Is This Person a Racist?

And if so, to what extent?
I have a friend. He is a liberal, or even a Leftist really. He votes straight Democrat and would never vote Republican even if you paid him. He supports working class and in general progressive politics. As far as Blacks go, he supports the Blacks in government, supports Obama and supports the Black political project in general, with the exception for busing and affirmative action. He supports Barack Obama.
He has little to no animosity towards Blacks at all. Truth is, he’s indifferent to them. He doesn’t hate them at all, and he thinks Whites who hate Blacks are morons. He’s not a Black-lover either. He just doesn’t think about them much or have deep feelings about them. He is a bit sympathetic towards them because he feels sorry for them since we brought them over here.
He is friendly towards Blacks, and all other non-Whites, frankly, and has no personal racism whatsoever.
On the other hand, he tells me openly that he is a White Supremacist in the sense that he thinks Whites are better than everyone else. Nevertheless, this is a lightly held attitude, as he despises all real White Supremacists and White nationalists as idiots. Does he think Whites are better than Blacks? He never talks about it, but I suppose he does, but only in that he thinks Whites are better than anyone else. I suspect that a very large % of Whites have a sort of secret feeling of White Supremacy and that Whites are better than everyone else.
He’s also a Nordicist, as he thinks that Northern Europeans are better than the rest of the Whites. But he despises all the real Nordicists as idiots and assholes. Once again, it’s just a private belief. I have reason to believe that quite a few Northern Europeans harbor secret feelings of superiority towards other Whites.
He doesn’t support any aspect of the White nationalist or White racist agenda. MLK was a hero, and he likes most Black leaders. He’s an integrationist and hates segregation.
On the other hand, he uses the word nigger freely, though not exclusively, often simply as a synonym for the word “Black.” It’s as if he uses “nigger” without any feelings of animosity towards Blacks, as if this was a proper way to refer to Black people. It’s almost a casual use of the word. He does exempt what he calls “White Blacks” from being called niggers.
Like many to most White folks, he’s down for a good nigger joke, and freely tells all sorts of racist jokes, including jokes about Blacks. Once again, this is done lightly and casually, with little to no animosity in the case of Blacks. I suspect that the majority of Whites tell racist jokes in at least this manner, so this attitude must be common.
I questioned him about his use of “nigger” and the racist jokes, and he said, “Oh come on! That’s not racism!” I would suspect that a large % of Whites would agree with them, that using that word and telling those jokes is not necessarily racist at all. Absent any malice attached to them, many Whites just think that word and the jokes are “nothing.”
Blacks I talked to said he’s definitely a racist. The White nationalists I talked to all said he was definitely a racist, and not only that, but he sounds like one of us (a White nationalist).
Thing is, I don’t agree at all. He’s not a White nationalist; he hates them. I don’t know if he’s even all that racist. To me, he just seems like a regular ordinary White person. If anything, it’s soft racist or racism light, but this kind of soft racism seems like it is everywhere in White America. I mean everywhere. I’d also argue that it’s fairly inconsequential.
What are your feelings on this matter? Please comment.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

55 thoughts on “Is This Person a Racist?”

  1. Do Nordicists include Slavs as one of their own? Russians, Poles, Ukrainians, and Belarusians look more Nordic than many western Europeans such as Frenchmen.

    1. Hard to say. Most Nordicists don’t comment on the Slavic Question. The few that have commented on it have said that Slavs are non-Whites. I’ve never heard a Nordicist say that Slavs are White.

      1. “Most Nordicists don’t comment on the Slavic Question”
        Yeah, the last nordicist to comment about the “Slav question” ended up blowing his own head off in an underground bunker. If only the rest would follow suit.

    2. Nordicists don’t think real highly of Slavs. As for the French, a Nordicist would probably distinguish the (historical) Northern French as being more Nordicized (The Norman French were part- Viking), as opposed to the more stereotypical “French” look that you might be referring to. They would call those folks more “Mediterranean”, which Nordicists rank as higher than Slavs.Also, a lot of “French” people are part- Germanic, especially in the border regions.

        1. Nordicists consider Meds to be kin to the ancient Greeks and Romans, who the Nordicists hold in high esteem. They also claim that Meds are (partly) descended from Northern tribes, originally. The Greeks came from the Baltic, the Romans from North-Central Europe, so they claim.

