| A unique pro-Northern ideology I have come up with and tampered with ideology in and out for years now, fading between being a true antinationalist and Communist and having a more particularist and possibly nationalist sympathizing ideology. Looking at it, I believe that true unparticularist Communism is more the value I put up because it fits for the most part and looks better and that my latter belief is kept inside and truer to who I am, but would reflect bad upon my leftism and would receive scorn from both Libertarians and Commies. Septentrionalism would normally be a name that would fit the idea, but that's already been taken by a more specific Northern culture, Germanic. I know this just may make me seem like some crazy unorthodox racist right winger nationalist nazi-esque human being, which is why I hide such feeling under just Commie, or just Libertarian Socialist, but please hear me out and ask questions about the matter. I don't intend for Borealism to be the same as white nationalism or resembling any common forms of Conservatism, Nationalism, Fascism, Nazism, or so forth. If anything I'd like to see it associated with a more Tribalist, and preservationist, Libertarian Left. It would probably be best for me to put out a book on the matter, or form a music band around promoting the ideology to get it known. This is mostly just a thread for me to expound upon my thoughts. |
 Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| Heh. |
hikky said: Heh. This thread better have more than this sort of thing to it when I wake up tomorrow.:/ |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| That was a tongue twisted read. But I'm not sure I understand, what exactly is borealism? |
| I am curious. Please write more. |
ukonkivi said: hikky said: Heh. This thread better have more than this sort of thing to it when I wake up tomorrow.:/ If you post in your sleep. ukonkivi said: This is mostly just a thread for me to expound upon my thoughts. Blogs exist for this sort of thing. |
Kurtz said: But I'm not sure I understand, what exactly is borealism? I see it as a word that should come to describe Septentrionalism in a bigger macrocosm of just having a philia for the north and Northern cultures in general. Politically I see it as an alternative to Pan-Europeanism, Pan-Asianism, and Pan-Americanism. And is instead a form of Pan-Northernism. Of course, that's my most simplistic answer to the question. There's quite a bit more specifics I'd like I could entail than simply saying that would say. |
ukonkiviOct 5, 2009 8:14 AM
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| This is an anime forum. What makes you think we want to hear pretentious bs? Especially pretentious bs that tries to hide it's lack of content behind a bunch of polysylabic words. Now back to the real topic. Dubs are better. |
| This is a serious post. You're not allowed to delete it. |
| Oh right, I get it. I don't really like the Northern countries so I'm afraid I can't become a Borist. Or whatever you plan on calling yourselves. |
 |
| I'm all for Scandinavianism. The second Kalmar Union. You lost me at tribalism. But do tell, what sort of government would be your ideal then? I suppose you won't be having any grand delusions of a complex anarchic society? |
ukonkivi said: I see it as a word that should come to describe Septentrionalism in a bigger macrocosm of just having a philia for the north and Northern cultures in general. Politically I see it as an alternative to Pan-Europeanism, Pan-Asianism, and Pan-Americanism. And is instead a form of Pan-Northernism. Of course, that's my most simplistic answer to the question. There's quite a bit more specifics I'd like I could entail than simply saying that would say. I see. |
Baman said: But do tell, what sort of government would be your ideal then? Normally I'm more of a Minarchist individual. However I'm also an extreme preservationist for certain heritages and have a few green politics than sometimes challenge my government lessening beliefs. That is, I wouldn't mind there being MORE government in the way preserving Northern heritage. By whatever means, Minarchistically or through more government, here's a few of the things I mean by Borealism and a few of the Preservations that I mean. At least as far as Scandanavian culture is concerned, I do mean a greater Macrocosm than just that. A greater preservation of Runic as a writing system. I mean to spread the mainstream usage of Runic as much as possible. I believe that Runic is far too overshadowed by the Latin Alphabet. Extreme support of ancient Germanic traditions, in a way that might be considered more European Tribalism resembling than Corporation Modernism. That is, it's not especially economic left necessarily, it's just extreme in the matter of observance and preservation of Germanic, Scandinavian traditions. People may be Atheistic or whatever, but the traditions of Heathenry that Ásatrú seeks to revive should have a greater impact than currently. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
ukonkivi said: So...you're trying to bring back the vikings?Baman said: But do tell, what sort of government would be your ideal then? Normally I'm more of a Minarchist individual. However I'm also an extreme preservationist for certain heritages and have a few green politics than sometimes challenge my government lessening beliefs. That is, I wouldn't mind there being MORE government in the way preserving Northern heritage. By whatever means, Minarchistically or through more government, here's a few of the things I mean by Borealism and a few of the Preservations that I mean. At least as far as Scandanavian culture is concerned, I do mean a greater Macrocosm than just that. A greater preservation of Runic as a writing system. I mean to spread the mainstream usage of Runic as much as possible. I believe that Runic is far too overshadowed by the Latin Alphabet. Extreme support of ancient Germanic traditions, in a way that might be considered more European Tribalism resembling than Corporation Modernism. That is, it's not especially economic left necessarily, it's just extreme in the matter of observance and preservation of Germanic, Scandinavian traditions. People may be Atheistic or whatever, but the traditions of Heathenry that Ásatrú seeks to revive should have a greater impact than currently. |
| This is a serious post. You're not allowed to delete it. |
