The Secret War Against Germania and its Historical Roots (part 5)
- Thread starter dreamtime
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2020
- Messages
- 651
- Reaction score
- 1,377
Trump could be controlled opposition. There must always be this doubt. If so, does it matter?
Please know, too, that over the past several months Trump supporters have become much more clear about the history of Germany. The "color revolutions" that destroyed Germany during the Weimar Republic have been made explicit. (For example, the twisted similarities between Anti-fa and the Brown Shirts). The real dangers to this revolt are supported by and coming from the governments of Europe and China and the Vatican.
Yes, the similarities are striking. Hitler-qua-savior and Trump. The building of coalitions against them. Etc... However, whereas Hitler pointed at "the Jews"-- misdirecting attention from the Kabal, the enemy, this time, is clearly identified. I should also note that Trump and Trump supporters (including Jews) express no expansionist tendencies. In fact, the opposite is the case. People here know this matters and know that the Kabal must be stopped here first.
Please know, too, that over the past several months Trump supporters have become much more clear about the history of Germany. The "color revolutions" that destroyed Germany during the Weimar Republic have been made explicit. (For example, the twisted similarities between Anti-fa and the Brown Shirts). The real dangers to this revolt are supported by and coming from the governments of Europe and China and the Vatican.
Yes, the similarities are striking. Hitler-qua-savior and Trump. The building of coalitions against them. Etc... However, whereas Hitler pointed at "the Jews"-- misdirecting attention from the Kabal, the enemy, this time, is clearly identified. I should also note that Trump and Trump supporters (including Jews) express no expansionist tendencies. In fact, the opposite is the case. People here know this matters and know that the Kabal must be stopped here first.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 37
Guest
My only intent was to point out the fact that a video which tries to expose an alleged relationship between Hitler and the Rothschild family begins saying that Karl Marx was German, while in fact he was Jewish. In the comments some authentic Germans (Deutsche) point that out, I was only reporting that interesting (to me) point of view.
About the relationship between Hitler and the Rothschilds is always good to remember that the guy with the mustache put this other guy under arrest (Louis Nathaniel de Rothschild - Wikipedia). Everyone can deduce what he wants. I have not seen the entire video and I don't know if this arrest has been pointed out and if the author of the video even knows about that.
D
Deleted member 37
Guest
I am not a professor by the way.
Germans - Wikipedia
The Germans (German: Deutsche) are a Germanic ethnic group native to Central Europe.
Jews - Wikipedia
Jews (Hebrew: יְהוּדִים ISO 259-2 Yehudim, Israeli pronunciation [jehuˈdim]) or Jewish people are an ethnoreligious group.
The Germans in that comment section were referring to the ethnic background one should have to be considered a German, something that Marx didn't have. The confusion between ethnicity and nationality (?! - in the sense of been born inside of a territory called Germany, UK, Italy, France...) is the most common error and weapon used against the natives all around the world. The migrants that are flooding Britain, that you correctly (in my opinion) spoke about in one of your posts, will be considered British before the law in the same way as a native. The comments in that video are talking about this problem and many others.
Germans - Wikipedia
The Germans (German: Deutsche) are a Germanic ethnic group native to Central Europe.
Jews - Wikipedia
Jews (Hebrew: יְהוּדִים ISO 259-2 Yehudim, Israeli pronunciation [jehuˈdim]) or Jewish people are an ethnoreligious group.
The Germans in that comment section were referring to the ethnic background one should have to be considered a German, something that Marx didn't have. The confusion between ethnicity and nationality (?! - in the sense of been born inside of a territory called Germany, UK, Italy, France...) is the most common error and weapon used against the natives all around the world. The migrants that are flooding Britain, that you correctly (in my opinion) spoke about in one of your posts, will be considered British before the law in the same way as a native. The comments in that video are talking about this problem and many others.
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2020
- Messages
- 271
- Reaction score
- 943
Because it has become politically incorrect to define race in any way that could help isolate one race from another based upon differing characteristics, both physical, intellectual, spiritual and behavioral, we, as multi-cultural societies worldwide, fail to understand why race matters.