      1. So, we’re supposed to be afraid of the Mongols rising again. According to your logic, we should be a-scarred about this. What do these nationalist Mongolians have to do with Hitler? Anwer: Nothing! I’ll have what you’re drinking! Second thought…
        …by the way, Wade, I found SOMETHING BOTH WE AGREE ON! Seems you don’t like illegal Mexican immigration, and neither do I. After hearing that, could I be all that bad? Debate! Discuss!

        1. At first, I thought it must be joke…Then I wasn’t sure…thanks for the clarification…Funny video, in a way, though. More power to the Mongols- F the Chins!

    1. They are still Nordic because having Siberian/Mongol genes makes one whiter than, say having Arab or Berber genes, which is why Mediterraneans are so godammn dusky looking.

      1. Nordic-ness is not the same as “paleness”, FYI. A Nordicist might consider an East Indian or a Persian to be more “Nordic” than, say, a Slav. Nordic doesn’t mean “blonde”, either. Lots of misconceptions about this!

        1. Nordicism is not based on hair and eye color! What is it based on? Being descended from original Northern tribes. Physically, more overall facial/cranial structure, stature, etc.

        2. Aren’t Slavs Indo-European? And Slavs are rather big. I don’t get it, Slavs have haplogroup R1a, which means they are the true Aryans.

        3. Indo-Eoropean is not a racial class- definitely a language group, though. Slavs being “big” doesn’t equate to “stature”. Stature is not in the height/size sense. Stature is more the shape and proportions, etc. Slavs tend to be more “rounded” looking, with slightly Asiatic eyes, cheeks, etc. as GSG pointed out. They’re considered different enough to not be “Nordic”. “Slav” means “slave”, they were enslaved by the Arabs and others, and looked down upon, etc. Considered nice, communal people, but relatively docile by temperment. AKA “Alpines” in Nordic-speak. Not sure about the haplogroups- not an expert there. “True Aryans”? You mean Caucasians? Nordics think those were the Northern Indians/Southern Russians, I think.

        4. Slavs are definately not Nordic. Many have traits that would be considered undesirable to Nordics such as slanted eyes, wide noses and pointy chins.

      2. mott 69
        December 17, 2010 at 12:46 AM
        Nordicism is not based on hair and eye color! What is it based on? Being descended from original Northern tribes. Physically, more overall facial/cranial structure, stature, etc

        Stop being such an insecure twat, and so concerned what a bunch of dorky ‘internet Vikings’ think of your Slavic ass.
        Get some self-respect, ‘feepee3pee’ – you bitch.

  2. Is This Person a Racist?
    First, no one should ever have to justify whether a label applies to them.
    Second, if one doesn’t advocate discrimination or tolerance of it, it isn’t wrong to believe some human acts or traits are better than others.

  3. What is the basis for the Nordicist feeling of superiority? Is it just appearance, being paler than other Whites? Is it something to do with culture? Achievement? History?

    1. Not sure about appearance, but they think that their culture, achievement and history is better. Pretty dubious if you ask me.
      I don’t know if they think they are better looking or not.
      Seems to me like ~80-90% of US White nationalists on most of the big sites are Nordicists. US White nationalism is basically just Nordicism. Their hatred for Meds has to be seen to be believed. It goes beyond words.
      I don’t know why any Med would get involved in the US White nationalist scene. I mean, you would be going to a party where 85% of the people hate you so much they almost want to kill you.

      1. Nordic history and their record of achievement is good, but I can’t see how it is ‘better’ than Med culture. There is no Scandinavian art to rival Italy, for instance. The Nordic population has always been lower, so perhaps Nordicists mean achievement per-capita.
        Appearance/health and culture (now) – perhaps they have a stronger point here. I mean it is a fairly humanist culture, though a touch boring. They come out on top in both the Summer and Winter olympics:
        http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/spo_sum_oly_med_all_tim_percap-medals-all-time-per-capita
        http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/spo_win_oly_med_all_tim_percap-medals-all-time-per-capita
        And, as pointed out on this blog somewhere, Swedes are the most over-represented group in the top billionaires of the world.

      2. Seems to me like ~80-90% of US White nationalists on most of the big sites are Nordicists. US White nationalism is basically just Nordicism. Their hatred for Meds has to be seen to be believed. It goes beyond words.
        Why do you take these asperger-dorks so seriously, Hoberto?!?

