I agree.
Thread for Heritage Americans
- Thread starter starlight
- Start date
The Holy Roman Empire..
When your entire civilization has little to no contact with people of a different race, you would never consider race. So, of course the Europeans never thought of "white" or "not white" everyone they encountered, generation after generation was White. The difference in a German and even a Franc are very small, but in a vacuum of all you see are Germans and Francs, the difference seems large.
Now these same people, for the first time ever, are forced to live next to non-Whites and they are starting to see race and identify as White. The same is happening in the USA and Canada as well. The differences are very large and make for a lot of discomfort, so the discussions begin and they spread. Nothing will stop the noticing and the discussions. Where it all ends up, I have no idea.
Now these same people, for the first time ever, are forced to live next to non-Whites and they are starting to see race and identify as White. The same is happening in the USA and Canada as well. The differences are very large and make for a lot of discomfort, so the discussions begin and they spread. Nothing will stop the noticing and the discussions. Where it all ends up, I have no idea.
Apprently the point flew over your head. Romans considered themselves White but never cared about the term "European." That's just a geographical term with absolutely no bearing on what race is.
Additionally, historically, Whites extended across huge parts of Asia and Africa in antiquity, it would make no sense not to call them White when they had White skin, hazel or blue eyes, blonde or light brown hair, etc.
Notice how they never defined the word White. They used the same test normal people use: The visual test. If you look White then you're White.
That's why Talmudic Jews were allowed to immigrate to America. So the founding fathers aren't who you think they are.
Most WN's use DNA to try and make their points, which is a better approach than geography, politics, or history, but is still flawed because who gets to decide which DNA is White or not?
I can't speak for men that lived over 250 years ago, the common assumption was they would never have thought of a time when the term "White" would need to be defined. Such as Benjamin Franklin thought citizenship should be limited to those of Anglo-Saxon genetics and not all Whites. Meaning they knew very well what was and was not White and how White was not synonymous with Anglo-Saxon. And you are correct, Jews were considered White at that time. Many of the founding fathers were very philosemitic.
I believe by now, any White Nationalist would be very much against the belief that Jews are White after witnessing their behavior over the last 50 years. Who gets to decide what is or is not White? Might makes right, so it would be the leaders of the White Nationalist movements across the west. My guess is it will differ slightly between nations, but all in all, it will be in the same ballpark.
I'm just responding to what is White and what the founding fathers said a heritage American is. I am a rapidly aging man who is just sitting back and watching. At my advanced age, I realize that my opinions and beliefs mean very little in the big world. I have pondered these things, but at the end of the day, might makes right, and what happens, will happen. I cannot sway it one way or another, I can only live my best life and pray for the wellbeing of others. If you want my prediction, I think it is too late for White people. I am not black pilled on this, I just think it is too late and their time to react was WW2 or maybe within a few decades afterwards. White people have gone from around 33% of the world's population to around 8% in only 120 years. That is a remarkable decline. Within another 50 years it will be 4%. If this trend continues, it will be very close to 0 within another 100 to 200 years. And I don't see the trend stopping. I do see Whites trying to organize and fight back, but it will be too little, and too late, and the rebellion will be put down and if so, that will speed up the elimination of White people drastically as their remaining bravest men are taken out of the gene pool. And this honestly brings me a lot of peace in life, it is a massive white pill to realize it is out of my control, unless called upon, and I am just living my best life.
But once again, I am just one aging man watching things from the sidelines. I command no power on either side of this coming war. I only see things shaping up. I very much hope I am wrong, but everything is falling into place as I have expected so far. If China/Russia/Iran can keep the Zionist bankers off their backs, and I don't know that they can, they could support this rebellion in the west to overthrow the satanic elites. But that is very far-fetched and so far, they have done nothing to help in this process.
No, it did not go over my head. What you're doing is arguing semantics regarding a topic that has been considered common knowledge for centuries. What next? Should we argue the definition of "Europe?" Or even what a "continent" is? Or the definition of what "is" is? No one debates that Black people are the descendants of the African peoples. When someone says a person whose ancestors are from China is Asian no one says, "Well, acksually..." because that would be ridiculous. But when a person says that White people are the genetic descendants of the historical peoples of Europe, somehow that is problematic. Think about that.
I have ancestry on one side that goes back to the mid 1600s in Massachusetts before they made their way to central New York. I have an ancestor who fought in the Revolutionary War on the side of the patriots and, among other ancestors, I have one who fought on the side of the Union and was captured and lived out the war in a prison camp, which was basically a concentration camp since many starved to death and he was 80ish pounds when he was released. None of my ancestors fought in the world wars but my dad was in Nam.
The founding fathers simply kept the word "White" ambiguous because they would let the question be settled by democratic vote. And Democracy is what has destroyed the White race, so, ergo, appealing to the founding fathers is in itself a flawed and doomed appeal.
People have thought about this, and it's been widely written about for hundreds of years. The best scientific racialists in the 18th century all agreed that Whites originated out of the Caucasus region, hence the term, "Caucasian race."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race (Please ignore Wikipedia's liberal bias; the sources and descriptions of what people thought in the past are still largely true)
To this day, the people of Georgia have their own distinct DNA separate from Europeans, and no one would call Georgians anything but White. For example, Joe Stalin was a Georgian, and to call him anything but White seems ridiculous on its face.
Thus the term Caucasian has a tremendous amount of scientific and empirical support, which holds that Whites originated out of Europe, the Caucasus, and North Africa. Each with their own DNA strands. Now, obviously, European Whites have flourished the most over the centuries due to their highly defensible location, but, it simply isn't true to limit the definition of White to Europe and that's why the term Caucasian has been used for centuries. The term was created by the same Europeans you are espousing.
Yes, and Whites voted repeatedly to keep it White, even going so far as to die in uprisings against the Union to not go to war in the south. Or WW2 soldiers surveyed by 90 to 10 of rather losing the war than integrating. So, it wasn't democracy that destroyed the Whites, it was the same satanic elites who make elections out to be the end all today, as they did back then. The founding fathers were very much against a democracy, but even when democracy overwhelmingly voted to keep the country Whtie, it was still not done by the people who were entrusted to do so.
Yes, Caucasian and White are two different things. Caucasian is race, Arabs are Caucasian, Indians and Pakistanis are Caucasian. North Africans are Caucasian. White is European, it is a wide ethnicity within the Caucasian race, to which there are more layers of ethnicity, such as Anglo-Saxon, or Mediterranean, or Alpine, or Nordic or Slavic.
You have it backwards and haven't read much about the Civil War: Heritage Americans voted for Lincoln because they were tired of Southern race mixers bringing over yet more Negros. You can literally read Lincoln's speeches in the Lincoln Douglas debates saying, "If you don't want miscegenation, how about we don't bring them [Blacks] here?" To which the crowds erupted in massive applause.
The North was disgusted with the South's obsession with importing Blacks by the hundreds of thousands. They were far more race realist than the South were, so the South had to try and make up for it by pretending to be super pro-White and treating Blacks like crap to compensate.
Sorry sammy. You're flat out wrong here. Love you my guy... But this is not accurate
Most of the heritage Americans were in the South.
Slavery in the South was a very very small percentage.
I see no reason to believe that race missing was actually their concern. That was was fought over which region would control the national government apparatus. Southern power centers or northern power centers and their different economic interests.
That said. I think what IIMT meant was that the founding fathers were pro constitutional Republic and not direct democracy. If that's accurate I agree. But not sure about the rest of the comment.
Maybe I'm misreading. Open to clarification
Last edited:
To get back on topic:
I think you mean here, "What does it mean to be Heritage American?" And the answer is to be a White descended from Europe.
But this argument leaves out the slaves, who were here longer than most Whites who came later.
Yes I agree with you, but I was responding to IIMT's claim that Americans voted on what was White but were shut down by the Federal Government in the Civil War. In reality in the Northern Whites voted to end the South because they hated Blacks being brought over. Southern Blacks had their economic interests, but the Northern population were the race realists.
I don't think of Heritage Americans this way at all. Vox Day's definition makes more sense to me: people who are mostly genetically British and have ancestors who were here before 1776. The founders wrote the constitution "to ourselves and our posterity" and probably meant "posterity" literally.
I meant what I wrote
This is a fair definition, but it's not what Starlight wrote.