divine feminine, and thus they subject themselves to her capricious wiles.

This is the root of the "White Women are Magical!" nonsense coming out of WN circles. They approach women like boys approach their mothers. The Madonna/Whore complex rules them, women are either saintly virgins, or despicable whores.

A man breaks away from his mother to establish himself as a man, to integrate his shadow; and thus is able to return to woman and rule her justly, to love his wife utterly as the mother to HIS children. She is both Madonna and Whore for him, instead of one or the other.

The viking symbolism is worship of the Muslim; it demands the Muslim. Without the Muslim, it cannot survive, it lacks all meaning. So rather than resisting the Muslim, it calls for him to invade - it needs outrage so it will get outrage. Instead of integrating the shadow self, it's about becoming the shadow self. Watch Apocalypse Now; the protagonist in that film destroyed his life because he "wanted a mission"; and at the end of the film, through Colonel Kurts, we see where that mission leads. The protagonist is offered the opportunity to become the new Kurts, but instead he embraces what Kurts means, and finally integrates he darkness, returning at the end of the film with the Elixir of wisdom.

Ok, I get it and agree with your overall point but really disagree on the viking part.

It's actually quite opposite in my experience with Wodinists, and lets be real, Wodinists are hardly wearing their beliefs on their sleeves (except tattooed sleeves occasionaly). It's very much an internal set of beliefs.

I think that is exactly why many are drawn to Norse mythology. It is because it is not black and white. God and the Devil. It is a belief system that is content in itself, it precisely doesn't need the muslim or the devil. It is not in some never ending battle against the evil muslim or the forces of evil. The closest Norse mythology has to such a thing is Loke and he is not even all bad, but more of a tragic conflicted character, half god-half demon.

I see the kind of white nationalist you describe far more in the christian white nationalist, of the Stormfront variety or the fanatical anti-muslims in Europe, who outside that still worship "equality" and "tolerance.

Wodinism is self contained. Give them their freedom, love of nature, mead and women. Freedom through strenght.

They are not interested in some never ending battle for the Holy Land.

If you peruse the small Volkisch - that's the word for it - movement online, you will find real practical people talking about history, living naturally and traditionally, belief systems, self improvement. The focus is always on changing yourself first, then your own people, then the muslims.

On the other hand, the jewish/christian anti-muslims movement, apparantly lives for that alone. They have nothing to contribute outside "muslims out".

[nomadbrah]

(04-30-2017 12:44 PM)AFS Wrote:  

There is certainly a romanticism related to the Vikings (and similar groups, like Tatars, Mongols, etc). Personally, there are often times when I have a deep-seated feeling that my life is completely wrong - living indoors, going to work, living in a city, putting up with idiocy from idiots. Perhaps there is a genetic component to this, as a result of my ancestors traveling, raping, and pillaging for thousands of years.

Having said that, there is nothing logical about putting vikings on a pedestal or their violent actions. It's just an easy motif for right-wing groups to use, as it's simple, powerful, and widely known and understood by everyone. Crusaders are another symbol I see popping up all the time, even though some of these knights (such as the teutonic knights) were extremely violent and brutal, even to fellow Europeans. Torturing and maiming women and children wasn't unheard of.

You should try visiting your ancestral lands and their countryside, see if it touches something. I bet it will.

[Sombro]

Quote:

"the Muslims at least at one point in their history were actually maintaining civilizations and empires. The Vikings never did. It's one thing to be plundering helpless monks and nuns and villagers and then fleeing before the king's men (people that could actually fight back) would show up. It's another to be able to subjugate another tribe/nation and then establish your own on top of it which the Muslims have done."

Isn't this what the Vikings did in France? (Norman French)
And the Norman Invasion had a great impact on the English language.

Another side note: I've read that the Vikings were one of the earliest cultures to give property rights to women. (Probably because the men were away at sea so much.)

[Sumanguru]

(04-30-2017 12:22 PM)the high Wrote:  

(04-30-2017 11:05 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  

(04-30-2017 06:12 AM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  

we wuz vikangz

Well, here is the thing. We wuz vikangz. And conquistadors. And redcoats. And crusaders. And explorers. And inventors. And physicists. And titans of industry. And astronauts. And etc, ad infinitum ad nauseum.

What makes black American "we wuz Kangz" braggadocio so laughable is not that it is jingoism, but that it is unjustified jingoism. It's one thing to brag about a game you won back in the day. But when you brag about a game that precedes "back in the day" by a few millennia, and furthermore it's a game that you not only didn't actually win, but in fact lost by the biggest margin in the history of the sport, well, that's when people laugh at your jingoism and coin phrases like "we wuz kangz" for it.

Look at the Mongols. They've been harmless and subjugated for centuries now, and they've only ever had one shining, transient "golden era" but they still have historical street cred as a people because shit, once upon a time they were the motherfucking Mongols and kicked ass.

