I'm an ethno-nationalist

>I'm an ethno-nationalist
>Europeans have a right to their own countries
>Europeans shouldn't intermix or atleast not too much
VS
>Europe spend most of its early days intermixing with other tribes forming new tribes
>Conquered under Roman rule, civilized, still intermixing and forming new tribes
>Holy Roman Empire, Byzantium and the Habsburg monarchy, all powerful nations of ethnically diverse European ethnicities intermixing
>Gernan Empire, Austro-Hungary etc etc
>All ethnically diverse and intermixing
>WW1 happens, Europe redraws its borders
>Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and Soviet Republic are formed, both ethnically diverse and intermixing
>German Reich still exists, still ethnically diverse and intermixing
>Muh racial purity theory, WW2 happens and ends
>Europe today, still ethnically diverse and intermixing
>Sup Forums keeps saying that intermixing and diversity are bad and unnatural

Good one Sup Forums

Also:
>Nationalism is healthy but the defenition changes all the time
>Racial purity is important but nobody is pure German or a pure Polack
>Racial purity is important when most European countries have always had a large population of minority groups within them like the Germans spread all over Eastern-Europe

Other urls found in this thread:

docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CRQPn1KdgaiLxdxqxuJeiqLFUH5jnaaoqlDeQTuuVlU/htmlview
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Let me add that not only does the defenition of nationalism change all the time, it also has a different meaning for a Serb or a German, a native or a non-native, a person in 1930 or a person in 2017.

Nationalism must be the most chameleonic ideology to have ever existed, there is no correct defenition.

Fuck off Ahmed.You will never be European

Thanks for comparing 100 years of European history to Merkel bringing in millions of poor Muslims who hate the west in a couple years.

Yeah you're really fucking brilliant.

Only non Europeans are pro-intermixing.

Refugees, they're not allowed to settle in Europe forever.

The government will be under intense pressure to send them back and the failure to repatriate them will lead to their own demise in politics and the rise of the right wing.
Either they do it, moderate or center parties do it or the people will elect new people who will which has been proven in the last European referendums and elections.

You're delusional if you think that Europe is going to invite millions of them and never send them home.

t. tokkie
All multi-ethnic entities were fragile as it gets. Austria-Hungarian """Empire""" being an excellent example: Vienna overrun with Slavs, constant threat of ethnic loyalty to the state and so on.
>ethnicities intermixing
It barely happened. People mated with those of their faith, language and ethnicity. See Belgium. Clear case of pure Flemish and Walloonish blood communities. Get educated or kill yourself

And some posting meme whores, creepy ass beta

> ethnically diverse European ethnicities intermixing

This is pretty much white nationalism

The different types of Europeans are genetically and culturally similar enough to one another that they can integrate well into each other's societies.

It's once you start getting sub-80 IQ shitskins with no connection to western history that diversity becomes a problem.

Besides, White people have the greatest variety of genetic phenotypes out of any group on the planet. Why would you ruin European diversity by diluting the red/blonde/brown haired, blue/green eyed population with immigrants who have shit colored everything?

>nobody is pure German


Right here.

They aren't refugees to begin with. They're economic migrants and they were clearly brought in with the intention of being permanent residents, hence all of the European politicians making excuses such as "they're skilled doctors and lawyers who will fill the gap left by our declining birthrate" etc.

Clearly not a temporary demographic.

>Multi-Ethnic nations were fragile
Not for ethnic reasons but for political, economic and structural reasons.
It's funny you mention Austria-Hungary because the main reasons for the destruction of the Austria-Hungarian empire was in fact ethno-nationalism.

Annexing Bosnia and Herzegovina to prevent the creation of a large Serbian pan-slavic state and showing little mercy to Serbia during ww1 actually created the Slavic nationalism and national identities based on racial and linguistic lines.

The funny part is that this created Yugoslavia, which also fell apart because of ethno-nationalism.
Russia is a huge multi-ethnic entity even today

If they are truy here with the intention for the government to make them permanent residents, then they're still going to be forced to change their position or they will never get elected again once removed and a more moderate party will promise to do it and get elected.

They can't get away with it and I think people like Merkel are smart enough to understand that fact so your conspiracy theory about using Syrian refugees to do something that would be detrimental to Europe as a whole and their political position is highly illogical.