    2. Nodicists think Nords are better looking, and have a superior culture. It’s not paleness or blondness. English, Scottish, German… Scandinavian blood is the common thread…it’s a Viking thing- they kicked ass and then assimilated. Culture? Democracy, Protestantism, Secularism. Acheivements? Industrial Revolution, Space Travel…thousands of inventions, discoveries…etc

      1. “. English, Scottish, German… Scandinavian blood is the common thread…”
        I have serious doubt about this supposed blood link. Other than Shetland and the Orkneys I doubt that there is a huge amount of Scandinavian blood. It seems more likely that invading groups just invaded and forced their languages and the conquered populaces. It appears this may still be occurring. Manx disappeared as a first language a few decades ago and Cornish is on a down hill slide. Irish isn’t exactly a major language either. Also, if you’re going to support this invasion equals relatedness you must also take into account that the Vikings invaded the eastern Slavic world. You would also have to consider them Nordics. So Russia and Germany would be united under this Nordicist banner. It seems pretty absurd and unhistorical to me, but Russian neo Nazis seem to have no problem with it, which tells me all I need to know about them.
        “it’s a Viking thing- they kicked ass and then assimilated.”
        I honestly can’t see what everyone’s obsession with the Vikings is. What did the Vikings do. The murdered, raped, and took all the gold they could find, then they made epic poems about it. So let’s look at the bare bones of Viking culture and make a comparison.

        Vikings             Ghetto Niggers
        murder              murder
        rape                rape
        viking raids        home invasions
        epic poems          rap songs
        raid/sail away fast drive by shootings

        To me the Vikings just seem like a bunch of ghetto niggers. I don;t see what the big deal is. Of course, neo Nazis seem like ghetto niggers to me too, so maybe there’s a connection.
        ” Culture?”
        “Democracy” – Nothing to write home about.
        “Protestantism” – *barf* they can keep it -many of these countries have catholic minorities anyway and Bavaria, Austria, and Flanders are predominantly catholic.
        “Secularism” – I don’t know how they can call themselves secularists. Many northern euro countries have nationally recognized churches. The Queen of England is the head of the Anglican Church. It seems that the real secularists are probably the French, and they’re “just a bunch of dirty meds”
        Achievements?
        Industrial Revolution – England had significant non-Scandinavian input from it’s pre Germanic roots and migration from the med during roman occupation
        Space Travel – Sure. the East Slavs also have space travel and so do the Chinese. In America, at least, German scientists were instrumental in early post WWII American spaceflight, and it is know that many Germans have Jew blood. Also, NASA has taken on many foreigners in the past few decades. I’ve heard that there are many Persians and Indians at NASA.
        “…thousands of inventions, discoveries…etc” – so do other places.
        I have nothing against northern Europeans, but I don’t believe they’re superior to anyone. Also, if they’re so superior, why do Nordicists try to steal the histories of Rome, Greece, Persia, Egypt, and others? They are acting just like black Afrocentrists but will never admit it.
        Also, we should not forget that the Jews have been a disproportionately large factor in the success of all these countries, and contrary to claims of Khazarian origins, they are largely meds.

        1. England wasn’t just invaded by Vikings. England was literally taken over and settled by Jutes (Danes), Angles & Saxons. Eastern England was ruled under the “Danelaw”. Scotland and Ireland were settled and ruled by Norwegian Vikings.
          Danish Kings ruled England and England was part the Scandinavian Empire. Then, England was invaded AND settled/taken over by Normans (Viking-French). Modern ideas leading to Democracy come from the “woden” Viking councils- BIG IMPROVEMENT over totalitarian monarchy.
          Contrary to everyday assumption, the British Isles have historically always been more a part of Western Scandinavia than Continental Europe until recently. Even now, Brits are more similar to Danes and Norwegians, culturally.
          England was basically No.1 in the world from the late 1500s until WW I. More inventors have come out of Scotland than any other country. American culture, law and government culture is mostly from British ideas & models. England and Northern Europe are extremely secular nowdays. Jews played large roles financially in England (surprise!) but didn’t help start the Industrial Revolution. Protestantism (flawed as it is) was a huge improvement over the early, very corrupt and intolerant Catholic Church.
          Wade, you write some good stuff here and there. But…your rant above (“the East Slavs have space travel”) begs the question…Are you Polish? (kidding!)