Fjuff said: If I understand this correctly, Borealism is more or less an ideology of a society based on a highly conservative form of Ásatrú which will seek to revive old traditions of Heathenry to give it a greater impact on the society than it currently does. The economic system will be based on the old Germanic and Scandinavian traditions and it will also try to reinstate the Runic writing system to some degree. That sounds about right for the most part. Though there's more to it than that. All Northern cultures are involved to some degree. For instance Uralic, Slavic and Celtic cultures. And I'm not sure if the word Conservative works, because if I'm not mistaken Conservative tends to mean preserving the status quo. In which this philosophy is way too traditionalist and preservationist to be in line with the status quo. Fjuff said: What's your thoughts about foreign policy of Borealism? Is it more of a protectionist or liberal approach you have in mind? I'm thinking more along the lines of protectionist. Sort of on the fence about this matter, because I like the idea of heavy exchange to and from between the north. Extreme protectionism would make it awfully difficult, bringing in the anime matter of this forum to light, to buy the kinds of anime you like and protectionist policies tend to make it difficult to experience matters of another culture, which may not necessarily deteriorate the culture of one country depending on the viewpoint. I'm not sure I'm for heavy import quotas. I'm sure that I'm against one that restricts any kind of Northern Unity. Not sure I agree with tariffs, either. Thought I'd be easier to accept tariffs between, say, Vietnam, Morocco, Iran, Israel, China and Norway, than Finland and Sweden. To which degree I am not yet sure, but I believe that to some degree absolute free trade between cultures may harm northern heritage, and wish to prevent it. Basically "any free trade that is not seen as counterproductive to Northern economies and Northern cultures is fine". |
ukonkiviOct 5, 2009 10:36 AM
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| 'sup Sverigedemokraterna/Dansk Folkeparti/what have you In a word, no thanks. In more of a word, I believe that any formal support of any kind of specific culture by a government is only harmful and in no way beneficial. Culture is vast and sprawling, for as it were, they are the field of self-expression, self-search, identification, differentiation, entertainment and life within which we exist - and 'we' are of all kinds, so cultures should be maximalized in number, not minimalized (which this would lead to). Why should the government, or what have you, bulldoze its way through and support culture X instead of xulture Y? This is pretty important, and you somehow managed to skip this part. And with pretty important I mean it is the most important, for For aesthetic reasons? Well, tastes differ, as you know. And I would prefer the government, or what have you, not to force me to like something. It should be pragmatic and minimal in its care for culture. For historical reasons? Well, we have a good deal of immigrants who have no connection to culture X. How would you define and delineate the culture of historical import? For surely, it would be more archaic and thus truer to the roots to adpot a pro-Samic, or for that matter, if we go before the diaspora two million years ago, semipretribal, non-talking and artless? Patently not, so the historic argument would collapse into pure favoritism... and thus, again, mere taste. For practical reasons? Well, delineate them, then. I cannot see any, so arguing against them is impossible. There's just no benefit from this. If there is no reason to adopt it, there's, well, no reason to adopt it. What problem would this solve? |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
Kaisereddie said: Why should the government, or what have you, bulldoze its way through and support culture X instead of xulture Y? As you said down at the bottom, it's a fairly "taste" oriented thing, as I would say is true of most politics. It relies on the National Romanticist and Northern Romanticist feelings of those involved in it. I also don't mean Borealism to be purely political, it can be much of a personal hobbyist thing such as someone who majors in Scandinavian and loves studying and putting forth Northern cultures in general. However I don't think it would be unreasonable to apply politics to such an idea. And given I see politics and indeed, subjective, I see nothing wrong with such political ideas spawning from Northern taste. Kaisereddie said: not to force me to like something. I wouldn't go so far as to say that, at least for most cases. Immigration and citizenship may be a different case. But for the most part, this is more of a Preservationism thing than an extreme Authoritarianism thing, as I see it. Kaisereddie said: Well, we have a good deal of immigrants who have no connection to culture X. Ah, and here I get my push to go into immigration, ethnicity, and ect. I also you see that you brought up the Sami. I went into Scandinavian specifics as a result of Baman's response about the matter. I hope you're not confusing northern to just be "Nordic" and to mean Germanic Western European Northern only. When I said Northern, I meant Northern. I don't know what you mean about "truer" though. My idea is based around the idea that instead of necessarily East and West, Communist and Capitalist as history has gone on, all Norther cultures share a common heritage of being Northern and a common ethnic heritage of originating through Northern mutation. I think that the wrong kind of immigration would be undesirable for Northern values. I think that things common among the "Conservatives" of today such as anti-LGBT politics and so forth would be detrimental to such a thing. It's misses the point and attacks something that would be productive to Christian morals, but not necessarily Northern particularism. Simply put, there is a certain ethnic goal that can be brought about far different from the Abrahamic morality of the matter. An ethnic goal. The only thing homosexuals cannot do is have heterosexual sex out of want which is the normal way of producing children. And from an ethnic goal, this is not beneficial. However, if the focus of putting forth Northern children is desirable, which is surely for the most part from this standpoint, it's merely but another reason to put forth Eugenics ideas. No genocide or anything like people have the wrong ideas about the matter from. But Eugenics and Transhumanism to preserve Northern Haplogroups and the matter. And also to keep Northerners on top of game should a eugenics war ever arise. Haplogroups R1a, R1b, N, and C will be the focus of ethnic preservation. That obviously limits the degree to which any immigration or welcome from Southerners can exist. A high "maintenance" should always be placed upon society with the goal of keeping haplogroup direction in a Northern mutation direction and so that population is kept proper. Even many homosexuals can give to this as many men not interested in heterosexual intercourse can donate sperm and many lesbians wish to raise children and take donated sperm. And this eugenics program will strongly benefit homosexuals because it allows for the facilities they need to be common and acceptable as heterosexuals. And if someone is simply strongly anti-Northern from the North, and wishes to live in sandy deserts and put forth Desert culture, or feels like Che Guevara and wishes to fight the North, they may simply leave. I should like to see the punishment as fairly limited for such a society. I don't necessarily have to have these things government enforced. Though it's a possibility I consider. This eugenics things is also just a possible assertion for the most part. Though I do want to preserve certain Haplogroups and even cultivate them to some degree. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
