Why do modern "ethno-nationalists" think all white people were considered equal by German/English/French racial...

Ok so explain the 19th century trend in trying to claim that every great leader from Rome to India looked pure Anglo-Saxon or Teutonic

Isn't it obvious? Amerimutts

Shape of the skull, bro

My point is that they used racial science to justify superiority back then.

Yes, both

But that's not racial science itself, that's just the implications they took from it.

Who do you think

>racially European.
stop

Nordics > other whites > the rest > piss > shit > niggers

t. Lothrop Stoddard

Does it trigger you

Yes, you're giving me secondhand embarrassment. "Racially European" isn't just cringe-worthy but a spit in the face of proper racial classification.

i knew it was over for the white race when i found out Veeky Forums and Veeky Forums were the whitest boards

>being this retarded and mad

Why does every history teacher tell that Germans wanted to kill everyone without blond hair and blue eyes?

For god's sake. People that were a quarter Jewish were considered Blood Germans.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Laws#Classifications_under_the_laws

>that feel when dark yellow has a higher development to red

>Why does every history teacher tell that Germans wanted to kill everyone without blond hair and blue eyes?
You know (((why)))

>muh development
Who gives a fuck

...

...

...

>Why does every history teacher tell that Germans wanted to kill everyone without blond hair and blue eyes?
Imaginary /pol/ spooks. They did want to kill non germans though.

>n-nobody believed an European race existed
Is this what kikes tell themselves today in order to "deconstruct whiteness"?

That's one map. Not indicative of a consensus. Saying all Europeans were just considered "White" is an insult to the massive amounts of diversity and complexity among European people. It's exactly the ignorant mindset that gives justification for sjws today, since if the hundreds of Europeans who are in fact already diverse are only treated as a monolithic "White" then they can all be considered the same and in need of a dose of diversity.

Those are languages.

like 80% of those are just slightly differing strains of a single language family, which is itself sprung from a single language(proto-indo-european)

German and English anthropologists held the "Nordic theory" which stipulated that IEs were Nordics from Germany that colonized Greece, Iran, India, and so on
French anthropologists held the "Celto-Slavic theory" which stipulated that IEs were Alpines from the Steppes that colonized everything from France to Poland, displacing the Pre-IE to the Balkians, and Scandinavia

The French were pretty much right about everything except about the Spaniards and the English who turned out to be IEs too

That map says nothing about a European race, only a Caucasian race which apparently includes Ethiopians. Do you believe that Somalis are whiter than Finns?

Your point?
Also
>slightly different
t.knows nothing of Italian dialects.

European and White are synonyms, it doesn't matter which term you use. I prefer European myself because there's more to race than just skin color.
>diversity and complexity
Which is mostly cultural and not racial. All Europeans from Spain to Russia form a pretty homogenous genetic cluster when contrasted to the rest of the world.

>only a Caucasian race
Map literally has a shade for ARIER you blind fuck

That map was made by an American (Lothrop Stoddard), but the OP clearly states the topic of discussion is "German/English/French racial theorists." Everyone knows Americans believe in a "white race", the question was why do retards believe that Europeans did?

Stoddard was a full Anglo.

i literally don't need to know anything about italian dialects to know that they aren't meaningfully different no offense. that doesn't necessarily justify their destruction, but 1000 different variations on a latin word, along with grammar that is virtually the same as the standard romance template, doesn't really excite me nor does it compel the conclusion that 'white' doesn't exist. i brought up the Indo-Europeans to show that yes, while you can claim that europeans are extremely diverse linguistically, you can also show that they're extremely similar linguistically(there are obviously genetic implications to PIE as well) if you go far back enough

Which are considered the same race as Ethiopians

As a subgroup of the Caucasian race, not a distinct race itself, or are you illiterate? Also, answer the question:
>Do you believe that Somalis are whiter than Finns?
Because that maps says they are

Literally even fucking wikipedia can prove you wrong.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Inequality_of_the_Human_Races
>Gobineau divides the human species into three major groupings, white, yellow and black
>Among the white races, he distinguishes the Aryan race as the pinnacle of human development, comprising the basis of all European aristocracies
Gobineau was French and the originator of racialism and he's saying literally the exact same thing Stoddard was saying.

So? He was an American, not a European, so irrelevant to the topic of conversation

>white races
The plural is important here. Whites were not considered one race, just a wider grouping, which included Semites by the way. And they were certainly NOT considered all equal

>three major groupings, white, yellow and black
>white
Now you can put your retarded theory about whites being an American invention to rest, because it's inaccurate.
By the way, I'm just curious what your background is.

>Now you can put your retarded theory about whites being an American invention to rest, because it's inaccurate
I never said the existence of white-skinned people was an American invention, you illiterate fool, only that the idea there is a single "white race" is.
>By the way, I'm just curious what your background is.
I'm not curious about yours, because it's obvious you're an Amerimutt

>all automobiles cannot be considered "cars", there is Chevrolet, Volkswagen, Ford, Toyota, but there is no "car"
This is what you're saying.

>it's obvious you're an Amerimutt
Wrong. And you're a shitskin.

I have actually heard this from idiots in real life.

Fuck off literally every history teacher i ever had emphasized this.

So this is the power of American education

I'm australian.

>Slavs
>not whiter than "Germanics"
lmao

All Anglos are the same

>they aren't meaningfully different

>fpbp
If you see a "white" thread on Veeky Forums, then you are talking to a mutt.

>Slavs aren't White meme
East Slavs and West Slavs are literally as White as you get. I never understood "Le Slavs aren't White meme" in relation to them. South Slavs, like Italians, Iberian or Greeks can be a little swarthier. But all in all, Slavs are probably among the fairest skinned linguistic groups on the planet.

Because modern white nationalists think that distinguishing too hard between europeans is just splitting hairs while their countries are being overrun by people who are drastically different.
You should at least listen to what a group's intellectuals have to say before you try to shit on them.

So you are admitting diversity is a meme? The real point is, it's liberals/sjw types who claim groups like the Italics "aren't diverse ENOUGH" despite them being very diverse. Meanwhile, apperently you need to import millions of pic related in order to be an adequately diverse country.Why, if (as you admit) what qualifies as diverse or not is ultimately subjective. If you look at European ethnic groups with nuance, however, yes, they are very diverse. The same is true for most Old World groups actually. It's hardly limited to Europe.

Slavs are the whitest Europeans you fucking moron. Germans wish to be 50% as white as Northern Slavs.

>
>i literally don't need to know anything about italian dialects to know that they aren't meaningfully different no offense.

Until like 1890 Italians from one city literally could not communicate with Italians a few miles away.

We are obviously dealing with a historical brainlet. That's ok, he is hopefully on Veeky Forums to learn and not to spread his (unlearning) as if it's fact.

You know who pushes that meme.

inability to communicate does not somehow invalidate what im saying. you can't tell me that 90% of the difference between such languages, hell, even between close sibling languages like spanish and italian, is just mutations of latin, with *occasional* semantic shifts that aren't even that radically different.
how am i brainlet? i understand that dialectical differences exist, and that they may have been, or currently are an impediment to communication. why is that a good thing? for me, i draw the line between semantic difference. There is a lot of differences in grammar and lexicon between Russian and Spanish. i wouldn't argue that the division between the two is irrelevant because clearly one word in Russian isn't a 1:1 mapping to a word in Spanish, or vice-versa. on the other hand, how many words in those italian dialects are, once again, just phonological mutations who have almost exact cognates in other langauges or dialects?

those mutations don't add meaning either which is why i consider inability to communicate trivial. ooga booga isn't meaningfully different from mooga pooga if the only difference between the two is that i added an m and p

Why do you think modern ethno-nationalist care if they were considered equal by German/English/French racial theorists?
This is a modern movement. The New racial Testament to their Old.