        2. “Wade, you write some good stuff here and there. But…your rant above (“the East Slavs have space travel”) begs the question…Are you Polish? (kidding!)”
          The Soviet Union had a space program ergo the traveled in space. In other words, they had space travel. In fact they beat the US up there. My god, they had the first satellite (Sputnik) and the first man in space (Gagarin).
          “Are you Polish? (kidding!)”
          This doesn’t even make sense. The Poles are West Slavs and have historically fought much with Russia. The Polish-Lithuania commonwealth almost beat out Muscovy as the preeminant power in this part of the world. Many Poles are anti-Russian. This unfortunately makes them vulnerable to neoconservative missle shield plans.

        3. “England wasn’t just invaded by Vikings. England was literally taken over and settled by Jutes (Danes), Angles & Saxons.”
          Yes, by thin upper crusts. Recent genetic studies have shown large genetic continiuty between modern ethnically english people and the pre-Saxon invasion population. Danelaw was the viking version of “Gibs me dat.” Just another viking similarity with ghetto nigger. They just seem to love them. Gunnar Myrdal sure did.
          ” BIG IMPROVEMENT over totalitarian monarchy.”
          Totalitarian monarchy = unfounded sterotype
          And of course, democracies never elect totalitarians. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_hitler)
          Besides, this is completely your opinion. Frankly, when I think of the great leaders of history, the only really democratically elected one that really come to mind is Lincoln, and not even close to all the population could vote at this time. Don;t waste space trying to tell me how Churchil or FDR were great leaders either.
          “Then, England was invaded AND settled/taken over by Normans (Viking-French)”
          Once again, an upper crust. Of course, they were also mixed and had much non-scandinavian cultural influence. Norman architecture brought to Britain during this period does not come from Scandinavia. In fact its Romanesque, not Vikingesque.
          “England was basically No.1 in the world from the late 1500s until WW I.”
          England was one of many powers during this time period. The Spanish, Russian, French, and Ottoman empires were all powers and different points in time. Italy and Germany weren’t even unified. But we can agree that England was probably the largest vampire state in the world during this time until they were replaced by their turd mutant offspring vampire state (the USA).
          ” American culture, law and government culture is mostly from British ideas & models”
          How many british ideas are influenced by or come from greek ideas? American culture is almost totally depraved anyway. Not all of us view fake tits and porno as hallmarks of civilizaiton. Also the magna carta and many of the beginngs of the english system occured while the country was catholic.
          “Protestantism (flawed as it is) was a huge improvement over the early, very corrupt and intolerant Catholic Church.”
          Once again using more steroetypes than anything else. There are several european scholars who wrote in the middle ages. (Nicole Oresme, Jean Buridan, and Albert Magnus come to mind for starters.) The begining of Europe’s “renaissance” has been pushed to a much earlier date than it was in the past under less informed scholarship. The idea that protestantism is so tolerant is crap too. The burned witches and attacked catholics too.
          Protestant tolerance and openmindedness at work:
          http://www.antifascistencyclopedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/ku-klux-klan-salute.jpg
          ” England and Northern Europe are extremely secular nowdays”
          If you exclude Sharia Law you might have a case, but I still view political correctness as a form of religion and these people appear to be some of the most “pious.”
          “More inventors have come out of Scotland than any other country”
          total garbage. The may have a high per capita rate, but Germany, France, and England have more for sure and there are other who have a larger raw amount of inventions than Scotland.

      1. Wade, you mix good facts with bad ones like none I’ve never seen. Are you just a contrarian? (DON”T ANWER THAT!) Do you mind if I ask- what are you (ethnically) and what’s your political mindset? I can’t tell- you’re all over the place!
        “Are you Polish?” It was a joke, dude! (Again, I have to ask you…)
        I know Poles are West Slavs…So?
        So the Ruskies put an aluminum bowling ball and some dead animals into space…so what? The first man thing happened because the U.S.was being slow and was in no rush. Great achievement by Russia- but they never got past it. All done with technology from Northwestern Europeans. Ruskies and Chinos wouldn’t have The Bomb or ICBMs if it wasn’t for people giving them the info or stealing it. (Now you’re gonna tell me that that Chinks invented rockets????)
        Seriously, Wade- WHO’S SIDE ARE YOU ON ON ANYTHING? I can’t tell! Disagree with me, PLEASE!