Technically, the Jews are not a race. They are, however, a specific family bloodline that have created the religion of Judaism as the ultimate cover to subvert all of the races of the world. They are not the Israelites of the scriptures, though they claim to be their descendants in public, while in the Jewish Encyclopedia and in many other sources, they readily admit to not descending from the Biblical Judah-ites. The story of the Biblical Israelites is a fascinating one, because the god of the Israelites, YHWH, was what could be called in modern terminology, a racist god. The modern Jews identify with and have adopted this form of racism, although they give it a different name, “Chosen-ness," a noteworthy admission of racial distinction.
Interestingly, they track their family tree using the matrilineal lines. This is also how they determine if a person is of Jewish descent. So if your mother is a Jew, then you are also, whether your father is or not. If your father is a Jew, but your mother is not, you are the son or daughter of a Jew, but not a Jew yourself. This does not take into consideration the religion known as Judaism. They are called secular Jews. Whether they practice the "religion" of Judaism or not, they are still considered Jews.
The reason for tracking their family tree matrilineally is their primary infiltration tool. Since children in non-Jewish nations adopt the last name of their father's rather than their mother's, it becomes quite easy for them to hide in plain sight in their host nation of choice. When a Jewess marries a non-Jew, their children take on their father's non-Jewish name. By keeping their father's last name, they can then claim that they are of the nationality of their father. In public, they do not admit to their "Jewishness". They are often referred to as "crypto Jews".This is why mainstream historians identify Karl Marx as a German. Karl Marx's mother, Henriette Pressburg, was a Jewess. His father, Heinrich Marx, may have been a Jew as well, but did not publicly admit to that. Nowadays, it is even more difficult to identify a country with a particular race, since they now identify you as the place where you were born. So regardless of race, if you were born in Germany or have established German citizenship, you are a German.
Converting to the religion of Judaism rarely has to do with a leap of faith, but is usually part of the procedure of a non-Jew wishing to marry a Jew. Conversion requires, first of all, permission and sponsorship. The person then goes through a rigorous study routine and must answer to the modern day Sanhedrin, the top tier of political Jewry. If their views and ideology do not match that of political Jewry, their request for conversion may be rejected. Conversion under any other circumstances is very rare, though is occasionally allowed for for the sake of public consumption. In that case, the convert is not taken very seriously, is not considered ever to be a "true Jew", and will be closely watched and monitored. The convert is also required to get circumcised!
In the top tiers of religious Judaism, their main study of focus is actually not theological in nature, but consists mainly in the art of subversion, that is, the art of the dialectic of problem-reaction-solution. Their true "holy" book, the Talmud, is essentially the manual of racial-national infiltration. Their surface traditions are taken from the Torah, the first five books of the Bible, and mirror those of the Biblical Israelites mainly for the sake of public consumption, though with noteworthy distinctions. This provides them with a religious, tax-free cover that allows them to clandestinely conduct their operations of espionage to infiltrate nations in the safety of the synagogue. In the past, when they have been caught in the this act of treason, they have often been able to appease governments and their peoples, particularly Christian-based ones, through baptismal conversion. This was the essential purpose behind the Spanish Inquisition, among other famous "historical" crusades. They can then proclaim faith in Christianity in public while, unmolested, they plot and conspire in the overthrow of said Christian government in private. The essential reason for conversion to Judaism is the political marriage. It is not uncommon, even from the mainstream media, to hear about important key political figures having Jewish wives. This allows them direct access into the top tiers of government, finance, and industry. These figures publicly espouse the Christian faith while in private they serve their true god, Moloch, the god of greed, usury, and control, by way of deception. They also masterfully use the tool of a unique brand of racism, anti-Semitism, to utilize guilt/victim consciousness to further their agenda. This tool acts as both a shield and a hammer. It is a shield when the host nation discovers the treason. The non-Jewish populations are stirred up by the media to attack these low-rung, peasant and merchant Jews that receive the brunt of the pushback, even though they may have little or nothing to do with the actual political intrigue of their power-elite cousins, who conveniently go into hiding during these pograms. When they reemerge from their hiding, usually after a sustained chaos of war or revolution that they have crafted and financed from the behind the scenes, they then cite or falsely concoct reports of casualties of their peasant cousins and hammer the host nation with censorship laws, forced reeducation (brainwashing), and make demands for crippling financial reparations. They also utilize this spiritual warfare, known as political correctness, under the guise of fairness and of universal equality, to disrupt the racial populations of nations in the engaging of free speech, stirring up hatred among the races, among the classes, and among the sexes, pinning the strong against the weak, the weak against the strong, through the media apparatus and the passing of draconian anti-hate laws.