Russia was an apartheid state with racial laws prior to 1991, dump tokkie. And totally homogenous entity entirely located in Europe prior to its expansion to Asia in the late 16th century.
>AHE
All the archives of Austria clearly show how homogenous in mating habits its subjects were.
>for the destruction of the Austria-Hungarian empire was in fact ethno-nationalism.
humans are tribalistic, dipshit. Ethnonatinalism has always been a standart
>cretead Slavic nationalism
I advise you to visit Balkans and talk to people this bullshit. Croatia dates back to 8th century

>If they are truy here with the intention for the government to make them permanent residents, then they're still going to be forced to change their position or they will never get elected again once removed and a more moderate party will promise to do it and get elected.
Here you can see the EU founder - Richard Kalergi. Ethnic displancemt of Europeans is THE GOAL

The fun thing about Sup Forums is that they can't even decide among themselves who is white.

>hurr, some guy from history said some stuff
>this means all policy since then is a conspiracy based on his views

Nationality and ethnic makeup changed within reason. They were mostly other tribes and peoples within Europe.

EU is a jewish made organization controlled behind the scenes by the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commision. Their aim is to destroy the homogeneity of European nation states by mixing the native Europeans with non whites to create an Euro-Mulatto race of slaves to be controlled by Israel. It's called a "Kalergi Plan". Also, they want to create an EU superstate and control it without ever being undermined. Your quick EU redpill.

Magically enough every two year the most pro-open borders EU bearcats receive the award of his mame
>conspiracy
Literally founder of the EU

Because the idea of being white is unscientific, if having a white skin makes me white then what happens when I move to Africa and sit in the sun all day?

If European ancestry makes us white then Indians are by defenition whites too.

>shall not be infringed

Idea of being purely European is scientific though.

Life must seem so simple when you're that retarded

>>I'm an ethno-nationalist
>>Europeans have a right to their own countries

THEN START HAVING MORE KIDS YOU FUCKING RETARD

A very strong argument.

Keep reading you faggot

Yeah, thanks 8gag. Good work getting Antifa on board.

All people have a right to their culture and ancestral homeland. Pretty simple stuff if you're not an evil person.

I'm not an ethno-nationalist you idiot, you're typing this shit on a computer made from parts from al over the globe, being a nationalist only limits us.

Now I'm sure it's shitposting.

In the 21th century, there is no nation, state or country in the world that can claim to be a monoculture.

Sup Forums btfo!!!1

Baltic States, West Slavic nations, Belarus etc
Kys tokkie

Not monocultures, Belarus is only 80 percent Belarusians, the rest is Russians, Poles, some Ukrainians, some Germans, Latvians and plenty of Jews.

Latvians are only 75 percent with Russians, Belarusians, Ukrainians, Poles, Lithuanians and Jews.

Poland is 97 percent Polish with a large German minority and Ukrainian and Belarusian.

Again, no such thing.

>Belarusians and Russians are ethnically distinguishable
Belarus is a case of Polish and Soviet political nation building you moron. They self identify as Russians.
>monocultures
They are monoRACIAL and there is a dominant national culture

I would position myself in the first section you wrote.

Now:
>Europe spend most of its early days intermixing with other tribes forming new tribes
Not true.
At least not to the extent that you insinuate here. In "its early days" Europe was so sparsely settled that people had not very much contact with each other. There was trade and cultural exchange - even long distance one - across the continent, from Slavic to Germanic to Celtic people but not migration to an extent that would amount to intermixing of tribes. Also newer research finds that the great migration period seems to be overestimated. Not too much ethnic exchange had happened during that era.
Later on, when Europe was more densely populated there was migration between tribes.

>Holy Roman Empire, Byzantium and the Habsburg monarchy, Gernan Empire, Austro-Hungary, etc.
>all powerful nations of ethnically diverse European ethnicities intermixing
That's just not true. Maybe for the Byzantinum a bit but you have to recall:
Moving over large distances at land before the invention of the railroads was A PAIN IN THE ARSE. Only noblemen, special craftsmen for said nobility, a few traders and armies would move across land. You needed a logistics to be able to move large numbers of people. Only the Roman Empire could do that. (Fun fact: the first bridge across the Rhine was built by the Romans in Cologne around 100AD; after that it took 1800 years (!!!) to build another bridge across the Rhine, again in Cologne).
Only seafaring was a viable option to transfer armies at that time.

>first WW
>German Reich still exists, still ethnically diverse and intermixing
save for the Polaks and the Jews the German Kaiserreich wasn't very diverse. Maybe if you count the Danes in Schleswig or some French at the Rhine.

Still yet to hear a good argument for ethno nationalism.