Kaisereddie said: If a specific culture is worthy of surviving, it will. Survival of the fittest work with culture as well as anything else. I do begrudge the failures of our ancestors as they forsook the old Åsatru and cowered before the vile iron hand of Kvitekrist, but alas, such is history. Why should the government, or what have you, bulldoze its way through and support culture X instead of xulture Y? And as luck would have it, Christianity is slowly losing it's grip anyways, leading towards a more enlightened, scientific and bright secular future. There are already several groups embracing the old ways as it is, but why should the government, as Kaiser puts it, bulldoze it's way through the present culture in order to protect the old ones? They are recorded and remembered in history, and even then, a lot is lost, especially concerning Åsatru. If people thought they were awesome enough, they would embrace them and bring them back to the mainstream, but establishing a sort of protectionism and even forcing one niche culture on the rest who are content with their Jeudo-Christian inspired cultures (no matter how vile we may think it is) isn't something that would be easy to do. And it does strike me as rather pointless. Reviving old northern culture won't boost our scientific progress, military or our economy, and neither will it lead us to rediscover some profound ancient arts. Eugenics and transhumanism could be a splendid addition though, damn all those who dirty it's name, but basing it on a specific ethnicity seems rather ridiculous to me. If you're going into eugenics and genetic engineering, you'd naturally aim to produce the best results, the best abilities and specifications, which means you'd naturally want to mix some African blood in if it could help out on physical fitness. |
BamanOct 5, 2009 11:49 AM
ukonkivi said: As you said down at the bottom, it's a fairly "taste" oriented thing, as I would say is true of most politics. It relies on the National Romanticist and Northern Romanticist feelings of those involved in it. I also don't mean Borealism to be purely political, it can be much of a personal hobbyist thing such as someone who majors in Scandinavian and loves studying and putting forth Northern cultures in general. However I don't think it would be unreasonable to apply politics to such an idea. And given I see politics and indeed, subjective, I see nothing wrong with such political ideas spawning from Northern taste. Quite. But, see, culture is autonomous. It works of its own accord. People like and think as they do. Not that it is an autonomous process individually - we're shaped by social circumstances to like what we like - but nevertheless, culture chooses and works on its own. Institutionalizing cultural and ethnic supremacy is something very different from there being one. I would much rather have tastes grow forth naturally than not. Bottom-up than top-down. Why? Because that way nothing is forced on anyone which couldn't be helped but forced. In other words, governmental preference of an ethnic group or culture extends government authority to the tastes of the masses. It should be the reverse - the taste of the masses means the government changes. (If we are to have governments). Institutionalization is unnecessary insofar as that people will choose to go with what they choose to go with, it would only complicate things for the day when tastes shift. You need to justify any kinds of intrusions of freedom, legitimize them. Basic Chomsky practice :< ukonkivi said: I wouldn't go so far as to say that, at least for most cases. Immigration and citizenship may be a different case. But for the most part, this is more of a Preservationism thing than an extreme Authoritarianism thing, as I see it. What parts should be preserved? The pillaging? The sleeping in a common room with the animals? There was no common cultural unity in the North, ever, nor was there an ethnic one (again, the Sami people, and other ethnic minorities - Finns and other ugric people, gypsies, and the occasional heap of slaves. There's no clear line between ethnic groups, either). There is nothing per se to preserve - as you say, it is National Romanticism, which was never ever grounded in fact, but on an imagined past. Creationism may be a better term, but that one has a baggage of its own, so I would propose imaginationism or something akin to that. Furthermore, preservation/imagination would have to mean that a very significant part of the population does live and act within the sphere of the imagined culture. Which would have to include coercion. The state must sponsor culture X - in this case, the constructed Northern one. That's the problem - it solves no problem, it creates one by crippling diversity. ukonkivi said: Ah, and here I get my push to go into immigration, ethnicity, and ect. I also you see that you brought up the Sami. I went into Scandinavian specifics as a result of Baman's response about the matter. I hope you're not confusing northern to just be "Nordic" and to mean Germanic Western European Northern only. When I said Northern, I meant Northern. I don't know what you mean about "truer" though. My idea is based around the idea that instead of necessarily East and West, Communist and Capitalist as history has gone on, all Norther cultures share a common heritage of being Northern and a common ethnic heritage of originating through Northern mutation. I think that the wrong kind of immigration would be undesirable for Northern values. I think that things common among the "Conservatives" of today such as anti-LGBT politics and so forth would be detrimental to such a thing. It's misses the point and attacks something that would be productive to Christian morals, but not necessarily Northern particularism. Simply put, there is a certain ethnic goal that can be brought about far different from the Abrahamic morality of the matter. An ethnic goal. The only thing homosexuals cannot do is have heterosexual sex out of want which is the normal way of producing children. And from an ethnic goal, this is not beneficial. However, if the focus of putting forth Northern children is desirable, which is surely for the most part from this standpoint, it's merely but another reason to put forth Eugenics ideas. No genocide or anything like people have the wrong ideas about the matter from. But Eugenics and Transhumanism to preserve Northern Haplogroups and the matter. And also to keep Northerners on top of game should a eugenics war ever arise. Haplogroups R1a, R1b, N, and C will be the focus of ethnic preservation. That obviously limits the degree to which any immigration or welcome from Southerners can exist. A high "maintenance" should always be placed upon society with the goal of keeping haplogroup direction in a Northern mutation direction and so that population is kept proper. Even many homosexuals can give to this as many men not interested in heterosexual intercourse can donate sperm and many lesbians wish to raise children and take donated sperm. And this eugenics program will strongly benefit homosexuals because it allows for the facilities they need to be common and acceptable as heterosexuals. And if someone is simply strongly anti-Northern from the North, and wishes to live in sandy deserts and put forth Desert culture, or feels like Che Guevara and wishes to fight the North, they may simply leave. I should like to see the punishment as fairly limited for such a society. I don't necessarily have to have these things government enforced. Though it's a possibility I consider. This eugenics things is also just a possible assertion for the most part. Though I do want to preserve certain Haplogroups and even cultivate them to some degree. What are Northern values? Why are they Northern? Why are they simultaneously so important and so fragile they need State sponsorship? Northern values, if such could be isolated, will have been the product of a discourse between North and what's not. Interracial children are, I think, far better off than monoracial ones. The seclusion of an imagined ethnic group would produce an insular and limited range of genes; it is far more worthwhile to, er, mix them. Increased diversity is a vast evolutionary advantage (I also find it aesthetically and morally advantageous but that's just me). Furthermore, being a transhumanist myself, I find the idea of preserving Northern genes with such outright detrimental. The very idea is to break free of such ridiculosity as our past human selves, there's nothing worth preserving of them. The very idea is to become something new - there is no need to hold on to genes we wouldn't want to, which would boil down to those we find beneficient. And surely Northeners aren't the only ones with beneficient genes. As Diamond put it, it's likely we are genetically worse off than any given ethnic group, having developed in a climate kinder to us. And on the topic of leaving, while this is true, some of us most of all want a diversity (for example, I). A diversity is superior insofar that within one secluded geographical unit, you can either be culturally insular, or culturally promiscuous, while an antidiverse culture would only leave the option of insularity to the geographical unit. Baman said: If a specific culture is worthy of surviving, it will. Survival of the fittest work with culture as well as anything else. To put what Baman said here in something closer to my structure of thought: The culture is the people, the people will always have the culture they fancy, and adding an institution will merely complicate matters (and do nothing at all to solve any problems - it only creates them) when the people isn't the same - which it constantly isn't. |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
Kaisereddie said: What are Northern values? Why are they Northern? Why are they simultaneously so important and so fragile they need State sponsorship? All right, for instance of Celtic, Goidelic languages are not currently in a state of well enough perseverance. My values, as a self described "Borealist", would be to spend a great amount of thing on such a perseverance, I'm not much for government, but I wouldn't necessarily be against considering it to preserve the heritage of Celtic peoples. It's already done to some degree to my understanding. I would merely be strengthening it further. For instance, I would take a stance of Tara Hill preservation against N3. Also, I'm not much for Right Wing Capitalism, but I wouldn't necessarily be against considering Capitalist, organizational means instead of governmental means to preserve culture. Many Capitalist cultural preservation groups already exist. This would merely be a macrocosm and joining of such things. In a neither Capitalist nor Authoritarian society, id est Communist, it would be a culture preserved by Tribalist guardians of ancient culture. All three have a way to be Borealist, in my opinion. Even more endangered, are the Uralic and Altaic languages of Russia. As a "Borealist", I wish to put forward and preserve the culture such as the language of Uralic and Altaic peoples. Runic used to be a beautifully widespread writing system, but now it mostly reduced to that of being a relic. These cultures are Northern because they originated in the North where people developed cultural traits of relating to the Northern cold. These people mutated, developed early tribal cultures and spoken languages that are still reflected in the modern but are often repressed. The fact that Reconstructionism is at all necessary for some things shows how indeed fragile some of them are. As far as importance, no culture is important in a very objective sense. The importance lies in the Particularist Romantic thinking. Kaisereddie said: Quite. But, see, culture is autonomous. It works of its own accord. People like and think as they do. Not that it is an autonomous process individually - we're shaped by social circumstances to like what we like - but nevertheless, culture chooses and works on its own. Institutionalizing cultural and ethnic supremacy is something very different from there being one. I'm not necessarily for enforcing people to uphold a certain behavior in day to day life, such as a Conservative Christian claiming that Government should enforce Christian values and make homosexuals to reform. It's more of a Preservationist thing. Much like how people have government sponsored libraries, museums, and television stations under the label of "public broadcasting". Also, Government is only one of the many ideas here I've considered. Remember I'm still a Minarchist for the most part, and this tears into somewhat my anti-Governmental values. Kaisereddie said: What parts should be preserved? The pillaging? The sleeping in a common room with the animals? Tara Hill. Yukaghir language. Manx language. Runic alphabet. Mongolian script. Tree veneration. Northern folk songs. Bear veneration. Kaisereddie said: There was no common cultural unity in the North, ever, nor was there an ethnic one (again, the Sami people, and other ethnic minorities - Finns and other ugric people, gypsies, and the occasional heap of slaves. There's no clear line between ethnic groups, either). As applies to much of the world, there is no perfect cultural unity. That hasn't stopped from there being ideas like Pan-Slavism, a Polyculturalist way of thinking. Northernism or "Borealism" as I've given it's label, would be it's own kind of Macrocosm. I note there being a difference here between this and Multiculturalism. Multiculturalism stresses difference and "diversity" in it's idea. Polyculturalism, at it's greatest Macrocosm would focus on the unity of the world instead of the diversity of the world. In this sense, it's only Macrocultural enough to focus upon Northern interrelation. From an Anthropological standpoint, there are certain things fairly particular to Northern culture that living in cold climates has created. And one can create a fellowship based upon it. Here I seek to establish a clear form of Pan-Northernism instead of say, Pan-Slavism or Pan-Europeanism or Pan-Asianism. Any Pan-Movements will have some diversity among but that is not the focus. Kaisereddie said: Interracial children are, I think, far better off than monoracial ones. The seclusion of an imagined ethnic group would produce an insular and limited range of genes; it is far more worthwhile to, er, mix them. Increased diversity is a vast evolutionary advantage (I also find it aesthetically and morally advantageous but that's just me). I see no evidence to make such assumption. And my definition of ethnic or "racial" preservation here is radically different from the ideas of phenotypical racial purity you probably think of due to argument stereotyped from outdated ideas of scientific race that people used to use. Furthermore, Finland has been "pure" or majority Haplogroup N for all we can know without problem. Furthermore, while the North is majority white phenotypical, there are plenty of more Neotenous or "Mongoloid" phenotyped people across the North. Several Uralic groups are majority Mongoloid skull shape instead of Caucasoid. There are plenty of Mongoloid Phenotype groups across Alaska and Canada(which I want to rebirth as Vinland, instead, more on that later), various Mongoloid Phenotype Alatic groups in the North, and even many Slavs who are a mixture between Mongoloid and Caucasoid skull phenotype. Including Haplogroup N-LLY22g, N-M128, N1b (P43), N1b-E, N-Tat, R1a1, R1a1a, R1a1b, R1b1b2a1a1, R1b1b2a1a1c, R1b1b2a1a1a, R1b1b2a1a2e, R1b1b2a1a2f, R1b1b2a1a2f2, C1- M8, and C3 would be plenty of diversity to have from. There is plenty of diversity within one Phenotype group to be healthy, and there are two commonly occurring Phenotype groups within these Haplogroups. |
ukonkiviOct 5, 2009 1:57 PM
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| Worship Boreas, titan of the North Wind? |
 Waratte Oemashou Sore ha Chiisana Inori |
Kaisereddie said: Furthermore, being a transhumanist myself, I find the idea of preserving Northern genes with such outright detrimental. The very idea is to break free of such ridiculosity as our past human selves, there's nothing worth preserving of them. The very idea is to become something new - there is no need to hold on to genes we wouldn't want to, which would boil down to those we find beneficient. And surely Northeners aren't the only ones with beneficient genes. As Diamond put it, it's likely we are genetically worse off than any given ethnic group, having developed in a climate kinder to us. Saying that Northern mutation was more beneficial than not would be white supremacist thought, so I'm not going to go there. This is not meant to be a Aryanist Racial Philosophy nor do I mean to espouse such a belief myself. But in my opinion, certain Haplogroups are a very beautiful thing and an important part of Northern Heritage. You also might say I have a fetishistic or almost religious love of Haplogroups. Transhumanism can be built on top of the currently existing haplogroups. I do not want them to disappear I want them to build and improve. And create new ones, but of their own origin. Transhumanism will certainly spur this on. And I do not think that avoiding a genocide of certain ethnic haplogroup genes will ever be detrimental to moving forward full speed with transhumanism. I want to protect the mutations that northern heritage has created. As a heritage. And move forward with it, not leave it behind. Not a supremacist one. I'm not at liberty to make full decisions at this point about race and intelligence and other such northern mutation related things. I also don't want to make it an issue to Borealism, which I want to be a thing of heritage and not associated with racism. Also, I would like to note that I have taken a majority sociological determinism standpoint in both the matter of race and sex in several occasions on these forums. I have been strongly at odds with some members arguing for certain ideas of Evolutionary Psychology and Biological Determinism being truth. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| Urgh, so many terms I don't understand. |
| I'm going re-state something Baman and Kaiser said.. If you're going to create a eugenics programme, it is much better to have more genetic information available. Mixed race people tend to be a better idea. Just take dogs, for example. Pure breeds can be wonderful, but they are highly susceptible to illness. I loved a dog, her name was Toby and she was a pure breed German Shepherd. Her hip, from age ~6(?) onwards was never quite right, and she broke it more than once, and ultimately never was really able to recover from that. This is a common problem associated with pure bred German Shepherds. Or just take Jewish people. They have a large list of diseases that occur at a much higher frequency in a Jewish person than someone who is not. Things like Bloom's Syndrome or Tay-Sachs Disease. These diseases are really awful, and I do not think you would hope to do something similar to Northern people, who I am sure have their own set of diseases. |
Indirect_Purple said: If you're going to create a eugenics programme, it is much better to have more genetic information available. Mixed race people tend to be a better idea. And I believe I already addressed that with this. ukonkivi said: I see no evidence to make such assumption. And my definition of ethnic or "racial" preservation here is radically different from the ideas of phenotypical racial purity you probably think of due to argument stereotyped from outdated ideas of scientific race that people used to use. Furthermore, Finland has been "pure" or majority Haplogroup N for all we can know without problem. Furthermore, while the North is majority white phenotypical, there are plenty of more Neotenous or "Mongoloid" phenotyped people across the North. Several Uralic groups are majority Mongoloid skull shape instead of Caucasoid. There are plenty of Mongoloid Phenotype groups across Alaska and Canada(which I want to rebirth as Vinland, instead, more on that later), various Mongoloid Phenotype Alatic groups in the North, and even many Slavs who are a mixture between Mongoloid and Caucasoid skull phenotype. Including Haplogroup N-LLY22g, N-M128, N1b (P43), N1b-E, N-Tat, R1a1, R1a1a, R1a1b, R1b1b2a1a1, R1b1b2a1a1c, R1b1b2a1a1a, R1b1b2a1a2e, R1b1b2a1a2f, R1b1b2a1a2f2, C1- M8, and C3 would be plenty of diversity to have from. There is plenty of diversity within one Phenotype group to be healthy, and there are two commonly occurring Phenotype groups within these Haplogroups. I do not believe that preserving these Haplogroups will cause for there to be more diseases. I am also not against, say, a person of a mix of all of these Haplogroups I mentioned. Purebred animals are not necessarily less healthy than mixed breeds. There is plenty of room to air out your own genes within your own phenotype. I also have no evidence presented to me or reason to believe that what I have listed is too small and closed of a gene pool. It might help to add, that I am also somewhat open to several other Haplogroups such as Haplogroup D2 and most R1a and R1b Haplogroups that I didn't mention. Your anecdotal evidence of a purebred animal is not a clear case against my own. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| Deep stuff... |
| It was not my intention to actually prove you wrong (far too lazy), and I wrote that before I had to go out (read: wrote it quickly). I just did not find your explanation sufficient, because in the long run I am not convinced that it is sustainable, assuming you wish Borealism could last over a thousand years... or do you only hope for a good 150-200 year run? In no way would you notice any problems if you were to suddenly have this sort of society existing. However, you cannot deny the fact that eventually your ideology will slowly lower genetic diversity and become problematic in future generations. OR do you plan to genetically screen for diseases and mutations? How would they decide if a mutation is negative or positive? Honestly, the genetics aspect is probably one of the least important problems with your ideology. It's not going to be any immediate problem, and could work out well for a couple hundred years. I just don't understand why one would want to create an ideology that is not sustainable. Oh, what do you plan to do with Canada and Alaska exactly? There are a lot of people in Canada who are not white. Are you planning to shove them out? Pretty much almost all Canadians don't even give a fuck about Northern European traditions, even the white ones. |
Indirect_Purple said: you cannot deny the fact that eventually your ideology will slowly lower genetic diversity Actually I think it's quite possible that this Northernism would lead to more genetic diversity than before. These countries have stayed the majority Haplogroups that they are for thousands of years. Doing such things would have a good chance of causing a greater spread of non Haplogroup R groups throughout Europe, and would bring unprecedented levels of Haplogroup R throughout Asia. Indirect_Purple said: because in the long run I am not convinced that it is sustainable, assuming you wish Borealism could last over a thousand years... or do you only hope for a good 150-200 year run? I think it's likely that any such organization, governmental, capitalistic, or tribal, has a good chance of eventually dissolving. I am convinced it is as sustainable as any other thing though. I believe that if it does dissolve it will likely form into several other branch movements that see things like Borealism as their origin. Either way it will serve it's purpose. Indirect_Purple said: Oh, what do you plan to do with Canada and Alaska exactly? I would like to see Canada eventually renamed to Vinland. Anglo and Franco culture is Canada is fine, especially Ango, considering Anglo is north Germanic. However, English culture is overspread in some way and also helps to kill Northern Germanic cultures. I'd like to see a more Anglo and Franco into Northern cultural movement. I would like to see Canada adopt Runic as part of a Germanic Anglo heritage. I would like to see a strict perseverance of the Inuit and other such Siberian origin cultures in Canada. Like the other societies it will be Northern Pantribal and work towards both eclecticism and preservationism. Mostly of Norse and Eskimo heritage at the beginning at least. |
ukonkiviOct 5, 2009 10:10 PM
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
Indirect_Purple said: ??do you plan to genetically screen for diseases and mutations? How would they decide if a mutation is negative or positive? Alright, so if I accept that, how exactly are you going to get these "Northern" groups to become a cohesive group of people when they do not share common traditions. I am not sure I am exactly clear on what you count as "Northern". Is there some Latitude restrictions? Do you have a list of countries? Are you expecting Russians and Polish people to join hands in harmony? Is only Normandy included--or none of France at all? There are many different kinds of German people, do all Germans count? What about the ones with dark hair? What about the English? They are in the North. The Scots? Greenland? All of these places have extremely different cultures. To me it seems like not all their cultures are acceptable, but their genetic information is welcome because they are white. Kinda like an excuse so people cannot argue you want to inbreed a select bunch of people. Also, what do you want to do with Canada? response while I was typing. |
| tl;dr. Someone dumb it down for me? |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Indirect_Purple said: There are a lot of people in Canada who are not white. Are you planning to shove them out? Ah this is exactly the misconception I was thinking would happen when I brought about this thread. Either that or that it was going to be mocked for being too Eurasian instead of European, or both. I especially added to that risk when I brought up eugenics but it was just too tempting. This is not White Nationalism. This is about the Boreal and not the Occident. Otherwise I could have just gone with another already fitting enough term like White Nationalism or Western Imperium. While this cultural philosophy could be seen as pro-white to some degree, it is not white nationalism. For starters, it is way too Eurasian to fit with White Nationalism or any specific currents related to it. Simply put, it is far too pro-Asian to agree with %90 or more of White Nationalists, and the majority of white nationalists would find it simply silly to associate the two. Though I must say I don't mind the ambiguity of looking like one and receiving the label, it brings a smile to my face, in fact. Also, Eugenics is just a small little thing I'd like to add on to the matter if Borealism formed a political party and I was of influence. I think it better to stick to the matters of culture rather than race. All right, let's get down to business. In such matters it's more about genetic preservation than of exclusion of other races. It would be nicer to work with against your argument if the case were that most Asians in Canada were Northern ones but I know that is not the case. So it seems for all my talk you did have a point in that the matter of South Asians and Negroes in Canada would complicate the matter. I don't see this as needing a big authoritarian government as y'all so imply of me, with the exception of the eugenics matter and even then for the most part I'd rather impart some kind of Liberal Eugenics mostly. And is a modal between the two. And a mixture of collectivist and individualist eugenics. I think that such a thing of a movement not so enforced would create a natural separatism than already exists already to some extent. The movement would then come between some very unusual individuals who can easily be afforded even under the most extreme interpretations of haplogroup preservation. If a South Asian or even a Negro feels such strong fervor for the matters of Northern preservation they should be able to be a part of it. Any number of such people would would feel greatly honorable to the movement to even be supported by those not mentioned in it's preservation I couldn't help but welcome them. And their number would be so small that it should do nothing to stomp out the macrocosm of the eugenics movement by far. It would essentially be like a black person who is a fan of black metal and neofolk. In the end, I don't see the ethnic minorities in Canada, especially co-operative ones, as a problem to what I am thinking. I am not thinking in terms of white nationalism. If I were a white nationalist, I could sympathize with such an idea, but what I am thinking of here is quite radically racially different from such an idea. Indirect_Purple said: Alright, so if I accept that, how exactly are you going to get these "Northern" groups to become a cohesive group of people when they do not share common traditions. Oh they share some common traditions, depending on the group. It's believed that Runic even extended to the Slavs to some degree. And I would do so just like I would normally advocate communism or feminism, with soft social advocacy instead of quick and sweeping governmental revolution. Again government is just one interpretation here, and I am a highly anti-government and anti-capitalism both person. I would mainly like to start with social activism. Cohesive group is not something I imagine as possible within my lifetime. Nor is communism or gender equality. Eventually, hopefully, in my lifetime I'd like to help raise awareness and preservation for certain cultures as Borealism as a long term goal as a name I would go by, as well as some significant changes to the way that government and capitalism work around the world. I hope to see the ideologies advocated in publications like Tyr become spread, gain more alliances, and create a lasting brand of traditionalist culture that traditionalist green leftism and undercurrents within related subcultures has needed. And I think Borealism could become a part of that. I see it as an extension of the sorts of Slavic ideas Mikhail Bakunin believed in, in a bigger macrocosm. As well as the feelings of European awakening I always related to and sympathized in the great influence of my Douglas Pearce. I don't expect any real goals such as we're speaking of and widespread but in the long term. To me, this is just Northern Revivalism and preservation. I am still a left winger and an anti-authoritarian one at that. I often criticize the BNP as "only having got one thing right". That is, they're undoubtedly one of the most economic left groups in Britain. But their leftism is also third positionist Authoritarian leftism. While I strongly hold that economic leftism is not good enough. And that Libertarian anti-government is necessary too. But the tribalism that it's left with some things that might not be seen as very politically correct or acceptable for much of the fellow Commie crowd. And on some level, have couple sympathies and Romantic feelings towards ecofascists and Eurasianists. I'm a real Commie but at the same time, I listen to Neofolk groups, NSBM, and to an extent, they're just not agreeable enough to me who likes Northern Asian cultures as well, but I also can't completely disagree with them as well. I mean, I find them less disagreeable overall that the people who simply tell me I can't do anything of Asian culture because I'm white constantly. Which makes up at least a 1/4 of usage and meaning of the term weeaboo, wapanese and Japanophile. In comparison to my normal talks with people about holding any Asian sympathies and hobbies of any sort if you are not of the Asian race, this philosophy I'd say is on the extreme side of "embrace" between peoples. This world is still filled with a good portion of people who think race mixing will never work, East and West will never understand each other and are not meant to. That race mixing is a selfish act, doesn't work, and creates unnecessary problems for both people in the relationship, as well as the children. That white people speaking Asian languages look silly and foolish and that the "insert Asian country here will never accept white people". And I'm being told that my viewpoint I am espousing does not promote race mixing and interculturalism to not be great ENOUGH? I certainly find the assertion alone ironic enough to continue had I not various other reasons. I can't believe I am espousing one of the most Wapanese, Race Traitoring ideas ever and it being called too white. I'm totally going to wake up tomorrow with someone mocking me for using the word Wapanese in such contexts. Be like "hold up there getting kind of racist discussion" in which I'll need to pull it back on track to heritage instead of this unneeded and fairly unconnected eugenics and haplogroup discussion. Or be banned for what someone will consider offensively racist. I look forward to it! I'm sorry for getting kind of irreverent here at the end. But I can't help but think such an idea either is interpreted as justifying Eurasian interaction which should not be justified. Or overly racist pro-white sounding. I'll either be labeled as some Asiaphile in need of a reality check or some Nazi. I think I kind of like that. I think that's one of the many reasons I keep coming back to this idea. |
ukonkiviOct 5, 2009 11:35 PM
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
Puni said: tl;dr |
 |
| What has still not been explained is why the nuggets anyone would want this. To put what I said previously concisely: If everyone likes Northern culture, the kind of preservation you propagate for would naturally happen. There would be no need for a politics of culture on this level. Thus this is an obvious attempt to force preservation and creation of a vague cultural identity. This will by nature of itself curb freedoms. As in, there is a seclusionist element which is seperate for the romantical one, and this is the problem. It limits the spirit of man to like what she likes, do as she does and think as she thinks. Why should this be accepted, as it solves no problem, merely introduces them? (Again, admit only legitimate authority. The authority of an imagined cultural identity I cannot find enough.) Propagating for Northern culture != Northern politics. First one I see the worth in (even if I find the lines around 'northern culture' vague and misty). But this is not something which needs politicizing. What it would need if anything, is a cultural movement. Preservation needs nothing vast; it needs a databank and nothing else. This for anything from language to (and frankly, Gaelic et al are not in danger of dying out, being well-documented already. All that will happen is that there are no native speakers of it anymore, which is how things go. Would be more concerned about Amazonic/Central African language families, and a few in East-Central Europe). ukonkivi said: I said: something about interracial being better than mono I see no evidence to make such assumption. And my definition of ethnic or "racial" preservation here is radically different from the ideas of phenotypical racial purity you probably think of due to argument stereotyped from outdated ideas of scientific race that people used to use. Furthermore, Finland has been "pure" or majority Haplogroup N for all we can know without problem. Furthermore, while the North is majority white phenotypical, there are plenty of more Neotenous or "Mongoloid" phenotyped people across the North. Several Uralic groups are majority Mongoloid skull shape instead of Caucasoid. There are plenty of Mongoloid Phenotype groups across Alaska and Canada(which I want to rebirth as Vinland, instead, more on that later), various Mongoloid Phenotype Alatic groups in the North, and even many Slavs who are a mixture between Mongoloid and Caucasoid skull phenotype. Including Haplogroup N-LLY22g, N-M128, N1b (P43), N1b-E, N-Tat, R1a1, R1a1a, R1a1b, R1b1b2a1a1, R1b1b2a1a1c, R1b1b2a1a1a, R1b1b2a1a2e, R1b1b2a1a2f, R1b1b2a1a2f2, C1- M8, and C3 would be plenty of diversity to have from. There is