Every nation in the world has been infiltrated by this family bloodline, virtually indistinguishable from the races of their host nations. They do have some distinguishing racial characteristics of their own, however, regardless of the race that they have infiltrated and adopted. Obviously the hook-nosed, reptilian look is well recognized by those with eyes to see. The older they get, the more pronounced these reptilian-like features tend to become. Look at any aging Hollywood movie star and you will be able to identify these traits, almost without exception. The "mark" of Cain, perhaps? Basic deduction leads me to conclude, circumstantially, that the so-called "reptilian look", which eventually manifests in most "racial" (family bloodline) Jews, is an indication of a secret fourth root race, the race that this family bloodline originates from.
The State, as we know it today, is the creation of this fourth root race. They are an elite bloodline of closely related cousins, ruling all nations from behind the scenes.
Under their dominion, if you do not follow the rules of the State, you will find yourself in prison. The rules become more distorted, inverted and more difficult to follow as their infiltration and corruption of the State reaches an inevitable climax. Under this State model, no one within the state is allowed to succeed beyond certain structured thresholds, unless you belong to this particular family bloodline (race). Highly manipulated taxation and rampant currency inflation/deflation, boom/bust, bear/bull market cycles set the stage for a completely manipulated economy, where only the very few on top benefit, while the peasants are forced into perpetual debt slavery to sustain this nefarious racket. It also appears that the use of resets is another tool in their shed to facilitate control clandestinely. Perhaps the wars, coups, and revolutions of our history books is nothing more than that.
As has been brilliantly outlined in this series by dreamtime, the German nation has been the #1 target of this bloodline for many generations. I imagine the reason for this is because of their legendary power and pushback that has been mostly erased from history. The Third Reich is probably one of the few documented phenomenons where we see the fruits of such monumental pushback. Unfortunately, it is most likely that this latest pushback was the product of controlled opposition, and that a greater plan had been in the works designed to derail the German nation's power and people once and for all in the form of the two world wars, and now the third world war, code-named Covid 19.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2020
- Messages
- 651
- Reaction score
- 1,377
Where does German blood begin and German blood end? How do you mark it? Where does German culture begin and where does it end? Who defines it? When did Germany have a singular tongue? Who created it? For what end? These and others are the questions that make me doubt the German blood/culture argument, not political correctness.
I've been through cultural/blood nationalism wars up close in personal in Taiwan for the better part of two decades. It is a tiresome debate and nasty politics. Chinese Nationalists, many of whose ancestors came from the mainland in 1949 claim that Taiwan is part of China and is so because it is part of Chinese culture. Tawianese nationalists, most of whose ancestors came to Taiwan from Fujian (SE China or the Ming--on the pre-Manchu/Tartarian maps) from 1600-1850 or so, claim that it is different because it is peculiarly Taiwanese. The key difference is the locals speak different languages (Hokien and Hakka) from the Mainlanders, who speak Mandarin. All the locals were made to speak Mandarin as children in school. This is the language of all offical discourse in Taiwan today. Mandarin is a largely 20th century invention of the state. At least as late as the early 1990s, when I was in the Chinese countryside, the local languages were very different from official Mandarin. I don't know about nowadays. The CCP has worked hard, but China is a polyglot empire, not a monolingual, mono-cultural place. However, if a German asks questions to the average Taiwanese nationalists about the 20th century origins of Mandarin and whether or not the characters of Mandarin might have, at one time, represented sounds rather than words, etc., the average Taiwanese will defend both their Chinese identity and the pure idea-graphic character of Mandarin. Meanwhile, everyone knows there is a far smaller minority of "aborigines" who claim neither Taiwanese nor Mandarin identity. It goes on and on.....In other words, it is a debate and politics that is riddled with political correctness because it is the very greatest example of (politically correct) identity politics.
