Summary: Mexican Nordicist, Arthur Kemp fanboy, lotsa dirt for FSTDT, so it suprises me there weren't any quotes by him on FSTDT.
First I brought him questions over the Flynn effect, etc. I buttered them up all racist and nasty, of course.
After all his posts about how Sicilians and Portuguese are racially mixed (and therefore scum, unlike a Celtiberian with Amerind admixture such as himself), he claims to not care about differences between European genetic groups.
I was stupidly impatient and crossposted about my conversation to e621. I was found out. The reason his arguments aren't refuted is because he blocked me after that. It doesn't block IP address though, so I went undercover (shoulda chosen a National Socialist-sounding name the FIRST time, ugh).
http://chechar.wordpress.com/2013/07/01/march-of-the-titans-7/So, I was found out before I could post this:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for responding!
Check this out for context, be warned that it may be along the lines of what you quoted L. as denouncing, that "mainstream paleocons" are no longer racialist, but the discussion of racial differences in European groups is probably significant to your discussion of miscegenation and civilizational decay:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/race-iq-and-wealth/I asked because Vanhannen's study, "IQ and the Wealth of Nations", earned a lot of controversy for its discussion of racial differences-- the study found that there was a correlation between national IQ and wealth, with northern European countries near the top and countries in Sub-Saharan Africa at the bottom.
I'm guessing that the more erudite members of the racialist community, such as yourself, take the broader conclusions as credible consider it a matter of IQ preceding wealth, not the other way around.
As the article noted, he found the lowest IQs among the Irish, but since Ireland is a heavily Catholic, conservative country, and so on (you've noted this sort of thing as one of the reasons Christianity is bad for the white race), he couldn't openly raise these questions because it would invoke accusations of "eugenics", "Nazi", etc.
I didn't know it was an HBD question, from what I've read of "Italian scum" and your posts on Spartan history and the blond Dorians (in other words, Voula Papachristou is the quintessential non-Pelasgian Hellenic elite of old in fitness, politics and physical features) you come off as deeply concerned with differences between Europeans and what that indicates given the presupposition that people like Varg Vikernes, Papachristou, etc. represent the purest strain of the original Indo-European race. I'm not sure how credible it is precisely, but Carleton Coon did a study of hair color frequencies in Europe, but his results found that while northeastern and Germanic Europe, especially Scandinavia and Finland, had high frequencies of blond hair and low frequencies of red hair, Ireland had high frequencies of red hair and low frequencies of blond hair. So I'm wondering if your take is that Ireland's historically low IQ, and the drunken rowdiness of Irish immigrants compared to well-behaved German, Norwegian, and Swedish immigrants, is a reflection of genetic, racial differences.
So was your Irish muse blond, or did she have more Celtic features like you (dark hair, hazel eyes)?
-------------------------then I tried to post this in response to Faggotron. It was blocked, so my ruse failed.-----------------------------------------
Hold on a sec. If pure Nordics of the right mindset are all racially equal and Celts are Nordic, why did the Irish have low IQs before, but not now? Chechar seems to be well-read on William Pierce, so I wanted to know what the educated, National Socialist view is.
Because, as many people on here pointed out, it's not a question that mainstream WN spaces like Stormfront are willing to even address. Just like few Paleocons (with the notable exception of Buchanan in "Suicide of a Superpower") do much to examine differences between Northern and Southern Italy and the possible genetics behind the differences in income, crime, etc., the question of the Irish, and the fact that they behaviorally weren't equal to the Midwestern farmers from Norway who ate lutefisk on Christmas to connect with their Viking roots, seems to be a topic that mainstream "I'm a white racialist" types tend to be PC about. There may be people who consider this evidence the Irish are more of a Pelasgian-esque/aboriginal European type than, say, Frisians, Anglo-Saxons, and the Kievan Rus. I say this because Madison Grant cited the image of a dark-haired, dark-eyed Welshman as an example of a full-blooded Mediterranean (not mixed like the Portuguese population with its Sephardic Jewish infusion from the conversos); in other words, at the very least, not all Celts are Nordic. As Chechar points out, not all conflict between Europeans is due to the Jews--they are, technically, an opportunistic infection from a certain NS viewpoint.
Also, Faggotron, Chechar hates PC WNism, so I'd like to hear his answer instead of you butting in and speaking for him, or sockpuppeting for me on another forum (since when have furfags had any knowledge of white history?).
Speaking of Italians, what would be your classification of the controversial, "racist" radio host Bob Grant (Roberto Gigante)? Is he a purebred dark-haired Indo-European, or is his admitted libertarianism a sign of southern Europe's Semitic/North African admixture?
------------------ Finally, I tried to post this: -------------------------------------
No prob, I'll post the links where he makes those claims.
1. Here we go:
>blond Minoans:
http://dienekes.110mb.com/articles/kemp/kempsfisherman800.jpg>Nordic Desert Empire is a chapter title
2. Where's that lengthy reply to Faggotron I posted earlier?
3. I said "trolling" entertainment purposes; I usually get entertainment from just asking educated questions that go above their head.
Here's what I wanted to get an answer to: is there a National Socialist explanation for the Flynn Effect and the increase in Ireland's average IQ, or is it all considered a PC or Jewish myth constructed by our overlords to obscure significant IQ differences between Indo-Europeans and Bantus that will always be there due to genetics?
I think strawman arguments are unneccesary. The fully nuanced argument made by Pierce, Kemp, or Europa Soberana has at least a few holes. Some of those are in the links above.
4. Faggotron, an ad hominem does not refute an argument. Suppose the most back-stabbing scumbag in town says that 2+2=4. It doesn't automatically make 2+2 not 4. If he says 2+2=5, I can refute him with a proof, without centering my refutation on the person making the argument that 2+2=5.
I would think the original "faggots" here would be American Conservative's publishers. An article like that would never find its way into Taki's Mag or Chronicles, both of which have a solidly racialist perspective.
----------------------------
Basically, he went nya-nya I-refuted-you after preventing me from showing Kemp's nuttiness.
Do you guys think he dislikes the IQ question because of his former Irish crush?
I would be posting on the e621 thread, but the admin locked it, ruining my fun.
Also, the name change of the forum still sucks ass.
Edit: fucker found that out to and deleted those posts.
