Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, there is "nothing near Zhirinovsky in American politics" because the political buffoons in the US usually work as radio hosts or on TV. Putin however likes to keep his court jester right in his court. American politicians are far more dangerous, because someone like Brzezinski with his crazy ideas is for real.
No, the kind of "squalor" and (oh horror!) "material depravity" that Germans saw in the USSR was not a sign of "civilized nation." The count of clothing items removed from the victims ( as much as their hair intended for stuffing of couch pillows) was a sure sign of "civilized nation" however, with all its "efficiency."
I think they saw the Russians similar to 'Slavs' (Slavic people), basically he saw them as impure for some reason and like the Jews. He wanted them exterminated, this evidenced by the mass murder.
And considered the Russian people to be subhuman and too may people.
They hated lot of people even half Jews and non Orthodox Jews .
He may even hated Americans and exterminated all Americans had they won the war.
The "most large cities" of the world are more cosmopolitan, yes, so it would be more difficult to spot certain "type" there as the most prominent one, but smaller cities in each and every country are quite indicative of the regional look ( because usually every nationality has more than one distinct "type" I think.)
In the "New world" - yes, may be. But not when it comes to the "Old World." There is more subtlety there.
Frankly speaking I don't understand much in "skull shapes" - but facial features, median height, shades of skin color - from light to dark - yes, I can see quite a variety within the "European family."
Where, here in the US? In fact no. I SHOULD see this mixture ( hypothetically speaking,) but in fact I don't. I live in the Mid-West, and the particular area where I reside has a lot of descendants from German and Scandinavian communities and that's the predominant look in the area - of the "generic Northerner," including my co-workers. My immediate boss is "Latina" though ( a very good looking at that, ) and she looks distinctly different from the rest. I don't spot any "Italian" or "Jewish" look around here - I saw this look mostly on the East Coast, around New York area.
I am definitely a mutt, (big time,) so yes, in my case "asking" works, but very often ( in the area where I live now) - you don't need to ask, or if you do, just only to verify for the most part whether people are of Scandinavian descent or German, or both. I could tell right away that one of our regulars was not of Scandinavian/German descent, but of English descent, (although he was from the local family too.) He said I was correct in spite of the fact that he had some Germans in his family too,) plus he had this wicked sense of humor I saw only in Brits; how this could be kept through generations - is it a gene or what? I have no idea.
Interestingly enough, I was badly mistaken only once, and interestingly enough - because of Russians. These two blond girls had that generic "Northern look" so common around here, that I've decided that they were locals. As it turned out - they could barely speak English))))
I think in the future with race mixing and I don't just mean whites with non whites but whites with whites of other country it will be very very very hard to tell. And no idea what people will look like in 50 to 100 years from now.
Your Co worker of Scandinavian/German descent and one English descent will be very very hard to tell of not impossible with race mixing in the future.
A person may be 30% German and 50% Russians with 20% some thing else. In past with lack of transportation people would hardly go from one city to next city that alone one country to other country.
It is way off topic but dont even try to put a positive spin on Zhyrinovsky etc. much like you dont want to face reality (just like Americans in 1939) there are crazed nations, electing crazed politicians like Zhyrinosky to channel their frustrations and longings for the restored glory. There is nothing near Zhyrinovsky in American politics yet.
Zhyrinovsky is a character who is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator. I am not trying to spin him, merely stating that you can't take his statements at face value nor can you assume he speaks for everyone in Russia. Like I said, plenty of American politicians who say outrageous crap about a variety of topics in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator...Americans are just more concerned with social issues.
Quote:
Folksy masses are well removed from the theoretical constructs regardless of times and country. Germans are not exception. Just ask local trailer park residents about commies, race, arian nation, terrorists, China, etc.. At best common people are capable of transmitting unrecognizable caricatures of the educated ravings and constructs. At "best" people express their superiority ideas in practical or traditional terms.
You've managed to string together a rather large mess of words. I made two points:
1. Racial theories and the occult were popular topics in Germany long before the Nazi's came to power.
2. The Nazi's tapped into this popular interest for their symbolism and rhetoric.
Nothing you said invalidates my points and if anything your point about "caricatures of educated ravings" would actually help prove what I was saying.
Quote:
I have read a few German war memoirs. None of the authors reflected on the shape of slavic skulls etc., but they've made themselves clear that "civilized" nations should not live in squalor and material depravity they saw in USSR.
What's your point? That Germans felt the Russians were uncivilized? Oh, that's news. They may not have been pondering the shape of Slavic skulls, but they were already well conditioned to view the Russian and others as "untermensch". The men writing the memoirs you mentioned marched into Russia with this in their pockets:
How can you say slavs look different than other white people!! They look white to me like all the other white people.
How could they tell slavs from other white people.
Before I met lots of Africans, they all looked the same to me, too. Same for Asians. No offense to anyone, but I'm sure many outsiders have the same preconceptions. It was strange for me when I found out about the ethnic war in Congo, for instance. They have minute differences to outsiders, but are defining features that set them apart from others in their eyes.