I'm no expert, but I think, based on limited reading, that the same is true for German blood and culture as well. This is why I always maintain that a constitutional government, based on the universal rights of people, is the only ground for a just society. Moreover, as I noted earlier in this series, Hitler and his coterie exploited this blood/culture nationalism to drive the people into dust. If President Trump was proffering an American blood/culture rather than an inclusive constitutional nationalism, I wouldn't trust him.
I've been through cultural/blood nationalism wars up close in personal in Taiwan for the better part of two decades. It is a tiresome debate and nasty politics. Chinese Nationalists, many of whose ancestors came from the mainland in 1949 claim that Taiwan is part of China and is so because it is part of Chinese culture. Tawianese nationalists, most of whose ancestors came to Taiwan from Fujian (SE China or the Ming--on the pre-Manchu/Tartarian maps) from 1600-1850 or so, claim that it is different because it is peculiarly Taiwanese. The key difference is the locals speak different languages (Hokien and Hakka) from the Mainlanders, who speak Mandarin. All the locals were made to speak Mandarin as children in school. This is the language of all offical discourse in Taiwan today. Mandarin is a largely 20th century invention of the state. At least as late as the early 1990s, when I was in the Chinese countryside, the local languages were very different from official Mandarin. I don't know about nowadays. The CCP has worked hard, but China is a polyglot empire, not a monolingual, mono-cultural place. However, if a German asks questions to the average Taiwanese nationalists about the 20th century origins of Mandarin and whether or not the characters of Mandarin might have, at one time, represented sounds rather than words, etc., the average Taiwanese will defend both their Chinese identity and the pure idea-graphic character of Mandarin. Meanwhile, everyone knows there is a far smaller minority of "aborigines" who claim neither Taiwanese nor Mandarin identity. It goes on and on.....In other words, it is a debate and politics that is riddled with political correctness because it is the very greatest example of (politically correct) identity politics.
I'm no expert, but I think, based on limited reading, that the same is true for German blood and culture as well. This is why I always maintain that a constitutional government, based on the universal rights of people, is the only ground for a just society. Moreover, as I noted earlier in this series, Hitler and his coterie exploited this blood/culture nationalism to drive the people into dust. If President Trump was proffering an American blood/culture rather than an inclusive constitutional nationalism, I wouldn't trust him.
Last edited:
Being german is a state of mind!
You have access to almost anything (some is expensive but many things are affordable - in case you have a job and are a useful member of society, and even if you are on welfare you have a health insurance, in fact it's illegal, employed or not, to NOT have one).
You love your car.
You sweep the sidewalk in front of your house every week, you don't mow the lawn on sunday, when something starts at 8 you are there 7:55, you put the trash in the designated bin, you bring your glass to the container, you have an opinion about everything and of course you know it better, you hardly tell anyone how much you earn (it's in most contracts you can be fired if you talk to coworkers or outsiders about your wage), you think you know it all but you let yourself be screwed over by authorities and you can never be happy about being a native here, only in secret, even if your parents are from africa and your skin is black, if you are proudly and happily doing all of the above, you're a Nazi, and you have to feel gulity for stuff that was or wasn't or wasn't exactly as told 80, 90, 100 years ago.
You have access to almost anything (some is expensive but many things are affordable - in case you have a job and are a useful member of society, and even if you are on welfare you have a health insurance, in fact it's illegal, employed or not, to NOT have one).
You love your car.
