Why do Nords like Varg mock African societies for having accomplished very little, while at the same time...

Why do Nords like Varg mock African societies for having accomplished very little, while at the same time, Northern European societies accomplished very litttle?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tichit
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2038856/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>Varg
>Nord

He's French actually.

>Nordic

For some reason this image really triggers me.

>white europeans
>people who are actually white
wut

Northern European societies have accomplished quite alot considering their small population

He's Norwegian by birth. He moved to France because he couldn't make a living as an ex-con who was tried for one of the most infamous murder cases in modern European history.

This is West Africa in the 11th century AD, vikings were still in caves, just saying.

>vikings were still in caves
Obviously not very familiar with scandinavian history

>Nords like Varg mock African societies
you clearly don't know Varg
>>>/reddit/

Why are you posting pics of the ruins Kasr el Barka as it is some ancient building? It's from the late 1690 or so.

Not him, but he's on the right track.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tichit

I dunno it's like some stormfaggot post the Rosenholm castle as it's some Bronze age scandinavia building, you can look at the rocks and see they aren't millenarian, much less 6.000 years old for the way they are cut and how clean they are.

Well Dhar Tichitt/Tichitt-Walata is considered a neolithic archeological site. According to that wiki, Tichit as it is now is a village that is partly abandoned, so I'd assume certain portions of it are upkept.

American education at work. Honestly, aside from upbringing, there must have been at least a couple hundred threads here talking about actual ancient african kingdoms, and people shitposting "dude mudhuts LMAO" was old the first day Veeky Forums was made.

>Obviously not very familiar with scandinavian history

Yes, you are right. They were in mud-huts.

Gee, I wonder who is on the top 5 countries in terms of human development, periodic table discoveries, Nobel prizes, inventions, medical research (it was the Nazis who discovered the link between smoking and cancer, for example), etc.

Shit b8, sage. Whoever replied to this thread before I did is a complete retard. Who replies after I exposed OP as an attention whore autist, is a retard.

>link between smoking and cancer discovered by Nazis

nice try wehraboo faggot

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2038856/

First link between carcinoma of the lung and smoking discovered by Austin Bradford Hill- an englishman, and Richard Doll, another englishman.

>not knowing history on a history board
>posting incorrect history on a history board

>That Jew
Kek

They were still the first to enact anti public smoking ordinances. Deal with it

nice goal post moving my guy

german autism truly knows no bounds

>northern Europeans societies accomplished very little
nice meme

That photo triggers me.

>Why

Because some idiot in the South invented the idea of being white. Thanks to this, Northern Europeans can latch onto the achievements of Southern Europeans under the guise that they were "white" achievements. It's rather ironic because the Romans themselves described them as barbaric compared to Africans. Pic related should sum up how they think.

"accomplished" in this context referring to the times of tribalism

compared to the diversity in Africa, north and south Europeans are the same shit
and the fact that you think Romans were talking about niggers when referring to Africans completely invalidates your opinion on anything

>not talking about niggers when referring to Africans
>invalidates your opinion on anything
Stay mad you subhuman snow nigger you were in caves and mud huts while Southern Europeans and Africans were creating civilization

>Africans were creating civilization
good one, thanks for the laugh
funny thing is, I'm south European myself

That is a werid way of narrowing it down in order to make them appear equal, almost like it's on purpose.

The Greeks were not unified politically until the time of Alexander (356-323 BC). Before that, their city states often fought each other, but they always recognized that, whatever their city or tribe, they belonged to the same nation or race. They called non-Greeks barbaroi, and resident foreigners metics. The latter were not normally eligible for citizenship. When Pericles (495-429 BC), the Athenian statesman and democrat, proposed a law to deny citizenship to anyone not born of both an Athenian mother and father it easily passed the assembly and became law.