If you want to read about the races in Europe, you can read The Ethnology of Europe, by RG Latham, MD https://books.google.com/books?id=Eq8kAAAAMAAJ Again if you are interested in this subject, libraries are better sources of historical information from antiquity to before the 2nd World War. Warning that the book above, like many such, may contain portions that are now considered generally offensive.
It has information that references writings by Herodotus regarding Race, and claims that Scythia described in Herodotus' writings on History, referred to the Slavic people. You can read this here (we should all have read this in school, but we all know the state education is in):https://books.google.com/books?id=8OdLLZ8S0uAC
You can read about what The Races Of Europe: A Sociological Study by William Ripley, Ph. D. (written in 1899) considers Slavic physical traits here. Again there are probably more books about this in a library: https://books.google.com/books?id=0Y8XAAAAYAAJ
Per pg 413:
Two physical characteristics render this ethnic group distinctive: First that it comprises some of the tallest men in the world, comparing favorably with the Scotch in this respect; and secondly...tend to be among the broadest headed people known.
...
The square foreheads and broad faces of the people correspond in every way to the shape of the heads.
This part is about Illyrians, which is a sub-group of Slavs as described by the author, comprised of Serbo-Croatians and Albanians. You can read the rest of the section about all the other Slavs at your leisure. The author goes on ad nauseum about the many groups and his and other's observations about their defining features.
Zhyrinovsky is a character who is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator. I am not trying to spin him, merely stating that you can't take his statements at face value nor can you assume he speaks for everyone in Russia.
He is such an odd figure, that not only does he "appeal to the lowest common denominator" ( which he definitely does,) but when I've said that he a "court jester," he LITERALLY IS.
Watch the reaction of Russian Parleament here, when he speaks... I have hard time even to explain what he is really talking about. It's sort of his speech on education reforms, where he inserts examples of classical Russian literature here and there, in order to be more "articulate" I presume.
Watch Putin's reaction in particular ( I don't remember who is who there exactly, but Tziskaridze ( one of the major soloists in Bolshoy Theater) is laughing his head off with no excuses.
( So obviously, when someone quotes Zhirinovsky, it should be taken in the context of ^^ )
Quote:
You've managed to string together a rather large mess of words. I made two points:
1. Racial theories and the occult were popular topics in Germany long before the Nazi's came to power.
2. The Nazi's tapped into this popular interest for their symbolism and rhetoric.
Nothing you said invalidates my points and if anything your point about "caricatures of educated ravings" would actually help prove what I was saying.
What's your point? That Germans felt the Russians were uncivilized? Oh, that's news. They may not have been pondering the shape of Slavic skulls, but they were already well conditioned to view the Russian and others as "untermensch". The men writing the memoirs you mentioned marched into Russia with this in their pockets:
The ones that had grown up in the compulsory Nazi education system had spent years studying racial theory and and its pseudo-science justifications.
It was always obvious to me that some substantial ground of racial theories was at the core of the WWII ( USSR invasion in particular, (not to mention Holocaust of course.)
There was definitely some attempt to replace one "race" with another one, that was yet to be created and expanded. So if you are saying that Germans considered Russians "Aryans mixed with "earlier tribes" ( which was in their eyes a "mistake,") then this brings yet another interesting detail in the Bible's context.
It looks then that along with the "preferred races" ( the ones that were given the "upper hand") and "the earlier tribes" (i.e. "the old tree that went down" mentioned in the Bible,) - basically the nations that represented the "third world" in modern history, there was this "twilight zone," which perfectly explains why Russia was neither, but the "second world" country throughout history. I'd guess that another nation that falls under the same category would be probably Iran, with their ties to "Aryans," whatever they could be.
(Just thinking out loud here, in connection with this thread -
It was interesting how Swearengen, in the old HBO show Deadwood, referred to the German and Scandinavian immigrants as 'square heads'. There was a whole lot of racial differentiation/stereotyping among white europeans from different backgrounds in those days (second half of the 1800's).
There was a whole lot of racial differentiation/stereotyping among white europeans from different backgrounds in those days (second half of the 1800's).
He is such an odd figure, that not only does he "appeal to the lowest common denominator" ( which he definitely does,) but when I've said that he a "court jester," he LITERALLY IS.
Watch the reaction of Russian Parleament here, when he speaks... I have hard time even to explain what he is really talking about. It's sort of his speech on education reforms, where he inserts examples of classical Russian literature here and there, in order to be more "articulate" I presume.
Watch Putin's reaction in particular ( I don't remember who is who there exactly, but Tziskaridze ( one of the major soloists in Bolshoy Theater) is laughing his head off with no excuses.
I think many people don't realize that this type of theater is simply part of modern Russian politics and isn't to be taken seriously.
Quote:
It was always obvious to me that some substantial ground of racial theories was at the core of the WWII ( USSR invasion in particular, (not to mention Holocaust of course.)
I don't believe that it was a core part of the war, that was over more regular things like resources and land, but the racial elements were certainly used to justify those more basic needs. I think you would have seen the racial theories become more "center stage" if the Germans had won.