        1. “Wade, you mix good facts with bad ones like none I’ve never seen”
          Thank you. My position is that this is the internet and it doesn;t really matter so I can mix facts with extremism, sarcasm, and pretty much whatever I feel like. You have to admit though that the viking-ghetto nigger comparison is awesome though.
          ” Do you mind if I ask- what are you (ethnically) and what’s your political mindset?”
          I’m actually ethinically mixedif you’re really into the hyphenated american thing. My mother’s side of the family moved her in the late 19th century from Italy. My fathers side of the family has been here since sometime before the civil war. Were really not sure exactly when they got here. He has always told me that his side was of english descent but he thought there could be some irish backround. The reality is that with many of the “old stock” white americans there really don;t know completely. It’s possibly that way back centuries ago I might have black or native american ancestors I don;t know about. I don’t really care that much and I’m not going to waste money on a genetic test to find out. As far as white americans go, some times I like them, sometimes they sicken me. The same can be said for the US in general. Politically I’m mostly a populist, but I have a soft spot for some monarchies, especially Russian and Byzantium monarchies. The British monarchy really turns me off. They just seem so neutered. I also have a soft spot for Stalin, Franco, Mussolini , and others in some areas. Hitler doesn’t do anything for me though. Neo-nazis are a part of the reason for that, but not all. He just seems like a buffoon and a closet homo most of the time. Religiously I lean toward catholicism although I’m kind of an agnostic. Protestantism (or rather North American protestantism) is a real turn off.
          ““Are you Polish?” It was a joke, dude!”
          Yeah, sometimes its hard to tell another wiseass on the internet. Some people believe such weird things its hard to believe their for real. When I was searching for the klansman picture some guy on the internet had a site saying that klan costumes came form a spanish religious ceremony. Of course that’s complete bullshit. Sometimes I feel like correcting people, but most of the time I know that there;s no point.
          “All done with technology from Northwestern Europeans.”
          Not really. The Russian are actually a quite capable group of people as are many other non-northwestern Europeans. Hitler found that out when the t-34 was beating the shit out of his Panzer tanks. Italy has contributed a great amount to science and techology. Mittel Europa (Central Europe) has to. (This is where I would place Germany, Austria, Hungary, the West Slavs, and possible some others. ) The Chinese are a different story. I do believe there is a difference in not only amount but also types of scientific advancements across civilizations. I don;t believe that the chinese are as uncreative as some white nationalists would have us believe. Also, I think it is important to mention that much scientific innovation in the US came from europeans. By this I mean actual europeans, not people of European descent in the US. White Amercans has made contributions, but up until the last few decades they were almost all in applied field like techonology. Compared to the amount of engineering and technology advancements white americans made form 1860-1960 there is almost a totaly dearth in pure mathematics and not much theoretical physics.
          ” if it wasn’t for people giving them the info or stealing it.”
          And you don’t think the US did this too? After the axis fell the US grabbed every scientist they could and put them to work at NASA adn universities where they joined the scientists already there who fled from nazism.
          “WHO’S SIDE ARE YOU ON ON ANYTHING”
          The right side. I may be inconsistent on many things, but there’s one thing I’m totally consistent on: correctness.

        2. Thanks for clarifying your worldview. Pretty unusual mix. Can I put you down as “Half-Italian Pro-Catholic Stalinist Agnostic who hates Nazis, Protestants and Northern Euros?” Glad the viking-nigger comparison was a joke- was starting to wonder. Glad you take my jabs back in good humor- no bad feelings- just intellectual word/byte hurling here, too. Me? I’m an anti-PC, anti-immigration leftie with common sense. Not racist, just a realist. Kind of an Anglophile and Germanophile, a little. Just finished courses on Early Brit History, Brit Politics and RenaissanceItaly. Big eye openers- lotsa new info. There’s a Germanic influence on Northern Italy, in my opinion. Not a “real” neo-Nordicist, either. But that’s another long story…Cheers!