The Greeks also drew clear ethnic distinctions between peoples. Homer used the figurative phrase “sun-burnt races” for brown-skinned Asiatics [and Africans] because Greeks and Europeans were lighter-skinned. Aristotle believed that “barbarians were more servile in character than Hellenes, and Asiatics more so than Europeans, for Asiatics submit without murmuring to despotic government.” Aristotle urged his pupil Alexander to maintain sharp distinctions between Greeks and their eastern enemies, and to treat conquered peoples “like plants and animals.” Prof. Painter quotes the Greek physician Hippocrates, who noted of the Scythians that “it is the cold which burns their white skin and turns it ruddy.” Prof. Painter does not seem to have noticed the words “white skin” in this passage.

As for the Romans, there is even clearer evidence that they thought in terms of common descent and physical differences. Their words genus and generis were almost an exact equivalent to our word “race.” Cassell’s Latin Dictionary defines them as meaning “race, stock, family,” also “birth, descent, origin,” and in its broadest sense, “kind.” Our word genocide comes from it. Romans had a related word, gens, gentis, which meant “clan,” but more generally, “people, tribe, nation.” It was derived from the verb gigno or geno, meaning “to beget, bear, bring forth.” The words natio and nationis meant “being born, birth,” but could also mean “tribe, race, or people.” Natio was the Roman goddess of birth, and our word nation comes from her name.

Clearly the Romans, like the Greeks, regarded a nation as a group with a common ancestry, in other words an ethnic group or race. The Roman historian Suetonius recorded that “[Emperor] Augustus thought it very important not to let the native Roman stock be tainted with foreign or servile blood, and was therefore unwilling to create new Roman citizens, or permit the manumission of more than a limited number of slaves.” The poet Juvenal railed against “Easterners” (Egyptians, Syrians, Jews) who were flooding into Rome, complaining that the Orontes, a river in Syria, “has poured its sewage into our native Tiber.” He called one upstart Egyptian “silt washed down by the Nile.” Romans never spoke of fellow Europeans — Thracians, Germans, Gauls, Iberians — in such insulting terms, except for the Greeks, for whom they appear to have held some special enmity. Juvenal even warned one Roman administrator that while it was safe to plunder the eastern provinces, not so the western: “But steer clear of rugged Spain, give a very wide berth to Gaul and the coast of Illyria.”

The Romans were clearly struck by the physical appearance of the Celtic and Germanic tribes to their north. Prof. Painter does not include a single physical description of the Gauls by a Roman, but there are many. Diodorus Sicilus (1st century BC) described “the Gauls as tall of body, with rippling muscles, and white of skin, and their hair is blond …” Ammianus Marcellinus, the late imperial Roman historian (4th century AD), wrote that “almost all Gauls are tall and fair-skinned with reddish hair.” Virgil described the Gauls who sacked Rome in 390 BC as having “golden hair, striped cloaks, white necks entwined with gold.” The Roman historian Cassius Dio (c. 150-c. 230 AD) described Queen Boudicca, who led the Gallic revolt against Roman rule in 61 AD, as being tall with long-flowing “tawny hair.” Prof. Painter does manage to quote Tacitus, who described the Germans as “tall” with “fierce blue eyes and red hair.” (Tacitus used the word rutilus, which meant “red, golden, auburn.”)

It is clear, therefore, that even if they did not use the word, the Romans thought of their northern neighbors as white, and some suffered from what might be called “blond envy.” Having lost some of the fair features of their ancestors, later Romans wanted to look more like the Gauls and Germans. The Christian author Tertullian (160-225 AD) complained that “some women dye their hair blond by using saffron. They are even ashamed of their country, sorry that they were not born in Germany or in Gaul.” Juvenal records that the Emperor Claudius’ wife Messalina kept her “black hair hidden under an ash-blonde wig.” Prof. Painter claims that the ideal of white beauty arose as part of the Eastern European slave trade. She is off by about 1,500 years.