You sweep the sidewalk in front of your house every week, you don't mow the lawn on sunday, when something starts at 8 you are there 7:55, you put the trash in the designated bin, you bring your glass to the container, you have an opinion about everything and of course you know it better, you hardly tell anyone how much you earn (it's in most contracts you can be fired if you talk to coworkers or outsiders about your wage), you think you know it all but you let yourself be screwed over by authorities and you can never be happy about being a native here, only in secret, even if your parents are from africa and your skin is black, if you are proudly and happily doing all of the above, you're a Nazi, and you have to feel gulity for stuff that was or wasn't or wasn't exactly as told 80, 90, 100 years ago.
Degeneration
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2020
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 61
Israel requires DNA tests for citizenship and immigration. Ashkenazi Jews are an ethnic group, not a "religion"
Golden Stag
Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2021
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 29
If you look at how much English has changed since the time of Shakespeare a mere four centuries ago, how much of a 1000 or 1500 year old English would we be able to read? Judging by this or this link, not that much.
I wouldn't even make an attempt at deciphering this "Old English" text. On the other hand, one of the oldest remaining Hungarian writings from around 1195 AD, the Funeral sermon and prayer, using the newly adopted Latin alphabet (instead of the runic writing used circa 1000 AD) can be read with a bit of effort. I assume Chinese people, for instance, would be able to read their scripts from 1000 years ago with relative ease. This to me implies that English is a relatively young language. The amount of phrases borrowed from Latin also reinforces this theory, IMO, as you generally do not borrow words from other languages when they already exist in your language.A parallel for the Grendels: illustration of a humanoid cannibal from The Marvels of the East in the Nowell Codex said:
From the rationale above, I'd be tempted to agree with your English is a recently made-up language theory, if it were not for the following:
- As I mentioned in another thread, English shares a considerable amount of core words with other Norse nations, words that a stone-, bronze-age man had to have used.
- It'd be a bit odd for British to write down some tales about Beowulf and Grendel if it were not part of their Norse heritage. Unless, they in the habit of recording other cultures' mythologies back then, which I sincerely doubt.
- I don't believe British have built any of England's prehistoric monuments scattered across the country, which implies someone else was there long before them, and that the Brits joined the party at a later date. As a side note, this "prehistoric" term seems so weird, but that's the official term for it.
Maybe that's the case now in an attempt to preserve their culture, a bit like putting native Americans on reserves, but I don't believe this was the case throughout England's history.
You're right that this division plays into the elites' hands, but that doesn't mean that current hostilities are not rooted in history. The West has a bit of a bad reputation when it comes to dealing with its minorities, both within their borders and without. The French and the Spanish (e.g.: Catalans), for instance, don't exactly have a stellar track record when dealing with their minorities throughout history, and I'm sure that Scottish history includes some related tales. Tolerance wasn't exactly a virtue for most of Western history. It's a bit ironic considering the origin of the recent tolerance at all costs Marxist paradigm.
Regardless, we need to start putting our differences aside, and focus on the international force actively destabilizing our societies. This needs to be a grass-roots movement, since it's clear that most governments cannot be relied on for this, and international organizations will certainly not do anything productive about it. If England managed to drain its swamp, I'm sure it would go a long way to regain some trust from other nations. This is a battle noone else can fight for you, heck the same allied forces responsible for the destruction of the Reich will actively intervene to prevent other nations from draining their own swamps. Just look at the unified response to leaders of countries who dared to suggest the introduction of a gold standard, they get bombed to smithereens under false pretenses. Until this pattern stops, I don't know if you can expect much good faith from others.
You may argue that the rule of law is not representative of the general population, and I would agree with that. Whether it's due to the lack of knowledge, care, bravery or perseverance of the people, or some combination, it doesn't matter. History has shown the world that the "Allied Forces" cannot be trusted when it comes to trying to constructively resolve the JQ. There were leaders who the people could have rallied around, JFK, for instance, whose assassination barely merited a blink from the American masses. Until you stand up for what you believe in to show that you have some skin in the game, too, you will most likely be seen as willing accomplices.
Wars of this scale are usually negative-sum games, where except for the puppeteers pulling the strings, every side loses. It's not so much about who bombed who, as it's inevitable in modern warfare, but how it was done. Specifically targeting civilians with the express purpose to demoralize a nation like targeting factories during day-time, and civilian housing during the night is quite different from taking out strategic military targets. If you look at the reported civilian deaths for WW2, and compare the British (~60k) and German numbers (~3.5 million), I think it speaks volumes on how things went down.