        3. “hates Nazis, Protestants and Northern Euros?”
          I don’t hate all protestants, mostly just really annoying north american protestants from certain groups, especially evangelicals.
          I also don;t hate northern Euros, I just don’t believe that they’re superior to everyone else. Germany/Austria is one of my favorite areas of the world, even though I think it fits better in with Central Europe than Scandinavia. I also like England, not a huge fan of Britain though.
          “There’s a Germanic influence on Northern Italy, in my opinion”
          Yes, there’s an influence, but they;re not germans who just happen to speak Italian. After the gothic invasions and part of the northeast being incorporated into Austria-Hungary it only makes sense they’re would be an influence. I can’t tell you how many nordicists I have read saying things like “Those red haired germans in Northern Italy started the renaissance, not those Sicilian niggers.” Which is just another example of nordicists trying to steal other peoples histories.
          I don;t believe that the viking were ghetto niggers, but there is a LOT of similarities between nordicists/neo-nazis and afrocentrists, A LOT.

  4. Why aren’t Eskimoes, Lapps, Koreans and Japanese included in the Nordics? Ashkenazi Jews are clearly superior to all Gentiles, Nordic or not. Are the Irish Nordics too?
    People who rank others should at least be a bit precise in their definitions.
    Interestingly, there is considerable evidence that Southern Germans are a bit smarter than Northern Germans. This shows up in PISA and in army tests.
    In what way is the Nordic UK superior to Japan today?
    Regards. James

    1. Nordic means descended from Northern European (Scandinavian) tribes and Celtic tribes from North-Centeral Europe, originally. Both supposedly go back to the Caucasus & North India, going firther back. It doesn’t mean “from the North”- It doesn’t means people who live in the “North”. It just describes a BROAD racial “type”. Most Americans aren’t 100% pure anything- so looking at Europeans is less confusing. A Nordicist wouldn’t distinguish much between today’s Southern and Northern Germans. Yeah, the Bavarians are a little different, more brunettes, shorter, rounder…a little bit of Hungarian-Asiatic in there. Irish are considered original Brittanic and Celtic with some Nordic blood (hence the red hair/freckles). So, Irish are Nord, but the other Nords- the Scottish & English, look think they’re inferior to them.
      As for Ashk Jews, any Nordicist (who’s not rabidly anti-Semitic) would concede that Ashk Jews are a very intelligent race- but Nordicists would claim that they’re “just Russian Kazars” (close to Euros), some with with a LOT of European, Germanic blood mixed in.
      Nordicists admire the Japanese race- consider them the best of Asians, closest to Caucasians. Koreans would rank second. The Nazis were Nordicists- they thought the Japs, Italians, & Spanish were OK.
      These online White-Sup “Nordicists” that supposedly hate “Meds”- I don’t know what they’re smoking.

  5. If you want the Nordicist view, consult the works of Hans Guenther.
    But serious Nordicism was abandoned by the Nazis during the war and substantially –in raw political terms–was never used as more than an esthetic prop before. There are none left of political signifiance which brings me to the initial question.
    Your friend is politically non-advanced, which is more important than whether he is any of the other terms. Squishy left liberals who still support Obama are in political kindergarten. You needn’t have elaborated further.

    1. I know this guy you’re talking about, and he’s not “politically non-advanced”. He has a B.A. in Political Science. He calls himself a “common-sense leftist”. Sides with the Right on the Immigration issue. He’s not crazy about Obama but thinks the alternatives are horrific (Tea Party,etc.) He doesn’t like “squishy liberals”, either.

  6. Your friend is obviously a racist in the sense that he feels whites are superior, but he’s one of those weirdo, soft “neurotic racists” that you wrote about on some other post.
    It’s pretty hilarious to watch these neurotic racists flounder around in their shitty logic.

    1. I happen to know that person and he isn’t a “weirdo” or “neurotic racist”. He’s just anti-PC. He just thinks it isn’t racist to use certain words or repeat jokes,etc. Or to have opinions about the merits of various groups as a whole. On a personal level, he doesn’t believe in discrimnating- every individual is taken case-by-case basis. He has friends and aquaintances of every color, minority group, etc.