The Romans not only noticed physical differences, they thought of them in racial terms. When Tacitus found the same physical features (“red hair and tall stature”) among the people of Caledonia (Scotland), he assumed that they were of “Germanic origin,” meaning that they belonged to the same race. When he noticed that the Silures living nearby had “swarthy faces and curly hair,” he assumed they were of Iberian origin. Iberians had the same features and could have sailed from Spain to Britain. Tacitus was not sure whether heredity or climate was the stronger influence on physical appearance, but Prof. Painter assures us that the ancients thought it was all due to climate.

Prof. Painter mentions the peoples of northern and western Europe — whom the Greeks knew as Keltoi and Skythai and the Romans as Celtae, Galli, and Germani — only to tell us that they did not think of themselves as white. “Rather than as ‘white’ people, northern Europeans were known by vague tribal names: Scythians and Celts, then Gauls and Germani.” Prof. Painter is wrong. Those were national, not tribal names. The Germans knew themselves by such tribal names as Marsi, Suebi, or Alemanni. It was the Gauls, and then the Romans, who gave them the national name Germani. Likewise, the Celts called themselves by their tribal names, such as the Helvetii of what is now Switzerland, and the Iceni of eastern Britain, but they were aware that they belonged to a family of tribes related by kinship, religion, language, and mores.

I didn't lie once

>its a "varg burns his bridges with the few remaining people who still like him within his faggy weirdo fascist meme cult all over an autistic argument over hair color" episode

>but did not the vast majority of Jewish people, particularity in Middle ages and Renaissance, considered themselves Jewish before European?

Yeah so?

Pic related

>Carthage
>African
rip Phoenecia

...

This isn't a "You're not white" thread, update your meme. This is a thread exposing Northern Europeans latching onto the achievements of Southern Europeans.

Read the OP again

Thats Africa
Scandinavians used wood

Mud and wood, just like Africa and most of the world really.

>LEL XD LET'S COMPARE 1600s AFRICA WITH 800AD SCANDINAVIA
>Also implying blacks built that rather than Arabs or Coptic Egyptians

>Coptic Egyptians
>In Mauritania

Stop posting

>hey sven
>ya olaf?
>look at these lines i drew on some rocks! i call them, RUNES
>dude, that's fucking graffiti

Times are changing I guess. Don't know if it's for the best, but at least it could be worse.

>what are you writing about, olaf?
>nothing special

>dude that's fucking Italian
fixed
Germans literally just copied alphabets they saw while they were mercenaries or traders in the Roman Empire, like those Native Americans who "invented" their own scripts after contact with Europeans.

>nords stole their alphabet from italians
who stole theirs from the greeks who stole theirs from phoenicians who stole theirs from egyptians
whats your point?

Danes are pretty cool, and Swedes might be contemptible clowns but they have made great contributions to science in the last few centuries.
However, is there a less relevant nation on the Eurasian landmass than Norway?

Reminder that the crusades were a thing, people who refuse and are ignorant that the Nords got their asses handed to them are retarded.

Greeks invented an original alphabet. The Linear B or A script. Also you the vinca (ancient Balkan civilization) which developed script. Meanwhile Northern Europeans never developed anything on their own.

>Greeks invented an original alphabet.

No, Linear A was invented by Minoans who were a pre-Indo-European people

>one of the most infamous murder cases
The only reason it's infamous is because he never jumped of a "i piss on Euronymous grave, Heil Hitler, Europe must be destroyed" train.
If he was even remotely less autistic he would be long forgotten like the other black metal murder cases.

You know whats funny about your statement? This gets cited by liberals as some sort of defense for the success of socialism or socialist democracies but the irony is that these countries only found success literally because they purposely opted out from participating in the very same liberal globalist nonsense that they tried to sucker them into with the European Union. Norway, Denmark, and Switzerland are all perfect examples of this.

So the next time some liberal says "omg we need to get UBI and accept refugees and make college free", just know that they are morons that don't understand why these concepts even work in the countries they reference.

how esoteric do you want to go?

Could that post wew the lad any harder?

>nords
>reading
>writing

whew lad.

>what are you writing about, govna?
>nothing special old chap, just documenting the latest incident of rape and plunder from those dastardly viKANGZ

kek

>It's another "Southern Europeans pretend that they are superior and not just welfare leeches on Northern Europeans" thread

You are aware that Germanics had their own writing system, right?

The same cannot be said for Celts, for example.

Southern Europeans acted as a barrier of defense against the desert shitskins, and allowed for you snowniggers to remain sheltered.

Its easy to talk shit when youre not at the border of europe defending against the mudslime and black hordes.

Why does /pol/ and Veeky Forums place so much emphasis on building materials?
They talk shit about "mudhuts"
But they don't talk shit about stacked stone or stacked wood nearly as much.
Is there something that makes them believe constructing a building out of mud is less intelligent than other materials?

alexander was obsessed with the persians though

Why argue?

I mean both Northern and Southern European contributed greatly to Western Civilization.

>Lose Spain
>Germanic Franks have to step in and beat the Umayyads

>Lose Sicily+South Italy

>Carolingians have to step in and beat the Aghlabids

>Lose Jerusalem
>HRE just has to walk into the Holy Land and negotiate

>Lose Anatolia
>Varangians have to step in and beat various invaders
>Frenchmen and Venetians sack Constantinople ruining the ERE and destroying all the Germanics had worked for

>Lose the Balkans
>Austria, HRE and Russia have to step in and beat the Ottomans

>Lose the Holy land again
>The UK and Russia have to step in and beat the Ottomans once more

>Gain Africa
>Germanics immediately convert their colonies
>Latins just let theirs be dominated by muslims

>Lose Algiers
>Germanics won't help
>Import of millions of Algerian shitskins willingly into your country

Sorry, who is the one defending Europe from Islam again?

I didn't just mean literally you autistic moron and god forbid they might have needed help from time to time.

Its easy to be superior when youre in an environment where you dont have to deal with niggers and muslims constantly.

You probably think the poor rural whites in the US are inferior to the liberals who live in gated communities.

If it wasn't for the rural redneck whites, the US would have fallen long ago.

>Lose Spain
Because of mutiny.

>Lose Sicily+South Italy
Big deal. Just two irrelevant regions in Italy.

>Lose Jerusalem
The Byzantines were extremely weak at that point and were militarily neutered. At least they successfully defeated Arabs at every siege they committed on their capital.

>Lose Anatolia
Same reasons as above. ERE remains as the the longest lived state in Europe.

>Lose the Balkans
>complaining that a bunch of irrelevant kingdoms lose to a premier power

>Lose the Holy land again
What? Europeans never had the holy land again after the middle ages.

>Latins just let theirs be dominated by Muslims
Ex-Spaniard and Portuguese colonies were not and are not Muslim at all, and the British and French never had success in converting their North African colonies either.

>Lose Algiers
>implying france is in southern europe

>Import of millions of Algerian shitskins willingly into your country
>Sorry, who is the one defending Europe from Islam again?
Are you unironically saying this while the biggest hotpots for Muslim immigrants are Germanic countries?

Poor rural whites in the US are Germanics and Celts you retard

>needed help from time to time
Besides early Byzantium, when did Meds ever repel a Muslim invasion on their own?

>"South Europeans acted as a barrier of defense"
>Point out that North Europeans have had to defend South Europeans in most Muslim invasions
>"B-but we were weak, those lands weren't important, we managed to not lose completely, Germanic countries are filled with immigrants now so the last 1000+ years of history don't count"
>Pls don't mention that France has more Muslims than every other country in europe

Not even the Mediterranean contains this much salt

Also Germanics invented all modern industry

>Poor rural whites in the US are Germanics and Celts you retard

I was using US whites as an analogy, but you know what, forget it.

why does varg dislike judaism even though it practically is desert paganism and its culture is rich?

he's an edgy LARPer just like every other "pagan" today.