Quote:
There was definitely some attempt to replace one "race" with another one, that was yet to be created and expanded.
The replacement race was already there, the Aryans with their Nordic, Alpine and Mediterranean branches. Of course the Nordic was seen as an ideal (this had been popular in Germany for a long time) and there was a lot of effort to promote the expansion of Nordic bloodlines, but Hitler was ultimately propagating the advancement of all Aryans.
Quote:
So if you are saying that Germans considered Russians "Aryans mixed with "earlier tribes" ( which was in their eyes a "mistake,") then this brings yet another interesting detail in the Bible's context.
It looks then that along with the "preferred races" ( the ones that were given the "upper hand") and "the earlier tribes" (i.e. "the old tree that went down" mentioned in the Bible,) - basically the nations that represented the "third world" in modern history, there was this "twilight zone," which perfectly explains why Russia was neither, but the "second world" country throughout history. I'd guess that another nation that falls under the same category would be probably Iran, with their ties to "Aryans," whatever they could be.
(Just thinking out loud here, in connection with this thread -
The theory would hold that there were several "waves/levels" of humanity. The Arayans represented the highest form of human evolution. The Slavs were sort of a "half breed" between Aryans and the next level down of humanity, which consequently included all of the Semitic peoples. I wouldn't ascribe anything to it beyond that was the theory and basis for their racial beliefs.
I don't believe that it was a core part of the war, that was over more regular things like resources and land, but the racial elements were certainly used to justify those more basic needs. I think you would have seen the racial theories become more "center stage" if the Germans had won.
And this is what I am trying to say ( struggling with words here...) That in case of German victory ( no matter what their initial designs or resources and such were,) the end result, the "center stage" ( or the "core part" of event) would have become the eradication of one "race" and replacement of it with the other.
Quote:
The replacement race was already there, the Aryans with their Nordic, Alpine and Mediterranean branches. Of course the Nordic was seen as an ideal (this had been popular in Germany for a long time) and there was a lot of effort to promote the expansion of Nordic bloodlines, but Hitler was ultimately propagating the advancement of all Aryans.
No, the "desired material" for the replacement race was already there, those "Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean branches," but if they were all to be "resettled" on the new lands, their "mixed combination" would have created a "new race." Plus ( if to take "Lebensborn" program in consideration, the Scandinavian gene would have become more present throughout this whole "new race" I assume.)
Quote:
The theory would hold that there were several "waves/levels" of humanity. The Arayans represented the highest form of human evolution. The Slavs were sort of a "half breed" between Aryans and the next level down of humanity, which consequently included all of the Semitic peoples. I wouldn't ascribe anything to it beyond that was the theory and basis for their racial beliefs.
You don't have to, I simply put this "theory" into a bigger picture, knowing what I know ( or rather always knew.) And what I "knew" - or rather took note of, while living in Russia ( and observing her history,) is that because it was such vast and "mixed" ( in terms of population) country, it seems that what worked for one part of Russians, never worked for the other, yet somehow there was only "one voice heard" and everyone was supposed to "comply." At that the whole ship was swinging violently from one side to the other, so it's not to say that it was one side that ALWAYS had the upper hand. Overall all this violence, wars, revolutions and inner struggle there ( and thus - rather misery for the "general population") was coming from the fact that TWO GROUPS of people ( at least two that is) were sharing the same land and were part of the same nation, and what worked in the interests of one, didn't work in the interests of other. But unlike in case of Blacks and Whites in the US, the "look" of these people was not all that different. ( The OP already pointed at the difficulty of distinguishing the "Russian look" from the rest of Europeans, yet it's only a part of the picture, because the "Russian look" itself varies a great deal. And taking in consideration that Wikipedia states that such group as "Slavs" is rather an elusive thing, and it's not all that easy to pinpoint what/who these people are, only adds to the equation.
So this whole "Gog in the land of Magog" ( as Russia is identified in the Bible,) most likely refers to some "newcomers" - i.e. people of different bloodlines, that settled in the land and shared it from then on with those who already lived there. ( It might be a few new tribes, and it might be a gradual resettlement of foreign elements, that later comprised a rather large group - that I don't know, I can be only guessing.)
But that would be my observation, and interestingly enough, when I was reading this recent article from "Israell?News" it seems to fit into picture, although they don't dwell particularly on what "Gog and Ma-gog" is all about.
You don't need to comment, but I thought it could be interesting for you to look into this kind of material.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
- but facial features, median height, shades of skin color - from light to dark - yes, I can see quite a variety within the "European family."
I SHOULD see this mixture ( hypothetically speaking,) but in fact I don't. I live in the Mid-West, and the particular area where I reside has a lot of descendants from German and Scandinavian communities and that's the predominant look in the area - of the "generic Northerner," including my co-workers. My immediate boss is "Latina" though ( a very good looking at that, 
) and she looks distinctly different from the rest. I don't spot any "Italian" or "Jewish" look around here - I saw this look mostly on the East Coast, around New York area. 
I have no idea. 