  7. I don’t mind mild Nordicism, but I don’t think mild Nordicism really exists amongst anyone who would actually call themselves Nordicist. Nordicists are basically Northern Europeans who have adopted a Jewish style victimology cult.
    Kevin MacDonald talks about the “lacrimonious theory of Jewish history”– the Jewish belief that Jewish history is one long march of nothing but pain and persecution; without mention of the fact that Jews generally did pretty well in Western society (higher per capita income than gentiles etc.); similarly, Nordicists adhere to the lacrimonious theory of Nordic history, the view of history as nothing but unfair treatment of the benevolent Nords by the evil Meds, Slavs, and Jews. It’s easy to draw parallels between the Nordicist view and the Jew view– just replace “gentiles,” with “non-Nords;” the Holocaust and destruction of the temple with the fall of the Third Reich; Christianity with non-Protestantism; pogroms with oppression of ethnic Germans outside of Germany (mainly Poland and Slovakia) after WWII; “blood libel” with “the Holohoax;” Zionism with Greater Germany; and you see the Nordicism is an ADL for Germanics.

  8. As a Swede, I regard the Nordicists as faintly amusing. From the swarthy Hitler to the inbreds of Kentucky, none of these people can claim the be inheritors of Norse values.
    In truth, there is no measure that Scandinavians do not come out on top. Can you name one? It’s not that I regard non-Scandinavians are inferior – I just don’t regard them as human. As far as I’m concerned, Africa begins at Copenhagen. The further you are from Dalarna, the less human you are.

    1. “In truth, there is no measure that Scandinavians do not come out on top. Can you name one?”
      Are you kidding me? Other areas have contributed and do contribute more scientific advances than Scandinavia. Other nations have hotter women. Other nations have better food, better literature, better art, …etc. Now try naming something significant, other than certain social programs, that Scandinavians are on top on. The coolest northern country is obviously Finland, and its not Scandinavian or germanic.
      Scandinavia had no indigenous writing system and it’s “fabled” history consists of a bunch of ghetto niggers who learned how to sail. You’re right, Africa does start at Copenhagen…and continues north from there.

  9. Tough call. People tend to have at least two personalities, their public personality(facade), and their real personality, i.e. who they are when the public isn’t watching. Ultimately, how we behave in public and to each other is vastly more important than our private thoughts and what we say behind closed doors. I’d say a guy like him isn’t a threat to black people per se, but if I knew a white person was making nigger jokes behind my back, I couldn’t befriend him or respect him. I’m sure some whites I am amicable with are racist and make nasty comments about blacks when we’re not around, but if I don’t actually hear any racism coming from them, then I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt. I treat white individuals as innocent of racism until proven guilty, even though I know that most of them harbor it on some level if you dig deep enough.

    1. …I treat white individuals as innocent of racism until proven guilty, even though I know that most of them harbor it on some level if you dig deep enough.
      Gee Tulio, you could say this about any and all ethnic and racial groups, not just Whites.
      As a White I echo your sentiments, toward Blacks and other non-Whites, however I must say Black racism towards Whites is something that one doesn’t have to dig too deeply for, since prejudicial Black feelings against Whites is given a very wide berth, and often with the full blessing and sanction of society.

      1. It’s different though. Whenever you have a society with an upper caste and a lower caste, be it based on race, religion, class or whatever, you are going to have some hatred flowing in both directions. The hatred that flows from the bottom upwards has different motivations from the hate flowing from the top down. It’s like an Israeli settler saying, “Hey, Palestinians are racist against Jews too! It’s all the same!”

  10. Is he a racist?
    He’s someone who has a few racist attitudes about some things, and not about other things. I think pretty much everyone is a bit racist about some things.
    It’s almost a stupid question, because having to choose between being “a racist” and “not a racist” is a stupid dichotomy. It sucks because if someone who is basically non-racist gets caught out making a vaguely racist comment, they get labelled as a racist, and find themselves put in a box with all the real racists.
    Not that I think people who use racial slurs don’t deserve to be called on it. But it’s important to distinguish between the good people who make a casually ignorant comment, and the asshole racist fucks of this world. And everything in between.
    I’m imagining a Kinsey Scale of racism, a continuum from non-racist to racist. The guy we are talking about is maybe a third of the way down on the non-racist side.

    1. Interesting…
      Robert,
      If you had to make a scale of racism, what would be the category labels and order on the scale (of course ‘White Supremacist’ being at the very top)?

  11. i think he just values intelligence/IQ and the highest scorers are actually Germans, then Japanese, then who…I dunno but I bet it’s a Nordic country. i agree with that guy, and i also probably agree that whites are superior. we have IQ plus the best of us are egalitarian.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *