Why did ideological pan-celticism not arise in western Europe like pan-germanism and the neo-roman movement did in the 20th century?
The 'western' sphere was unique in its hostility to consciousness of supranational European races, despite forming an alliance in WWII to oppose the Germanic and Romance spheres of power which essentially conforms to the Celtic cluster of the ethnocultural map.
What gives?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
myredditnudes.com
twitter.com
And who the fuck are the dacians?
If the French had dropped the pretense of speaking their own language and adopted an Anglo-Saxon type of dialect would we have had a gallic Figurehead like Hitler or Mussolini, or is England just inherently too perfidious for a consolidated identity?
Why are western yuroppers such disastrous vandals, Sup Forumsros?
Thought eurocucks prided themselves on discussing things other than Trump and the cuck-bait headlines tailored to their country of origin.
Oh well.
The ancestors of Romania.
u dun goofed
They were our ancestors among some germanic tribes like the visigoths and ostrogoths, celts and slavs which mixed up; hell, some of us identify themselves more with romans than dacians or vlachs.
>some of us identify themselves more with romans
Most of us, unfortunately, despite sharing little with the romans genetically.
Thracians -> Dacians -> Romanians
There has been discoveries on the actual territory of Romania that prove Dacians/Thracians are one of the oldest settlers of Europe.
The ancestors of the aryans, of course.
>Hail Zamolxis!
I unironically believe that christianity (excluding orthodox and bogomilist), among islam and judaism, is an immigrant religion and is not compatible with Europe. These three (maybe excluding judaism, because it had no contact outside the semitic world before 200AD hence the tribalism and hate for the world surrounding it) were so bad at first that they had to mix in some native beliefs and ideas. That's why so many protestant countries become atheist or adopt another religion or sect of christianity.
It's a fucking plague, they had to take so much of native European religion to actually get people to stay with the religion. And then obviously all those Europeans murdered because they didn't want to take some kike religion being forced on them by brainwashed European Christians.
dacians > vlachs > romanians*
Because the Celts didn't achieve anything. Germanics stopped Rome's expansion and even caused its fall while Celts were limp wristed faggots bending over to every (Germanic) conqueror.
Angles and Saxons? Germanic.
Franks? Germanic.
Basically this. I grew up in a orthodox/baptist christian family and I can wholeheartedly say that baptists are by far the most fanatic sect of them all.
>M-MUH IDOLATRY
They're nothing but a bunch of scheming little bastards that have no place within our borders. At least most orthodox christians here are not acting like niggers (inb4 fedora). Also, are you "pagan"?
I forgot to ask you something regarding our country. Aside the gypsy meme, what do your countrymen think about us and what are we known for there?
Maybe because the celts got conquered and no longer wants to be represented by a conquered people
Probably because Celtic peoples weren't culturally Celtic on the whole and the two countries with Celtic ethnic roots were historic rivals
England is definitely too perfidious.
>try to start a thread about the west European ethnic identity
>zero replies
>question why Thrace is doing on my medieval map
>raise the anthropology corps of Vlad the impailers army back from the dead
Lmao that's probably a more profound commentary on western Europe's abnormal sense of ancestry than any of their replies to this thread.
I know next to nothing about the inheritance of Baltic civilization but it seems like you are within the culturally self-aware domain of Europe. Do you view yourselves as belonging to a separate branch of European civilization from the other major traditions, or is it more of an ethnic distinction?
France and England hate each other?
>pan-germanism and the neo-roman movement did in the 20th century?
Hitler as politician needed something to charm the Germans' people, even LARPING so far as the Roman Empire.
>muh ebil Christianity
Ultimate bluepill
>he's not a Christo-Zalmoxist continuity interpretation
Truly subhuman
>Do you view yourselves as belonging to a separate branch of European civilization from the other major traditions, or is it more of an ethnic distinction?
Yes, I'd say the balkans is its own branch, the Thraco-Daco-Illyrian one. Despite being heavily influenced by the surrounding slavs, the Roman Empire and the greeks (and to some extent the turks, admittedly), it's endured as a cultural group and a linguistic sprachbund. So yeah, I'd say we are in a different branch, same as germanics are a different branch than slavs etc.
>>muh ebil Christianity
Christianity is not "ebil" in any way but it is the closest religion that resembles globalism more than both islam and judaism do (yet islam is more cancerous). Judaism is their truly "ebil" root that encouraged polygamy, incest(present in nowadays islam), "killing the men and capturing the women" (as it is stated in the Torra and some parts of the Bible) hence genocide of the native population. They just don't belong to any other continent but the middle east and Maghrib.
You missed the point. The celts/germanics/meds represent disparate offshoots of the Indo-European antecedents which seeded the whole continent, with each having idiosyncratic cultural and genetic traits that are broadly shared by the in-group populations.
Even if France and the British Isles are the embodiment of tribal hybridization between glorified chiefdomes, the demographic speciation which historically Celtics populations represent in comparison to meds and germania remains mostly in tact, and the feed back loop of frequent interchange between local tribal traditions has created a Web of regional customs which culturally differentiate the western gallic lands from central and southern Europe.
Also
>Christo-Zamolxist
that's a good meme to be quite frank
is this thread dieded
France IS in the Romance sphere though...?
it did especially in britain but not to the extent of the others. it was mostly in the form of antiquarian and secessionist movements like cornish nationalism or plaid cymru.
am uitat sa spun ca fedora mea e undeva prin orbita acum
Personally I think the jews as we concieve them in the modern day are the descendants of a cult within the Roman state religion invented by civil servants seeking to establish themselves as a protected class within the imperial beuracracy. They chose some obscure cult from a remote part of Rome's dominion, adopted their 'rites and rituals', and made knowledge of their religious practices a prerequisite for anybody wishing to perform the duties of their office. Priestly orders functioning as professional guilds was common place in the Roman Empire.
My guess is these particular civil servants were accountants.
Meant for
Culturally, They've got a lot of ethnic Celts though Brittany is the only place that retains some of the culture
Because they are catholic and speak a Romanized version of their vernacular?
Ireland is romance too then, even moreso perhaps because they adopted another latin-rooted language from whole cloth.
Wat between 1900-1945? Sauce? That's pretty interesting.
I would still say that very parochial style of nationalism is more in line with the tradition of tribalism that characterized evolution of State institutions in Celtic Europe since late antiquity, not the monolithic race-nations that Hitler and Mussolini were promoting.
How else do you define Romance then? It's just a language category with some cultural ties. It imply much of anything about Race.
>The term Romance comes from the Vulgar Latin adverb romanice, derived from Romanicus: for instance, in the expression romanice loqui, "to speak in Roman" (that is, the Latin vernacular), contrasted with latine loqui, "to speak in Latin" (Medieval Latin, the conservative version of the language used in writing and formal contexts or as a lingua franca), and with barbarice loqui, "to speak in Barbarian" (the non-Latin languages of the peoples living outside the Roman Empire). From this adverb the noun romance originated, which applied initially to anything written romanice, or "in the Roman vernacular".
>It doesn't* imply much of anything about Race.
It's about culture indeed, but Germany and north eastern Europe never got to experience culture at all, so they can only think through muh genes.