Not being a double digit nigger. How funny. Just fuck my genetics up. Look at the fun math I did. You negroes understand the simple math? Italy is a pure example of need for one drop rule eugenic enforcement.
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CRQPn1KdgaiLxdxqxuJeiqLFUH5jnaaoqlDeQTuuVlU/htmlview

The data for Northern Italy confirm that Piemonte, the region which received massive immigration from southern Italy, has the lowest scores (although not low) among the northern regions.
[The average score for northern Italy (minus Piemonte): Lombardia, Emilia Romagna, Valle D'Aosta, Veneto, Friuli Venezia Giulia, Trentino, Bolzano (Sud Tirol) is 512, which compared to a British score of 494, is equivalent to a Greenwhich IQ of 102.93.
Piemonte= 499
Northern Italy-Piemonte= 512-499=13.
13= 2.2 IQ points.

So about 30% southern admixture in Piemonte lowered the IQ by 2.2 points. Thus the genotypic difference between Northern and Southern Italy is 2.2/0.3= 7.33 IQ points.

Note that this calculation assumes that there was zero southern admixture in the rest of North Italy. This is false, as other northern regions received their share of southern migrants, about 10%. Thus the real N-S difference would be even larger.
Of course this is based only on Pisa Math. More accurate results would be given by using other scores as well. Not only these southern subhumans are stupid, they are inbred too. Arguably a levantine-arabic trait they do have in common with their even more subhuman ancestors
Italy IQ 102/99 (95/92) Basilicata (-/89) Bozen/South Tyrol (-/100) Campania (-/87) Emilia Romagna (-/97) Friuli-Venezia Giulia (-/100) Liguria (-/93) Lombardy (103/96) Piedmont (99/96)Puglia (-/88) Sardinia (-/87) Sicily (-/86) Trient (-/99) Tuscany (99/-) Veneto (102/99)

>Habsburg monarchy, all powerful nations of ethnically diverse European ethnicities intermixing
You need to study moar.

Go to the middle east and intermix with them, they need more diversity.

>Sup Forums keeps saying that intermixing and diversity are bad and unnatural
of course at the fringes of nation states/ethnic territories there is an exchange and other ethnicities and custom seep in.
That's in fact natural and to some degree also desireable. It makes for better relations with your neighbours and the cultural exchange can be benefitial.
But first off we're talking about processes that took centuries and took place in tiny steps. And furthermore it mostly happened between people that are kind of similar in the first place. The phenotypes of Germans and Celts or Nordics and Slavs isn't that different. I can tell the difference but after a bit of intermixing they look pretty much the same. I have difficulties telling Czechs apart from Germans.
These people are likely to be compatible because they inhabited similar topographical and climatic regions in the first place. Environment shapes people.

Then you also have to take into consideration that often ethnic exchange results in one ethnic group being replaced or displaced or assimlated even when the process takes place "amicably". The German population east of the Oder in Silesia and the Sudetenland immigrated there since the 12th century, iirc. The people that lived there sometimes are no more. They either moved further East into Poland or got germanized. For the Polish nation that was a loss, no doubt about it. Even though they Poles influenced the Silesians way more than the average guy thinks: if you look at the traditional costumes of the Silesians and the Kasubians you will find it to be a very slow gradient as you move closer towards Poland.

>Racial purity is important but nobody is pure German or a pure Polack
Ethnic purity would be correct there.
But it's true. The Wends, a slavic tribe, lived as far as Brandenburg and their language only died out only in the 18th or 19th century. In Saxony there is still a Slavic minority, the Sorbs, living and they are alive and kicking.

>Let me add that not only does the defenition of nationalism change all the time, it also has a different meaning for a Serb or a German, a native or a non-native, a person in 1930 or a person in 2017.
>Nationalism must be the most chameleonic ideology to have ever existed, there is no correct defenition.

Not surprising, since who we regard as our in-group is pretty much dependent on the circumstances.
A hundred years ago when all the colonial empires were still standing strong noone would have thought of the French and the Germans and the Brits to have a feeling of commonship.
But that's what we have in the today since the world has changed dramatically: The colonies are no more and they are reverting to their pre-colonial cultures (most of them anyways). Europe is a small continent with a shrinking population.
Of course the kind of nationalism isn't contrasting itself so much against other European nations but against China and India and Africa and the Middle East. The EU wouldn't have been possible a hundred years ago. Today it's still overambitious but you get the point.