So the takeway lesson here is that there is no double standard. If you don't want people to laugh at you when you say "We wuz kangz," first you actually gotta be kangz.

How much African history have you really studied, though?

For example, even if you argue the original Egyptians weren't Black, (even so there was definitely a Black presence). The 25th dynasty of Egypt was ruled by a group called the Nubians rivals of the Egypt empire and unequivocally Black. This is recognized by historians everywhere.

So if someone did want to say "we wuz kangz" they would technically be right.

Not to mention other African powers like Ghana/Mali/Songhai, Benin, Ashanti, Zulu, etc.

[weambulance]

Everybody living necessarily has ancestors who were at one time very successful.

[armenia4ever]

The Viking fetishism is due to one primary factor: Lack of identity. For the last 100 years, we've hacked away the prior identities of "white" people. Their religion is responsible for everything bad, their culture evil and colonial/oppressive, and their foundational myths can still somehow be labeled as an "ist" or an "ism"

What's left is consumerism, shopping malls, and partying.

That doesn't build a community that will produce great men. People are still floundering wondering who they are, if they can trust their neighbors, and if their future is worthy of hope.

We need a mythos - and I'm only half white. The turks and muslim neighbors helped crush my Armenian half over the last 800 years. Quintus made this point about Mythos http://www.returnofkings.com/19947/why-m...-his-myths and how it important it is to a people:

Quote:

"Man cannot live by bread and woman alone. He also needs a myth to sustain him, to console him in his bereavements, to provide a code to anchor his life, and to impart a sense of meaning to this brief mortal existence. Snatch away his mythos, rob him of his ideal, and you banish his spirit to a rudderless drifting in life’s expansive ocean. It is a cruel fate, and one that is far too common."

If you want to destroy and/or create a new identity, you have to do away with the old - which is what's happened to much of the West. Ironically what happened to the pagan Britons and Celts is now happening to the remains of Christendom in the West. The Z Man makes this point effectively, and I'll quote his post in full, http://thezman.com/wordpress/?p=10077 "The Death Of You":

Quote:

"Try to imagine yourself alive during the early middle ages in Britain. It is not an easy thing, of course, as the world of 7th century Britain may as well have happened on another planet, compared to our age. The largest city at the time, for example, was probably Winchester. This was a city of a few thousand people, not tens or hundreds of thousands of people. By modern standards, it was a small village or what developers in America call a town center. Of course, it would have smelled like a restroom at a truck stop.

The Romans tried to recreate the cosmopolitan life they associated with civilization, but it never really took hold in Britain. After the Romans left, things quickly fell back to their natural order. People lived in rural villages. They spent most of their time working the land and tending to the things that agrarian life required. Britain was a tribal society and people lived among their kin, ruled by men who were their kin, or by men who had ruled over their kin for longer than anyone remembered.

Anyway, there you are, covered in dirt and filth, smelling like cabbage, when some weirdos show up and meet with the rulers. Maybe you saw them come down the road or maybe you heard about them. All you know is that foreign weirdos have shown up and the people in charge are entertaining them for some reason. Eventually, you and everyone else is rounded up and marched down to the local river where you witness the weirdos dunking the lord in the river, while making weird sounds and pointing toward the sky.

Then, the king’s men force all of the people, including you, to do the same. You are marched out into the river, you are dunked under the water by the weirdos. To your surprise, your family and neighbors seem to be OK with it. They enthusiastically go along with this strange new ritual, even though you know they have no idea what’s happening either. Their confusion is due to fear and their fear tells them to follow along, even though they have no idea what is happening. You do the same. You have been Christianized.

That’s not an unrealistic portrayal of how Britain went from being a pagan land to being a Christian one. The Church set about converting Europe by first converting the kings, nobles and tribal leaders. It could then be the duty and interest of the rulers to force the new religion on their people, which they mostly did. In Britain, Æthelberht of Kent was the first king to accept baptism, around 601. The final kingdom to join the winning team was The Isle of Wright in 686, but the death of Penda in 655 ended paganism in Britain.

Just because the king adopted this new weird religion, did not mean the people fully embraced it. In fact, the ruling class was not entirely on board with Christianity. In order to make the transition easier, the Church gave the early Christians of Britain broad authority to practice Christianity. The goal was to get them on board first and then later enforce theological discipline. The Church was playing the long game so many pagan practices were Christianized to make it easier for the people to convert to the new faith.

Another way that made the conversion smother was for the legends and stories of the old gods carried on with the peasants. That’s where we got English folklore. All of those old legends told in the pagan era were a form of entertainment for the common people. After conversion, they still told stories about magical creatures and heroes, but they left out Woden and Loki, at least as real gods on the same level as the Christian God. They became children’s stories and fairy tales, rather than foundation myths for the people.

The removal of a people’s religion, cuts them off from their past and effectively ends their identity as a people. It was so much more effective to adapt the new religion to the culture and customs of the people being converted. It allowed the people to hold onto their identity by holding onto their past. This is also why the Americans allowed the Japanese Emperor to remain in place after the war. He was more than just a political figure. He was a defining feature of the Japanese people. Liberal democracy was modified for post-imperial Japan.

The point of all this is as it relates to what we see going on in America with the slow removal of Christianity from the culture. The ruling class long ago converted to the new religion of multiculturalism. They have been slowly erasing the old religions from the public institutions and replacing it with their own. Now they have moved into private institutions by forcing Christians to worship at the altar of multiculturalism. The next step, and there are already rumblings, is to force churches to adopt gay marriage or face sanction.

Christianity is not the only religion under assault. The soft, civil religion of Americans, based on equality before the law, individual liberty and the right to be left alone is being erased. The tearing down of Confederate statues is one example. The elimination of freedom of association is another. The rule of law, of course, has been eliminated long ago when the Talmudic parsers cooked up the idea of a living Constitution. The law is now just an endless round of hairsplitting and a morality of convenience.

The toppling over of confederate statues is often seen as a final sweeping up after the Civil War. First they came for the Confederate flags and now they are coming for the statues. Next they will be digging up the graveyards. That’s all true, but it is also an effort to erase America’s past. There are calls to topple over the statue of Jefferson at the University of Virginia. It will not be long before Washington, Franklin, and the rest of those evil pale penis people, who founded the nation, are ruled out of bounds on moral grounds.

The whole point of the exercise is to cut the people off from their past, by taking away their religion and civil institutions. It’s tempting to think of globalism in purely economic terms, but it is more than that. It is a war on the people who make up nations. It is a direct assault on the very idea of a people. If they can destroy the civil institutions and erase the past, they will destroy the identity of the people and the very rationale for countries. The post-national paradise, therefore, is the post-you world. It is the death of you."

The new replacement identity is a quasi multicultural globalism for the sake of money and power for the elites. However, people know something is missing in their lives - specifically many blue collar white people living in places where the jobs are gone and misery is all that's left.

What's left? A return to the old? The old norse culture died for a reason and restoring it won't rekindle any new sense of cultural identity. The feminization of Sweden has ensured that. The local culture is racist and the immigrant culture is to be embraced. Too far gone.

Even our populist "identity" is potentially vulnerable to being based on what we oppose instead of any core founding principles. A similar issue is occurring with white nationalism which ends up being about the assault on whites and loathing of certain minorities/jews rather then on what "white" and Western European pride and culture is supposed to bring to the forefront.

It's not surprising though. Most tribes and groups these days form based on what they oppose, rather then on what they support. Aurini made the point about the kind of men we need to stand up and bring about a new identity:

Quote:

"To win the long-war requires that we embrace radical responsibility as individuals, rather than falling sway to Libertarian Populism. The moment attacking Antifa becomes a cause in itself, rather than an act in pursuit of civilized society, we have lost. The moment anti-feminism becomes about casual sex and cheap ego gratification, rather than the pursuit of healthy relations between the sexes, we have lost. The moment our advocacy of Capitalism becomes about privatizing the profits while socializing the costs, we have done nothing but guarantee a future generation of broken, Left-wing voters. We’ll have been the ones who broke their legs when the Left comes to sell them crutches."

[I DIDN'T KILL MY WIFE]

tl;dr vikings would be our guys doing the raiding so it's all k

Without sperging out too much, if you think about it, just about every culture gives a free pass to their own raiders while condemning the raiders and fighters of others. It's just normal human nature, your own dudes conquering is heroic and full of glory while foreigners conquering and attacking you is barbaric savagery.

Who knows, if WE WUZ VIKANGZ conquered and pacified the middle east/civilized world we'd be all living in peaceful societies with universal healthcare and no multicultural rapings

[Elster]

I do not have an ounce of nordic or germanic blood (at least that I know of) but I was quite fascinated with the peculiar twist many of the stories put on what I suppose is the essential base material of indo-european legends that have survived to this day (albeit undoubtedly altered and variable as with most other mythologies there was no established cannon).
As a young insecure teenager seeking a compass - though it was undoubtedly a matter of mere syntactical interpretation- I was fascinated by the sacrifices and deeds Odin performs such as trading a seeing organ in order to gain "greater sight", or sacrificing himself unto himself (bonus for bug exploitation!). Unlike the greek tragedies (which I also adore, curse me) , the characters are willing to accept a condemned fate and do not fight to change but fight however. I guess as I listened to less metal and read more history I came to establish connections between the economical ,geographical and cultural situations of their era.
That said, I also found celtic mythology beautiful in it's almost lyrical interpretation of nature more as a divine force on itself than the domain of a particular or several gods.


Eh,that doesn't make any sense.
To reply to the OP,don't most of us at one time or another seek to aggrandize our lineage in order to feel better about ourselves and/or as part of a legacy as a motivation?