I've talked to Russian relatives of mine from St. Petersburg who survived the war, and the general consensus is that the German army treated the Russian civilians humanely with no tales of rape and pillaging civilians. When the city was put under a blockade for almost 3 years, the "Road of Life" across the frozen surface of Lake Ladoga remained open, allowing the city to resupply itself to an extent. It would have been so easy to make bombing runs on this supply line to put the final squeeze on the population. I'm sure the "British Mad Dog" would have done it. Unsurprisingly, this didn't make it into the victor's version of history books. I would be very interested to hear of the Russian perspective from others who may have heard stories from their surviving relatives. I suspect that if one could have chosen they would have much rather lived through WW2 in St. Petersburg, than in Dresden.
This is how the PTB does and have done business for a centuries, directing their puppets from behind the curtain. It's one thing to acknowledge having been the useful idiots of the story (has this actually happened?), and another to actually do something about it. Sure, the Jews were expelled from various countries over the course of history, but when all's said and done, the West ended up the beneficiaries of this symbiotic relationship. The reason they have the standard of living they do now is a direct result of willingly turning a blind eye to the exploitation of others. It may not even take violence to resolve this, and stopping actively supporting the PTB may suffice. Boycott the army, stop sending your sons and daughters to further the globalist agenda. Get your people out from the grips of usury, which is used to fund their global network. Start building your own local networks of like-minded people, and start boycotting the boycotters. The tendrils of this beast are becoming more and more transparent as time goes on, they're starting to openly advertise themselves, see the #StopHateForProfit censorship movement.
I find it odd how English is categorised as a West Germanic language, related to Dutch and German, and yet it seems to me that it shows more obvious similarities with the North Germanic languages in vocabulary and grammar.
It's also true that English mythology is clearly more similar to Norse mythology than West Germanic mythology, suggesting a closer cultural connection to Scandinavia than the Continent.
There is a definite agenda in mainstream British academia and the establishment to portray the English as being newcomers, as invaders, and the Celts as the only "natives". I wonder if this refusal to acknowledge North Germanic origin of English stems from this, as in if you accept that English is North Germanic then that opens up the possibility that the English/Germanics have been present in Britain a lot longer than the canonical history admits, which would then cause all sorts of problems for Celtic "Nativists".
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2020
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 132
If you speak Dutch and/or German you would not find it odd at all English being a West Germanic language because plenty if not almost every basic sentence in English is actually Dutch/German
Dat/That
There/Der
Het/Here
The/Die
And so forth...
Dat/That
There/Der
Het/Here
The/Die
And so forth...
I started learning English pretty late, in 7th grade (started with Latin in 5th, then came French in 9th) and I must say English was the easiest! I sucked at Latin and my French, forget it! I had the same teacher in English and French and one day he pulled me aside in the hallway, almost crying, really disappointed, and asked me why the hell my grades were so bad in French, when in English I was literally his top student, and I just said sorry, but it's just so easy, I have no explanation, "Es geht runter wie Öl" it goes down like oil [down the throat, another saying that is hard to translate, you can also say like butter, which means Butter, so there you go). He thought it was his fault, but English just came to me and made perfect sense, even the irregular verbs and everything. Latin didn't and French didn't either. Of course I'm glad I got at least a little glimpse at the basics, but as a German, and maybe this is only subjective, English is so similar and the easiest language to learn.
German and English are not cousins, they are brothers. Maaaaybe French and Latin belong to the same family, but they're adopted or something, or each have a different Daddy and spent some time in boarding school. But German and English have the same Mom & Dad, used to play together all the time and are always hanging out together even now.
Edit: Dutch is the other brother who always smokes weed and listens to weird music ?
German and English are not cousins, they are brothers. Maaaaybe French and Latin belong to the same family, but they're adopted or something, or each have a different Daddy and spent some time in boarding school. But German and English have the same Mom & Dad, used to play together all the time and are always hanging out together even now.