>desert paganism
Its a rejection of all nature in favor of abstraction.

How is it pagan?

he creative genius of the Jews is inversion.
This has made them the representatives of nihilism in the west.

They took a world where they were the bottom and flipped it on its head, placing them on the top, and then they denied this position to all other desperate, degenerate, slaves in every other tribe.
This made them hated.
if they had offered salvation to every slave, every genetically inferior individual, desperate for a wy to change his determined immutable past, they would have become powerful before the Modern age.
But they were misers who wanted to be the 'chosen' by their one god, which they stole from the Persians.
They would keep salvation for themselves, making them the only victims worthy of it.

Their mistake became apparent quickly enough, and Hellenism offered them a solution.
Their spiritual elitism, of the feeble, and lowly, would be offered to other tribes in a watered-down form: Christianity, and then Islam.
Later they would do away with the discriminating God part, leaving only the idea, as State, as love, as freedom, as equality, as humanity.

Their inversion does not seem much to us today but at the time it was revolutionary.

Words/Symbols would still connect noumenon with phenomenon, but the direction would be inverted.

Instead of symbols connecting min with world, it would connect world with mind.
Instead of noumenon being a representation of phenomenon, phenomenon would be a representation of noumenon.
We now know this as subjectivity, denying an objective world, rejecting natural order against which man measures himself and all his inventions, innovations and perceptions.
Instead of the idea(l) adjusting, adapting, to the real, the real would be adjusted, adapted to the idea(l).

The symbols/word would no longer go outwards, connecting mind to world, but inwards, connecting world to mind.

The inversion required duplicity, because the world remains indifferent to human contrivances and it would force a high cost on those who detached their senses from it.
Duplicity, and compartmentalization, and selective application of reasoning, became a mainstay of the Abrahamic triad, and later with Marxism, and Humanism.
The lie was where obscurity and innuendo would hide, knowing that the majority would not have the cognitive abilities, not the psychological fortitude to perceive it and expose it.

Lies have become an unspoken social contract binding together all variants of nihilism.
As with all pretentious performances the audience is expected to suspend reason, and participate in the act being preformed.
The idea that you could change your lot in life, by using symbols, metaphors, words, that compensate for inherited feebleness was too seductive to the many, to not be taken advantage of.

Retarded thread but I approve after all the anti-'kangz' posts.

>placing them on the top, and then they denied this position to all other desperate, degenerate, slaves in every other tribe

jews allow conversion and believe everyone will benefit in the World to Come

Because modern Nothern European societies are more succesful and have been so for quite a while.

Also they're the kind of dumb autismos who kill other people over black metal drama.

>lose spain

spain was a VISIGOTH kingdom by the time the moors entered the peninsula, and guess what the absolute fucking GERMan cucks did, they LET THEM IN.

You fucking germanic cucks destroyed iberia forever, the only good germanics were the suebi.

Perhaps they allowed conversion as a means to compete with Christianity but conversion is still usually looked down upon.

>World to come
Of course, because they were too weak for the world as it is.

>Lose Jerusalem

Technically Ashkenazi are Mediterranean master race so Southern Europeans have the Holy Land

b-but muh harsh environment

This is exactly why I don't see Jewish domination of the world as a bad thing. They are just continuing the legacy of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance. They are proud Mediterranean people using inferior wh*tes as their slaves just as we did.

>Lose Spain
>Germanic Franks have to step in and beat the Umayyads

fuck off already you filthy liar, cunt.

>the only reason it is infamous is because of this thing that made it infamous

>the only reason you have ever heard of Leo Messi is because he is good at football

No shit Sherlock...

by the 11th century the nordic saxon tribe had merged with the angles to conquer and resettle england.

I thought we were the nationality of our passport, are you not being universalistic in your standards? Really activates the almonds

why is the IQ of this board so close to /int/ ie low as fuck?

Its a nordhate thread, what did you expect?

>VINCA
>SCRIPT