>German Empire

>ruling over Europeans is somehow less based than conquering subhumans

Having an european monarchy in south america is surely based.
Even the Dutch got a piece, but the germans couldn't handle an african shithole.
If your defition of good is ruling someone else, then germans failed.

what are you refering to?

greater social cohesion. Read this:
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

Just look at how your fucking election campaign works in the US.
It's split right up on racial lines. 92% of blacks vote Democrats. As do 66% of spics. Whites vote constantly for the Republicans.
You live in a completely segregated country. You have black neighborhoods, white neighborhoods, Chinatowns and so on.

The US may be a diverse country but you're not living together in it you are living alongside.

You'll never be African either

You see, here is the difference. Germanic Anglo-Saxons were human enough to put the so-called natives out of their misery, whereas Portuguese niggers couldn't do it and bred them instead. Germany didn't need some shitskins far away to be a continental power(still is really), it was a continental power on its own merit.

Russia talking mad shit for being an African tier shithole.

Comparing to almost any Western European, the germans failed to have an overseas colony.

You seem to know very little about how prosperous Brazil was when we had an emperor. It was one of the most prosperous contries of the world, only a little behind the US and UK. The Dutch are Anglo-Saxons, but their colonies aren't important, so no genetic relation here.
FYI, Portugal was one of the smalest nation of Europe, they only got big because of the friendly relation with natives. As I said, their ruling class had a proper plan that should make almost everyone happy. The French and the English were at least 15 times as populous. Just compare.

Yet city states of Moscow and Saint-Petersburg surpass all of Eastern Europe in quality of life. Meme pictures you get are from some native shitholes or prol towns. It's call fiscal eugenics. Not every state is determined to feed off the inferior on Hartz IV

>proper plan
Like a plan in 19th century how to MIX negroes out of existence instead of exterminating them. Portugal is "literally who" of Europe

>the germans failed to have an overseas colony.
What is Antarctica. Checkmate.

>Comparing to almost any Western European, the germans failed to have an overseas colony.
Yes, only small ones.

so you were referring to
>A hundred years ago when all the colonial empires were still standing strong noone would have thought of the French and the Germans and the Brits to have a feeling of commonship.
right?

Obviously, the first half of the sentence is a description of the change that the world and Europe experienced. The second half is about European nations not bashing each others heads in every 50 years.

Well, literally who tried and lost 13 ships only to make a damn little circuit and finally discover some island in Atlantic. It was a country of a million people. Imagine two hundred of the most experienced dead in one of these trips. Literally who beat spanish asses time after time. Literally who taught the japanese who to make a fire gun that after, was the technology that led to their unification.
Literally who? I guess your family was just a peasant in the hands of tsar while some dudes were doing cool stuff. So, shut up.

Yes, that's why, in this sense, germans failed. But since it failed, it should remain divided in little pieces, that way seemed to work better.

>Sacks and exploits Eastern europe during all its history
>"look how well we live compared to them"

Your average wage is equal or less than our minimum wage and Im speaking from one of the poorest nations of europe. Meanwhile Putin is among the richest people in the world. I dont recall him starting his career as a businessman (I wonder where he got his money...).

>minimum wage
Thanks for confirming yourself as a subhuman(pretty much a fact given your flag) incapable to secure his living without the state assistance.
>exploited
What? (((USSR))) was feeding them all off. Moscow spent 13 rubles on shitskins to each 5 rubles spent on ethnic Russians. Ethnic Russians managed to secure better life in spite, not due.

Sure. Your rule was so enlightened that they had to build a fucking wall to keep people from escaping.

>your rule
What do mean? Soviet citizens dreamed to live in DDR. It was shit, but it was the best Warsaw Pact had
>your rule
Ethnic Russians ruled USSR only at last stages and dismantled it asap

Yeah, soviet citizens(the ethinic russians) are different from the rulers, because those were jews. Your country is a shame, don't try harder, it will only get uglier.

you keep telling yourself that compulsively fucking niggers only is a normal thing OP

Fuck off kike. When French and British intermixed or Germans, Poles and Russians did it, they were powerful white empires that bred powerful and great White men.
When disgusting Turks raped Byzantium or when modern French, Swedish and Germans are raped by niggers that is a vile tainting of the white race with the blood of primitive savages. It dilutes us and destroys our society.

>we jews
I wonder why
I put USSR in ((()))
And wrote this
"Ethnic Russians ruled only at last stages"

Pardo can't read? Typical

>niggers were always excluded in the European equation...gets your facts right sandnigger.

He's a troll

Who is this qt? How can I find a girl like her?

Chances are she's not a woman