Edit: Dutch is the other brother who always smokes weed and listens to weird music ?
My eldest was taught German at secondary school and what a waste of time that was. He understood nothing of it written or spoken. I was taught French during my time in secondary, it or Russian was compulsory and I too understood nothing and couldn't speak it either.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2020
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 132
I like what I read Myrrinda!
English has either become dumbed down with time or made more simple with time (you decide)
If you are able to read and write both German and/or Dutch at an intermediate level English speakers just look like they haven't finished kindergarten yet
Here is Old English with German without Dutch counterpart (hey! it's just different spelling and pronunciation)
Hú meaht þú? // Wo macht(s) du?
Ic mæg wel // Ich mag wel
Hwæt hātest þū? // Was heisst du?
Ic hāte // Ich heisse
Ic cume of ... // Ich komme auf
Old English sourced from
https://omniglot.com/language/phrases/oldenglish.htm
The loss of grammatical case in modern English is not that surprising, because Dutch and all the North Germanic languages besides Icelandic have also lost their case systems.
What I find more strange is the loss of gendered nouns in English, because this has not happened in any other language that English has been influenced by. German, Dutch, North Germanic, French, Celtic, etc, all still have gendered nouns, so there is no obvious reason why English would have lost this system.
I find it strange how English transitioned very quickly from being a high inflected language similar to German, to a minimally inflected language that doesn't even mark gender in nouns. I can't think of another language that has undergone such a dramatic shift in a short space of time, I'm not sure what would explain that other than English suddenly being spoken by many as a second language.
What I find more strange is the loss of gendered nouns in English, because this has not happened in any other language that English has been influenced by. German, Dutch, North Germanic, French, Celtic, etc, all still have gendered nouns, so there is no obvious reason why English would have lost this system.
I find it strange how English transitioned very quickly from being a high inflected language similar to German, to a minimally inflected language that doesn't even mark gender in nouns. I can't think of another language that has undergone such a dramatic shift in a short space of time, I'm not sure what would explain that other than English suddenly being spoken by many as a second language.
They needed an easy language for their melting pot "New World", that's what I always thought after finding out about stolen history stuff. Gender in nouns and too many cases to memorize just takes too long, they modified it so it was easy to learn for all kinds of people from who knows where. Still a beautiful language and I think they did a great job simplifying it. Genius!
Edit: if you read good books, older ones as well, you can still see how much there can be done with English. I just love it!
Edit: if you read good books, older ones as well, you can still see how much there can be done with English. I just love it!
That is the most likely source, soon it will be as androgynous as our society.
The thing is modern English still retains most Germanic words in its vocab, almost every German word or phrase has a direct English cognate, it's just that very often the word in English has a different meaning or has become obsolete.
So what I mean is the concepts in English described by Latin words could have been Germanic if there had been a desire to do so, but inevitably Norman rule meant that there was a much stronger preference for importing Latin based words.
Golden Stag
Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2021
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 29
I think that this line of thinking is not only futile, but may very well end up being counter-productive. This is a bit of a delicate subject, as it involves national pride that has a tendency to blind people from objectivity. In order to avoid falling into the trap of "feels over reals", when researching history in an ideal world, we'd want an unbiased third-party to examine the evidence and formulate various theories. Unfortunately, in some cases, this may not be possible. In Britain's case, specifically, there aren't many places around the world that haven't been negatively affected by the globalist shenanigans throughout history. I don't think I should have to say this, but I will anyways: #NotAll. When I say Britain, I do not mean that every Brit living, deceased, or yet to be born is responsible for let's say colonization.
There is no such thing as "Sins of the Father", regardless of how much the mainstream would like to push that narrative. Even if one were to believe the official narrative about WW2, the witch hunt that's been going on against Germany for nigh a century is utterly ridiculous. I understand why TPTB is doing it, and it makes sense from their perspective, but that doesn't mean I have to like it, or agree with it. By most accounts, Churchill was a despicable man, and it should be easy to universally condemn such a man, but instead, he is still hailed by most normies as a national hero, or at best the better of two evil. Granted, the article I linked is biased, and the author likes to toss around meaningless labels like "racist" and "white supremacist" as much as a progressive would, but merely skimming the quotes attributed to Churchill is enough to get one's blood boiling. Churchill wasn't a racist, or white supremacist, he despised the Irish or Russians as much as he did the Indians or South Africans. He was a "Britain firster, at ANY cost". Attempting to defend or justify his actions not only does disservice to humanity (if such a concept even exists), but hinders any attempt to find a solution to the predicament we currently find ourselves in.
It's best to try to view history with a sense of detachment, keeping in mind that you had no way to influence past events, and are essentially stuck with the aftermath of a gong show that's been going on for millennia. This is a world created by the perpetual victors of history (TPTB that the Roman Empire and its successor states represent), and from its current state, it's obvious that we've lost our way somewhere along the line. We should be striving to find our equilibrium, and using a detective's objectivity to attempt to find where we went astray. Every nation has its work cut out for them, but some may find themselves in a deeper hole than others. If we chose to stand by and do nothing, that hole will get deeper and deeper for successive generations.
In an effort get away from all this West-bashing, I'll switch to East-bashing for a bit. China's nationalist movement also deserves uniform condemnation. What's happened in Tibet, or what's going on with the Uyghurs is a travesty. There are rules representatives of other nations must follow in order to be graced by the Emperor's presence, the primary one being: Tibet must not be mentioned. Again, I understand they're doing what they are, considering the majority of China's freshwater supply lies under Tibet. This is the same line of "China first, and fk everyone else" mentality that Churchill was guilty of. It's true that there's plenty of anti-Chinese propaganda, but it focuses on the red herrings like the "CCP Virus" or "ChiComs collusion". Funny how the phrase "Talmudic collusion" doesn't exist, and yeah, we all know how the Marxist ideology made its way to China, among other places.
For a more personal example, this is where I think the Hungarians lost their way. I believe that our founding father, Saint Stephen I, was essentially a traitor. If his forefather Khan Arpad (yes, yes, I know the official BS translation of his title is "Grand Prince" and not Khan) were alive to see his deeds, he would have been appalled. Here's a brief list of his "accomplishments":
- He spearheaded the movement to force Christianity on his subjects, cutting all ties with old traditions. He was baptized, and changed his name from Vajk to Istvan (Stephen), which is suspiciously close to the word "Isten" meaning God, but this is merely a conjecture.
- He introduced the corrupt Roman legal system (how's that electoral recount going?), replacing the unwritten traditions centered around brotherhood, loyalty, self-sacrifice and honesty, concepts illustrated by the back-to-back Scythian archer statues
- He started the process that lead to the introduction of the Latin alphabet, superseding the previously used runic writing. Runic writing from that time was collected and destroyed. This is a highly contested theory, but IMO, it falls in line with the rest of his edicts.
- He normalized (if not started) the tradition of inserting spies into the royal court with "alliance marriages". Unsurprisingly, Hungarian princesses did not end up in Western courts.
- He introduced Latin as the official language used by the clergy and in court. Latin was the official language of Hungary until the middle of the 19th century.
- He used German mercenaries to crush any local resistance
Agreed, the lack of gendered nouns is a peculiarity I haven't been able to figure out. I mean, it's a dumb concept to start out with, but most - if not all - so-called Indo-European languages including Russian and presumably Slavic use it.
Maybe you can help me with my spreadsheet
, Google Translate kinda sucks for this purpose.Circling back to the original British and Celtic animosity point. It's highly unlikely that the two nations arrived to the isle at the same time, meaning one was there before the other. I have my opinion on the matter, and I'll gladly share it on a related thread, but I'd prefer not to derail this thread any more than I already have. As it stands, both side insists they were there first, and we come to an impasse where nothing gets resolved and the animosity will continue to fester. The only way to heal this wound is to remove ego from the equation, objectively figure out how things went down, align the opposing narratives and figure out a way forward to deal with our common parasites.
P.S.: Apologies for the tangent, I swear I have a few responses directly related to Germany - Part V partially typed up already!