plenty of diversity within one Phenotype group to be healthy, and there are two commonly occurring Phenotype groups within these Haplogroups. Not quite baseless, it's based on, er, this thing called the theory of evolution. Basically, any population with wide diversity is more likely to persevere than is a population with low diversity, as high diversity means more situations will be possibly adapted to. As, for instance, diseases. High diversity also means that previously rare combinations of genomes will be, er, experimented with (just like rarely mixed memetic complexes would be in diverse culture). To say plenty is one thing, you cannot deny that more diversity is evolutionarily better. It's a weasel word which avoids the argument - rather say outright that you think the argument true but not of significant enough weight than try to shuffle it away, eh? But I suppose people do not tend to like to admit any argument against their own ideology true. The folly :< This has nothing to do with good ol' social darwinism nor did I semi-strawman you as one; it is merely a natural consequence of any wilful limitation of breeding. Not that I think that the human genome is diverse enough to lead to anything interesting to begin with. Just saying. People can keep to screwing people of their preference as they wish, and I see no need of an ideology espousing any particular limitation of such. Also note well that North culture already is, by far far far far far, the dominant one in the world. Overwhelmingly so in the North itself, very much noticeably so in the South. The particular kind you espouse is more historically regressionary than culturally perservationist and purist, it seems me. The seclusionist element is the problem, and frankly it seems mostly useless except as to make the ideology needlessly authoritharian. Also, how do you manage to see all critique as making you out a white supermacist? I have seen little to no allusion to such. It's just that the arguments which can be levelled against borealism are nigh identical to the ones against white power fantasies, since the delineation is again arbitrary and needless, and while not based on identical tokens of such, are based on differences within a type (ie ethnicity, genetics, and culture - as opposed to say, economy, thematics or what have you). |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
| I still don't understand what exactly you want to achive ukonkivi. Try to state your goals (and methods to achive them) in a clear way, point by point, without mixing all together. Because all I see now is a really weird mixture of cultural and racial ideologies, where's no clear line between what is what, and what you wanna do with it, and why. You're political/ecomonical intentions are pretty shadowed as well. Sounded like you want something like "Tribal Capitalistical Communism"? |
 |
Kaiserpingvin said: Not quite baseless, it's based on, er, this thing called the theory of evolution. Claiming that greater genetic diversity ALWAYS brings greater health and that the more genetic diversity the better? That is surely pseudoscience and I'd like to hear a source for such a statement. Not only have racially pure nations worked out just fine and without significant problem, but I dare say they tend to be countries who have done very well. One was mentioning Jews earlier in this thread. Do you know that many Jews view Jewish race mixing as like another holocaust? Esley said: Because all I see now is a really weird mixture of cultural and racial ideologies, My apologies, race has nothing to do with what I wanted to call Borealism. It somehow got onto that with what I thought would be a meager compromise by many of Heathens, Scandophiles, Slavophiles, and ect. who are often heavy Odalist and so forth. Considering what degree of my fellow Nordic Traditionalists hold such ideas, it would be entirely reckless of me to espouse any such idea with no such tinge as I did. And even what I did espouse is pretty heretical. I would be laughed out of Heathen circles if I just espoused the opinions others had held in this thread about the matter. All right, back to my actual focus now that I think I wrapped that part up. Again, it was a complete mistake in me getting dragged up in bringing that stuff up. I did not mean Borealism to have anything to do with race and that was just one interpretation I thought it might be compatible with. In fact wearisome of this outcome I tried to espouse that it wasn't in the very beginning in the first post and I still failed at that. It is meant to be some ideology of social activism and organization, much like how marxism is a label. A school of thought very first and foremost. That may have a strong propensity to build organizations related to and around it. It should be apolitical but open to political interpretation as to how to carry it out. Unfortunately, I mixed the matter with too many of my interpretations about the matter which are not central to the ideology. This school of thought is a Northern preservationist concept that seeks to do things like keep Runic, Manx, Yukaghir, and other such northern cultural things alive and preserved or reconstruct extinct ones and try as best they can to bring greater importance and forefront to them in society. And if organizations were to form, they would have to be under one driving societal force. That would either be they would survive in a pro-capitalist society and be an organization much like how other organizations exist in Capitalist societies, through donation and fundraising and so forth. However, that would not sit well with Socialists. So on the other hand, considering government already spends money on cultural preservationism, it might not be unreasonable to up the degree to which government does this. However, this would not sit well with Libertarians. The third Libertarian Left or Communist option, would be for it to simply be upheld by tribal keepers of culture. Any of the three above works. And all are the only political forms I can think of. Simply put, I want Borealism to be a school of thought of preservation of Northern heritages with the propensity to be founded in organizations of some sort. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| Sorry brah, I'd say give it up. Regardless of your noble intentions, such a movement inexorably be co-opted by white nationalists and such. Sorry ;_; |
| not a job creator |
ukonkivi said: I see, so you're objective is a preservation and promotion of Nordic culture though establishment of organiztions that will deal with that matter. If you want my opinion, I find the cause to be not bad at all, it's important to preserve heritage. However the means you've chosen to achieve it, are rather "weak" and ineffective. One proof of my words is the fact that similar organizations already exist. Yes, they might manage to preserve or restore some of the heritage, but only in rather small circles. They never achive a large impact that will affect the masses. A dramatic involvement in politics, economy and media is absolutely needed for achiving any weighful results. |
|
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
271 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |