Hess
On hour 2 of No Fap
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2023
- Posts
- 3,214
- Reputation
- 4,251
Introduction
First before we go into this, we have to classify what white is, for me and for anyone that uses the word in the modern world classifies it as European/Euro descended, and when we look into what European is we get this, ancient Indo-European Groups mixed with neolithic farmers during the IE migrations, it is really that simple, now you will get multiple groups claiming slavs are not white and do not fall under this definition because of three main arguments, the first is that they claim they are not majority IE descended unlike WASPs or Germanics, and the second argument is that slavics have mongol ancestry which declassifies them, the third is that they will back pedal and claim that they do not fit under Western Civilization or Western Culture, I will go over all these arguments in detail.
"Slavic's are not majority IE descended"
This argument is one of the more brain dead and easily debunked claims that one can make, they will make this claim because IE ancestry and proto IE groups are what we call "Aryan" (I am not going to go into detail about what IE is because it is a very complex topic that I am FAR too tired for), now this seems pretty logical if we operate under the claim that the higher the IE ancestry the more aryan/white you are, however this is just blatantly wrong when you look at the genetic studies which I will link here with pictures for anyone too lazy to read said studies.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Distribution-of-the-Yamnaya-genetic-component-in-the-populations-of-Europe-data-taken_fig2_318751121
www.nature.com
(for clarification, Yamnaya was the first major subgroup that came out of the IE, then you have corded ware and etc, some claim they are a branch of yamnaya and some don't)
"Slavic's are not white because they have significant mongol admixture"
This take is far more retarded and not based in reality at all whatsoever, it stems from the conception of the creation of tatars and the mongol invasion, lets go over both of these. First tatars are not "half slavic half mongol" but more so tend to be on average 16 to maybe 20 percent mongol DNA to the point where their ancestry is mostly slavic, this happened because tatars in the first place were an extreme minority even back then and there was never any significant migration or mixing to make the average russian mongoloid on average, they are just a separate ethnicity that has numbers in a few slavic countries (only in the thousands but they do have significant pop in russia), now when we look at the actual DNA of the slavics themselves the average for mongol dna we see that the study that i will link says they are about 1 to 5 percent mongol in their mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), which is already considerably small, so when we look at what the total is in general according to to the other study I will link it says that East Eurasian autosomal DNA amounts to 1% or zero for slavic groups and proved that it is only found significantly in specific ethnic groups like the lipka tatars having about 30%
www.nature.com
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
"Slavic's do not fall under western civilization and the classification of white only applies to those that do"
This one for me is a much more complex topic and I will give some weight to the argument and not treat it as braindead as the others, yes you can claim that but then what about antiquity then? regardless of what some may claim antiquity was a far more different and alien culture compared to the western civilization and culture that we have today, the ancient greeks and romans were pagan and had a far more different worldview and morality compared to the western civilization that we had today, it was 100 percent influenced by antiquity (look at how a lot of christian theologists relied and used greek philosophers to argue for theism) but they were two entirely seperate periods, so by their definition we can now claim that ancient greeks and romans were not white, which seems silly right? so using this I would argue that this is not a coherent classification of what makes people white or not and it is far more logical to use the classification of DNA and use IE ancestry with the mixture of neolithic to classify as who is white, however I can also claim however that even within this framework it does not even apply to slavics, you can see clearly in history how integrated and connected the polish were to the HRE and western cultural groups and how they adopted catholiscm over orthodoxy, and even with Russia we can see how they used and connected with western culture through their classical music and even with how Peter The Great westernized Russia heavily to the point where it very much resemebled a lot of the feudal western countries at the time in both their high culture and their government.
The End
This is the end of my extremely spergy rant and thank you for taking the time to actually read it
Tags: @Niebvll @Divineincel @zimione
First before we go into this, we have to classify what white is, for me and for anyone that uses the word in the modern world classifies it as European/Euro descended, and when we look into what European is we get this, ancient Indo-European Groups mixed with neolithic farmers during the IE migrations, it is really that simple, now you will get multiple groups claiming slavs are not white and do not fall under this definition because of three main arguments, the first is that they claim they are not majority IE descended unlike WASPs or Germanics, and the second argument is that slavics have mongol ancestry which declassifies them, the third is that they will back pedal and claim that they do not fit under Western Civilization or Western Culture, I will go over all these arguments in detail.
"Slavic's are not majority IE descended"
This argument is one of the more brain dead and easily debunked claims that one can make, they will make this claim because IE ancestry and proto IE groups are what we call "Aryan" (I am not going to go into detail about what IE is because it is a very complex topic that I am FAR too tired for), now this seems pretty logical if we operate under the claim that the higher the IE ancestry the more aryan/white you are, however this is just blatantly wrong when you look at the genetic studies which I will link here with pictures for anyone too lazy to read said studies.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Distribution-of-the-Yamnaya-genetic-component-in-the-populations-of-Europe-data-taken_fig2_318751121
Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe - Nature
A genome-wide analysis of 69 ancient Europeans reveals the history of population migrations around the time that Indo-European languages arose in Europe, when there was a large migration into Europe from the Eurasian steppe in the east (providing a genetic ancestry still present in Europeans...
www.nature.com
(for clarification, Yamnaya was the first major subgroup that came out of the IE, then you have corded ware and etc, some claim they are a branch of yamnaya and some don't)
"Slavic's are not white because they have significant mongol admixture"
This take is far more retarded and not based in reality at all whatsoever, it stems from the conception of the creation of tatars and the mongol invasion, lets go over both of these. First tatars are not "half slavic half mongol" but more so tend to be on average 16 to maybe 20 percent mongol DNA to the point where their ancestry is mostly slavic, this happened because tatars in the first place were an extreme minority even back then and there was never any significant migration or mixing to make the average russian mongoloid on average, they are just a separate ethnicity that has numbers in a few slavic countries (only in the thousands but they do have significant pop in russia), now when we look at the actual DNA of the slavics themselves the average for mongol dna we see that the study that i will link says they are about 1 to 5 percent mongol in their mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), which is already considerably small, so when we look at what the total is in general according to to the other study I will link it says that East Eurasian autosomal DNA amounts to 1% or zero for slavic groups and proved that it is only found significantly in specific ethnic groups like the lipka tatars having about 30%
East Eurasian ancestry in the middle of Europe: genetic footprints of Steppe nomads in the genomes of Belarusian Lipka Tatars - Scientific Reports
Medieval era encounters of nomadic groups of the Eurasian Steppe and largely sedentary East Europeans had a variety of demographic and cultural consequences. Amongst these outcomes was the emergence of the Lipka Tatars—a Slavic-speaking Sunni-Muslim minority residing in modern Belarus, Lithuania...
www.nature.com
[Origin of the Mongoloid component in the mitochondrial gene pool of Slavs] - PubMed
The data on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) restriction polymorphism in Czech population (n = 279) are presented. It was demonstrated that in terms of their structure, mitochondrial gene pools of Czechs and other Slavic populations (Russians, Poles, Slovenians, and Bosnians) were practically...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
"Slavic's do not fall under western civilization and the classification of white only applies to those that do"
This one for me is a much more complex topic and I will give some weight to the argument and not treat it as braindead as the others, yes you can claim that but then what about antiquity then? regardless of what some may claim antiquity was a far more different and alien culture compared to the western civilization and culture that we have today, the ancient greeks and romans were pagan and had a far more different worldview and morality compared to the western civilization that we had today, it was 100 percent influenced by antiquity (look at how a lot of christian theologists relied and used greek philosophers to argue for theism) but they were two entirely seperate periods, so by their definition we can now claim that ancient greeks and romans were not white, which seems silly right? so using this I would argue that this is not a coherent classification of what makes people white or not and it is far more logical to use the classification of DNA and use IE ancestry with the mixture of neolithic to classify as who is white, however I can also claim however that even within this framework it does not even apply to slavics, you can see clearly in history how integrated and connected the polish were to the HRE and western cultural groups and how they adopted catholiscm over orthodoxy, and even with Russia we can see how they used and connected with western culture through their classical music and even with how Peter The Great westernized Russia heavily to the point where it very much resemebled a lot of the feudal western countries at the time in both their high culture and their government.
The End
This is the end of my extremely spergy rant and thank you for taking the time to actually read it
Tags: @Niebvll @Divineincel @zimione