No. Let me educamate you on foreign lanugages:

Ethnographische = Ethnographic
Verbreitung = The spread of (Roughly)
Menschrasse = Human races

You don't see colours very well do you? The map does not show the same colour for white europeans and ethiopians. It does not say that somalians are whiter than Finns but it does show that Finns are considered a different group from white europeans which is actually true. Finns are closer to Samis than Swedes and Swedes are closer to Germans than Finns. It simply reflects the historical origins of those races.

Also I forgot to mention:
Skin colour =/= race.

maybe because most ethnats discussion happens anonymously.

this happens all the time outside of the blanket of anonymity. it might also be because, in the alt-rights current state, it can't be bothered with who's the better white people, because their more concerned with having a bigger movement

"white" just means "European Christendom", it doesn't mean Dutch paper white blue eyed people.

Nice divide & conquer strawman there, /leftypol/ shitlib soyboy.

All actual native europeans WERE regarded as aryan.

The Ahnenpaß/aryan pass stated that "wherever they might live in the world" Aryans were "e.g. an Englishman or a Swede, a Frenchman or a Czech, a Pole or an Italian".

Not all Aryans were considered equal. There was racial segregation in occupied Poland.

The most Aryan Europeans aka Balts, West and East Slavs weren't considered Aryans at all.

Stop making shit up.

Amerimutts, also racial theory is sponteous
>WE'RE NOT SLAVS WE ARE MIGHTY BULGHARS ENSLAVERS OF THE SLAVS

He's not making up anything you faggot.

>Amerimutts and Slavs
This, mutts need "white" as artificial distinction and it just means "of European descent", Slav's are just happy to have pale skin, because that's about the only thing that distinguishes them from other b-tier nations.
On the plus side, since no academics or educated people use the "white" moniker, you instantly know a shit thread on Veeky Forumswhen you see one.

>most aryan europeans
>potato-headed ""pure"" (aka inbred) finno-something raped a little 10.000 years ago by actual aryans
yeah, no

Balts and West Slavs are the pure Aryans. Anglos are retareded mutts.

Deal with it.

Anglos are not white but why mention them?

Because Anglos are still whiter than your average German shitskin. You want actual white people? Look at Baltic countries, Poland, Czech and Scandinavia.,

>Anglos
>whiter than Germans
Cool story Nigel

dumb Americans who don't understand anything outside of the US

my blood comes from Scandinavia, Prussia and Poland, I love being tall handsome and white its amazing too bad for you anglo manlets

Germans aren't white.

t. Schlomo

>prussia and poland
slavs which weren't seen as white
>scandinavia
only the
lazy and unenterprising Goths who had remained in Sweden, whereas the
heroic Goths had left Sweden, invaded the Roman empire and settled in
Spain

>ITT Slavs talking about why they SHOULD be superior thanks to their pale skin (100% Aryan bro!), but in reality are Europes underdeveloped poorfags.
>also dumbfucks that think "white race" is something scientific.

>weren't seen as white
Well memed

Back to the oven with you

They try to get what they can. Area 56 is the only place where it sort of makes sense to group all europeans. Their made-up history on the other hand is just as bad as we wuz kangz shit.

Okay user can we have some concrete source on the whole of the educated population thinking there was this shared super-race of white people, above that of anglo, teutones and hiberian, and not just a few romantist fags here and there

>prussia were slavs which weren't seen as white
>prussia created modern Germany, the holy circlejerk of aryans
man you're an idiot

Burden of proof is on you.

>thinking dagos are descendants of Scandinavians

>the rulers of a country are the same ethnictiy as its black masses
sure ting user
outlandish claims needs to be substantiated user, you are going against the mainstream, if you go back 100 years then most of europe isn't white because they're catholic

Prove Slavs aren't "white" via genetic research.

I'm waiting,

You made the outrageois claim they weren't considered white and now you can't substantiate it.